Leping

ANNEX 1 Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE) Description of the action (DoA) Part A Part B Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION (PART A) COVER PAGE Part A of the Description of the Action (DoA) must be completed directly on the Portal Grant Preparation screens. PROJECT Grant Preparation (General Information screen) — Enter the info. Project number: 101120831 Project name: Integrated renovation services for heritage homes of Estonia Project acronym: LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME Call: LIFE-2022-CET Topic: LIFE-2022-CET-HOMERENO Type of action: LIFE-PJG Service: CINEA/D/01 Project starting date: fixed date: 1 November 2023 Project duration: 36 months TABLE OF CONTENTS Project summary ......................................................................................................................................................3 List of participants .................................................................................................................................................. 3 List of work packages .............................................................................................................................................4 Staff effort ............................................................................................................................................................. 18 List of deliverables ................................................................................................................................................19 List of milestones (outputs/outcomes) .................................................................................................................. 25 List of critical risks ............................................................................................................................................... 27 2 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET PROJECT SUMMARY Project summary Grant Preparation (General Information screen) — Provide an overall description of your project (including context and overall objectives, planned activities and main achievements, and expected results and impacts (on target groups, change procedures, capacities, innovation etc)). This summary should give readers a clear idea of what your project is about. Use the project summary from your proposal. The primary goal of the LIFE heritageHOME project, known as "Integrated Renovation Services for Heritage Homes of Estonia” is to pioneer a comprehensive renovation service that guides owners of historic homes in Estonia through the process of enhancing their properties' energy efficiency. LIFE heritageHOME builds upon the principles and guidance laid out in the 'European Heritage Green Paper’ and engages a range of national policy makers, heritage operators, researchers and representatives of civil society to facilitate the uptake of these principles in Estonian context. The solutions developed and tested will set up a model on how to facilitate energy-efficient renovations within historical building contexts and equip it with necessary toolbox. Moreover, the project places a strong emphasis on involving homeowners in co-creating solutions and collaborating with scientific and professional communities to harness best practices tailored for heritage homes. The ultimate aim is to assemble an integrated set of services that effectively surmounts the obstacles impeding energy-efficient renovations for heritage properties. The project's scope includes the development and customization of necessary solutions for the integrated service, boosting the capabilities of key facilitators who support energy renovations for heritage homes, and creating a user- friendly digital platform. This platform will serve as a client-facing interface, making it effortless for property owners to access essential information and navigate the various steps required throughout their renovation journey. Crucially, the solutions devised within LIFE heritageHOME are not solely applicable to heritage homeowners in Estonia; they are designed to be replicable in other European countries. The project aims to extend its reach to heritage authorities in the Nordic-Baltic region, particularly in cold climates, and engage with the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) National Committees. By doing so, it will introduce both the technical renovation solutions and the service design of a digital one-stop-shop, simplifying the customer journey toward achieving improved energy efficiency in heritage homes. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS PARTICIPANTS Grant Preparation (Beneficiaries screen) — Enter the info. Number Role Short name Legal name Country PIC 1 COO KUM KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM EE 994060075 2 BEN MKA MUINSUSKAITSEAMET EE 951666710 3 BEN KLIM KLIIMAMINISTEERIUM EE 941609750 4 BEN TalTech TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL EE 999842536 5 BEN EKA EESTI KUNSTIAKADEEMIA EE 955368327 6 BEN ICOMOS MITTETULUNDUSUHING EESTI ICOMOS EE 884437465 3 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIST OF WORK PACKAGES Work packages Grant Preparation (Work Packages screen) — Enter the info. Work Work Package name Lead Beneficiary Effort Start End Deliverables Package No (Person- Month Month Months) WP1 Project management and coordination 1 - KUM 36.00 1 36 D1.1 – Coordination tools (communication plan, sensemaking plan, replication strategy) D1.2 – Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool D1.3 – Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool WP2 Mapping the Customer Journey for the heritage 5 - EKA 36.20 1 24 D2.1 – Public registry data model for home energy renovations heritage buildings D2.2 – Synthesis report for owner centred service design process D2.3 – Green Transition Charter of Estonian heritage buildings WP3 Standardization of solutions for cost-effective 4 - TalTech 54.30 1 30 D3.1 – Technical solutions for single and less disruptive renovation of the historical renovation measures (Month 12) buildings D3.2 – Technical report on the renovation solutions D3.3 – Technical solutions for single renovation measures and configuration criteria WP4 Building the partnership for integrated heritage 2 - MKA 38.50 1 36 D4.1 – Implementation report for owner home renovation service centred service design process WP5 Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage 3 - KLIM 33.20 1 36 D5.1 – Replication guideline for digital one- homeowners stop-shops of heritage home renovations 4 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Work packages Grant Preparation (Work Packages screen) — Enter the info. Work Work Package name Lead Beneficiary Effort Start End Deliverables Package No (Person- Month Month Months) WP6 Disseminating the best practices and solutions for 1 - KUM 24.20 1 36 D6.1 – Energy renovation atlas of heritage sustainability and replication homes D6.2 – Legacy report of LIFE heritageHOME 5 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Work package WP1 – Project management and coordination Work Package Number WP1 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Work Package Name Project management and coordination Start Month 1 End Month 36 Objectives WP1 provides the organizational infrastructure and management of the project, necessary to operate the project and to perform all administrative, financial and operational tasks, directly related to the coordination of the project. This includes: 1) project planning, coordination, and progress control; 2) reporting to Grant Authority (including necessary audits etc); 3) provision of information required by Grant Authority & local monitoring team; organization of project meetings; project communication, internal communication and knowledge exchange; 4) valuation and transfer of the input of the communication platform on the project website & social media channels; 5) monitoring the KPI of the project. WP1 also includes the internal monitoring, quality control and the feedback loops of project implementation and actions to achieve project visibility. Description T.1.1 Contractual management and coordination KuM (COO), all beneficiaries contribute The task includes overall coordination of the project as well as performing the tasks of administrative, financial and contractual management. For the implementation of the whole project the internal arrangements regarding their operation and coordination are made, to ensure that specific synergistic roles are understood for the actions to be implemented properly. All the roles defined under the chapter 4 of the (model) Grant Agreement, are to be carried out under the task. Also, the routine of steering panel will be organized. Coordination activities include the overall project strategy implementation, including project planning, performance and financial control, quality assurance, risk management and contingency planning, and administration of the LIFE grant. KuM is responsible for internal communication management, ensuring that an adequate level of communication exists among the consortium, including through the preparation of minutes of meetings, and circulars to the consortium where appropriate. Next to the scheduled meetings frequently scheduled web-meetings will take place; in addition, ad hoc web- meetings will take place, at least every month (or more frequent, depending on the necessity and the state of play of the tasks concerned). Administrative, Financial and Contractual Management activities are carried out according to general conditions and provisions set forth within the Grant Agreement and the LIFE guidelines for the implementation of projects. KuM as a coordinator will act as a permanent helpdesk for all project participants, providing practical support particularly for the compilation of Financial Statements in compliancy with the LIFE Financial and Guidance Notes on Project Reporting, and the Grant Agreement, where necessary. KuM will be responsible also for the overall contractual management with Grant Authority (such as requests for amendments to the Grant Agreement). Consortium Management will include tasks like organization of official project meetings such as periodic Progress Meetings, Steering Board meetings. Also, the coordinator will be responsible for the distribution of deliverables and reports to the consortium, and maintenance of a project archive. Associated beneficiaries engaged to the task will be keeping information stored in the SyGMA up to date as well as they will take the responsibility for submitting to the coordinator in good time: 1) the financial statements (and additional documentation required as certificates etc); 2) the contribution to the deliverables and technical reports; 3) any other documents or information required by the granting authority under the Agreement. Steering of the project: A consortium-wide project steering panel is aimed to follow the projects progress. Annual meetings for the steering group are foreseen. See the management structure also explained under section 4.2 Project management structure of the proposal. T.1.2 Sensemaking, evaluation, and learning MKA (BEN), all beneficiaries contribute 6 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET This task concerns the continuous internal monitoring of the project results by the participants and joint sensemaking on project progress towards expected impact and cross fertilization between project work streams (Figure 10). The internal monitoring will be including: 1) Overall monitoring of the progress and achieved results in relation to the project time schedule and schedule of deliverables by the coordinator; 2) Monitoring of the results achieved by the individual participants in terms of quality of the work delivered in relation to their tasks, involvement of necessary key actors (outside the consortium) and target groups; 3) Devising a contingency plan and alternative approaches in case of deviations to the work programme or performance indicators; 4) The results of the internal project monitoring are to be disseminated in progress and screening meetings and applied for the overall coordination tasks (T1.1). The comprehensive monitoring of internal project progress allows to apply timely response to any variances (force majeure, unforeseen circumstances, potential for complimentary efforts etc). The task will also include reporting of (estimated and actually achieved) key-performance indicators (KPIs) in the LIFE KPI web tool within the first 9 months from grant signature and at the end of the project. Various externally collected data (state monitoring programs, city statistics, university researchers) analyzed for correlations with project results. Under this task data in various reports is aggregated and concluded. T.1.3 Project visibility. Communication and media activities KuM (COO), ICOMOS (BEN) The task’s primary goal is to disseminate project results and promote the use of EU funds to achieving clean energy transition goals. Project communication and visibility task lasts throughout the project and will focus on promoting the use of LIFE funds. The overall promotion of LIFE is to be achieved by the following actions: Webpage: An important part of the project’s objectives and dissemination of results is a constantly updated to a specially dedicated project website at a separate subsection of KuM webpage. We expect all the other partners promote the project in their webpages in some form. Project web page will cover project objectives, activities, details of implementation progress and results as suggested by LIFE communication guidelines. The page will be in Estonians, with summaries in English. As the project will be using various digital applications for the homeowners, the web page will be interlinked to such tools and thematic content will be included in the webpage. Information about important events related to the project and links to other relevant websites (e.g. other LIFE projects) will be published on the website. Project partners will also provide the project’s main information on their websites and will have links to the project website. In terms of social media, very targeted approach is applied and rather than overall project accounts, partner accounts will be used for distributing specific information to target groups. Communicating LIFE contribution, assuring project visibility during the implementation of the tasks and after project has ended: This task will produce all the specific project materials, such as project banner, message boards in the city space, newsletters, exhibition stands, etc. Each of these contains unique information material about the LIFE heritageHOME project, its goals, planned actions, and expected results. The exact need, format and content for such materials will be developed in the project communication plan drafted in the beginning of the project. The task will follow and comply all necessary communication requirements provided by the contractual obligations for communicating, also recommendations from the LIFE communication toolkit will be applied. The LIFE logo will be featured on every publication / keepsake item / presentation. Tripod display board stand is planned for meetings and conferences. Overall media work about the project results is to be carried out. Regular news about the different relevant activities carried out and especially significant milestones and deliverables will be distributed to the media channels. A presence policy in relation to significant EU events is being pursued. Participating events organized by CINEA: heritageHOME consortium will contribute, upon invitation by the Agency, to common activities related to information (like reporting on impact indicators), dissemination and visibility, and synergies with other LIFE and EU supported actions. Work package WP2 – Mapping the Customer Journey for the heritage home energy renovations Work Package Number WP2 Lead Beneficiary 5. EKA Work Package Name Mapping the Customer Journey for the heritage home energy renovations Start Month 1 End Month 24 7 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Objectives This work package will establish needed baselines for many further concrete tasks that support the specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME. SpO 1 – Align policy: The expert panels (T.2.1) will engage >90 experts, covering different policy sectors like heritage protection, energy, housing, urban planning. SpO 2 – Agree procedures. The expert panels (T.2.1) will serve as baseline for agreeing the procedures. The owners’ heritage assembly will enable homeowners to have a say in policy making prior to designing the measures, thereby simplifying further process for coordinating and approving the planned policy procedures. SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: The revision of exploitation potential of digital solutions (T.2.2) will assist in further design of digital services. Outreach to homeowners via facilitated assembly will help to identify the entry level capacity of owners for further development and design of user-specific tools. SpO4 – Empower of owners: the owners’ heritage assembly (T.2.3) is expected to bring together ~50 homeowners (representative random sample), whose awareness will be raised. Known spokespersons (~10 persons) of homeowners of heritage buildings will be invited to the expert panels (T.2.1). We aim to empower all 7000 homeowners by these initiatives as well as dissemination of their results via project communication channels and public media. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: The owners heritage assembly format will be analyzed for further replication as a routine outreach mode. Description T.2.1 Building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings EKA (BEN), MKA (BEN), TalTech (BEN), KuM (COO), KLIM (BEN), ICOMOS (BEN) Before entering the service design process for heritage home energy renovation as well as developing specific solutions, it is necessary to conduct broader discussions, which include narrower and wider circle of experts. These discussions seek answers to basic questions like: Should the architectural monuments be part of Green Deal? What are the benefits and disadvantages? What does Green Deal mean while considering the architectural monuments? What could it entail? What could be the basic solutions and the so-called red lines? For example, would the solar panels on the roofs of the monuments be allowed? What are the multifaceted considerations (i.e. the aspects EN 16883 Conservation of cultural heritage) that should be weighed and in what scale? These and other questions that will be more specifically drafted for the event series need to lead to the root question - how to support the heritage homeowners on their pursuit for improved living quality and energy performance in architectural monuments? Moreover, these questions need to be answered for different policy scenarios (preliminary scenarios drafted along with proposal – figure 11). As indicated in the section 1.4, we acknowledge the paradigm shift and potentially contradicting perception on the matter, which is due a professional facilitation is foreseen for the seminars. Also, we’ll integrate the principles and key steps outlined in the Green Transition Roadmap of construction sector currently being compiled by KLIM (see explained in section 1.6). Three facilitated seminars will be held within the project: 1. A seminar which is aimed at narrower circle of experts. There will be speakers (5-6 persons) from European Heritage Institutions. The aim is to receive a better knowledge of the practices and opinions on Green Deal at the architectural monuments. 2. A seminar for the wider circle of experts (heritage experts, restoration architects, engineers, energy efficiency experts, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication). The aim of the seminar is to discuss which are the benefits as regards Green Deal at the architectural monuments from the state point of view and how could the state support this action? Event is targeted towards ~50 professionals in the field. 3. A discussion between heritage stakeholders. The aim is to compose a Charter of the Green Deal of Estonian architectural monuments which submits the basic positions of heritage stakeholders (Estonian National Heritage Board). Event is targeted towards ~30 heritage stakeholders. Parallelly to the facilitated seminars described above that set the goal (why? what? when?) and roles (who? how?) for the green transition of heritage homes, a series of expert interviews is carried out for rapid assessment on the possible means of innovation, that could help to obtain the set goals either faster or more efficiently. The interviews will feed into joint workshops of academia representatives and public officials that aims to map the further heritage energy renovation research needs. The possible topics identified via interviews are weighed based on common methodology and facilitated process, which helps to identify the most urgent applied research topics on the matter that need to be implemented as spin-off’s and follow-up’s of the current project. The results of the innovation workshop are included to the charter as an annex, but moreover follow-up projects will be launched based on these. The LIFE heritageHOME results are to be exploited also in: 8 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET - policy work regarding the energy renovations of heritage homes (coupling the challenges of solving the challenges of energy poverty and protecting the European built heritage authenticity). key ministries are engaged to the project as beneficiaries as well are the significant state authority and the leading civil society organization, all findings of the project will integrate in policy work. - policy work regarding the energy renovations of historic homes (milieu-valuable buildings protected locally). Project findings will be as much possible integrated in the planning and construction laws of Estonia. T.2.2 Examination of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions MKA (BEN), KLIM (BEN), TalTech (BEN) Information about heritage buildings is available in different registries managed by authorities including building registry, heritage registry, Museums Public Portal. In addition, there are different web interfaces for processing national subsidies, and various web-tools for E-ehitus (see explained section 1.6) are advanced. When setting up the digital one- stop-shop for home renovation services of heritage homes, we aim to first understand the possible service gaps of existing and already developed tools for identifying the special features of heritage homes that need to be integrated into such systems. Data about the building geometry, building envelope structures and service systems is incomplete in the building register. There is no machine-readable information about building envelope structures in the National Register of Cultural Monuments. However, this incomplete or missing information is an inevitably necessary input when renovating a building. The database of the National Register of Cultural Monuments and the special conditions for heritage protection must be updated so that it contains machine-readable information. More detailed building typology will be worked out that represents better historic building geometry (3D and meter scale), details (2D and cm scale), structures (1D and mm scale) and service systems. In addition, to building shape also other parameters will be used for generation the typology on the building level: function / use, ownership, age, etc. This building typology is later input for working out renovation solutions. It will be tested and validated how it is possible to identify the characteristics of building envelope structures and service systems on the basis of the parameters entered in the database search. T.2.3 Co-creation with owners: heritage assembly for private owners EKA(BEN), MKA (BEN), other beneficiaries can be invited to specific events at prior agreement. Various studies (e.g. LINK, LINK) have shown that in heritage buildings residents often negotiate creative and informal comfort practices specific to their own circumstances and contexts, although these frequently pass under the radar of policymakers. This is particularly found in buildings considered to be less energy efficient, and while this may sometimes be because of fuel poverty, it is acknowledged that these practices are in many cases conscious choice, related to a sense of sufficiency and frugality, especially in older buildings. Such behavioural changes and minor retrofits are likely to negatively affect heritage values compared with more significant fabric alterations, in some cases even creating heritage enhancement, and are likely to have much lower financial costs (LCC). The need to support such positive user interactions with their buildings and systems is being highlighted by the heritage assembly work in the project. The aim of the task is to replicate the social engagement model of climate assembly successfully implemented in different cities of Europe among the homeowners of heritage buildings. The invited mini- publics would be chosen by the representative random sample of 50-60 heritage homeowners, who would be invited to discuss and agree on the most critical measures needed to improve the existing services and procedures supporting renovations. The longer vision is to institutionalise deliberative mini-publics in the governance of the green transition of private heritage buildings. Also, such collaboration forms encourage and empower the heritage homeowners to take active role in policy discussions and future service design. The owners’ heritage assembly will be invited together in two rounds. As a first step owners are informed and engaged for series of thematic co-creation events, which will be succeeded by feedback round for the same group to inform them about how their recommendations have been implemented and revalidate the feasibility and urgency of the policy initiatives that were sprouted from the assembly. Work package WP3 – Standardization of solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings Work Package Number WP3 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Work Package Name Standardization of solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings Start Month 1 End Month 30 9 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Objectives This work package will develop the technical renovation solutions. The agreed solutions and guidance provided to the owners on how to implement them will contribute to several specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME. SpO 1 – Align policy: N/A SpO 2 – Agree procedures: develop feasible and efficient renovation solutions accepted by heritage authorities. Agree the building level limits of acceptable change to be allowed (T.3.3) SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: Identify (T.3.1) and develop (T.3.2) technical renovation solutions (50 solutions at TRL 3-5) for heritage homes and propose feasible step-by-step renovation sequences for homeowners (T.3.3). This will simplify renovation for >5000 heritage homes and around 60 000 historic buildings in Estonia by (partially) solving the contradicting challenge of preserving unique solutions with standardized solutions and identifying the limits of acceptable changes. As a result of the WP a professional guidance report is produced enabling heritage authorities, consultants, energy performance auditors and engineers designing the renovations (>500 professionals). SpO4 – Empower of owners: Solutions developed within the project will be published as renovation atlas of heritage buildings in (T.6.1), for that the solutions need to be simplified and sufficiently explanatory to allow uptake by non- expert homeowner. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: For all solutions replication potential will be assessed, based on which the solutions will be disseminated to various other interested parties (national and beyond). For example, the practical renovation guidance will be well applicable for renovation of public buildings for which a grant scheme is currently being prepared nationally. Revision procedure to sustain the timeliness for developed solutions will be agreed within the project. All solutions developed within the project will be also disseminated among owners of conventional homes (via outreach channels of LIFE IP BUILDEST). Description T.3.1 Analysis of existing best practices MKA (BEN), TalTech (BEN), EKA (BEN), ICOMOS (BEN) The aim is to make existing deep renovation best practice experiences available to homeowners, architects, engineers, heritage specialists, real estate developers, and other stakeholders to draw inspiration from these examples and put them into practice. Each historical building will be analysed as a specific case. IEA SHC Task 59 | Renovating Historic Buildings Towards Zero Energy suggestions have been considered for the minimum requirements for case studies: • Deep energy renovation of the building. The aim is to provide examples that have considered the building as a whole, and not only individual renovation measures. Therefore, the cases included in the database must be aimed at improving the energy performance. Renovation of the whole building is preferred for cases studies, but individual measures may also be possible under certain conditions, if the information about reducing energy demand of renewable energy production is available. • The project has been implemented. Most of the influences on the energy-renovation of historic buildings appear from compatibility with the existing construction and/or intended use. It is therefore important that the best practice example shows a renovation project that has already been implemented. • The intervention followed the results of a thorough heritage value assessment. The improvement of the energy performance of historic buildings cannot be achieved at the expense of losing their heritage value. Heritage values must be sufficiently quantified to be assessed. • A significant improvement of energy performance was achieved. The final goal of project is to achieve the clear reduction of energy demand in historic homes, therefore energy use before and after the energy renovation must be known. Targeted heat saving is 40 % - 50 % depending on the heritage value of the building. • Detailed documentation of technical solutions and monitoring data is available. As previously discussed, access to detailed and reliable information is important in overcoming obstacles to the renovation of historic homes. Therefore, any examples included in the best practice database must be well documented and make this information available to other stakeholders. To reach all stakeholders groups, the quality of visual information transfer is very important - specially to building owners -: photos, short and concise texts, easy-to-read diagrams, detailed drawings of solutions and the experience of colleagues. A good browsing experience is also very important. The best practice examples should inspire stakeholders. Therefore, the presentation begins with images of the entire building and its interiors, describing with photos and text the aesthetic and historical values and how the responsible modernization improved the comfort of the residents. Within this task the recent building specific special conditions for heritage conservation will be analysed, also the recently highlighted renovation houses (prize winners) will be reviewed. Based on this, buildings will be selected to be assessed for their post-renovation performance and heritage status. Also, international state of the art solutions and best practice guidelines will be analysed for their replication potential. The solutions documented here will be fed into digital interface content as well as various dissemination materials to be published under T.6.1. 10 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET T.3.2 Development of single technical renovation measures for different historic building envelopes and service systems TalTech (BEN), EKA (BEN), MKA (BEN) Deep renovation solutions will be developed in the task based on the typology of the building, boundary envelope structures and service systems determined in T.2.2. Since during the renovation of the heritage building it may be necessary to preserve some building components in their original form, other building components must be made more energy efficient (energy saving donation). Since some renovation measures may not be implemented when renovating step by step, renovation solutions are developed with the understanding that not all measures need to be implemented at once. This may mean that the measures used may not be the most cost-effective, but at the expense of this we can better preserve the historical heritage. Therefore, renovation solutions with different energy efficiency characteristics are developed in the task. It can be estimated that deep renovation solutions will cover at least 90% of the building types, handled in the project, if we consider a certain degree of generalization: • for external walls, up to 10 different renovation solutions. • for basement wall, up to 6 different renovation solutions. • for roof / attic floor, up to 6 different renovation solutions. • for the basement/floor, up to 6 different renovation solutions. • for windows / door, up to 4 different renovation solutions. • for ventilation system, up to 4 different renovation solutions. • for heating system, up to 4 different renovation solutions. • for heat source up to 4 different renovation solutions (including renewable-based heating and cooling). • for energy from renewable sources up to 4 different solutions. • for building automation and control systems. Final list to be agreed in the beginning of the project. With agreeing the list of single renovation solutions also methods for validating their resilience and performance and fitness for heritage contexts will be determined for allowing adequate modelling for validation and testing beyond available practice. To reduce costs and time of design these standardised renovation solutions will be available in digital format for: • homeowners (easy to understand pdf) understanding that the user is usually non-professional decision maker • consultants (construction companies, architects, engineers, urban planners) (dwg) for direct use or for modifications as needed. We’ll exploit the assessment categories and criteria of EN 16883 Conservation of cultural heritage, however go beyond from assessing the level of risk against different criteria, but more specific parameters are considered for performance assessment. While doing this, the national adaptation to assessment criteria is foreseen. T.3.3 Investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings TalTech (BEN), EKA (BEN), MKA (BEN) This task combines various renovation solutions and services into packages by combining single renovation measures (input from T.3.2) in order to create confidence and simplify the renovation process. Since it is a multi-variable task, different criteria will be taken into account when developing and evaluating solutions: preservation of historical value, improvement of energy performance, economic capacity of the building owner, prevention of energy poverty, extension of the service life of the building, creation of a safe living environment, etc. Results of this task will help to develop the final renovation concept, determine special conditions for heritage protection. Different attitudes of building owners are possible to take into account: keeping original architectural appearance the least to save heritage buildings, maximizing energy saving and minimizing emissions or best economically viable effect. The packages will be presented to attain different energy savings: from 25-30% as a minimum primary energy saving to ≥40-60% as primary energy saving requirement for deep energy renovation of existing buildings targeting self- sustainability in the medium to long term. All renovation will fulfil basic requirements set in the building product regulation. Renovation packages will deliver an optimal level of Indoor Environmental Quality to the building occupants. For example, ventilation airflow will fulfil indoor climate category II requirements. Selection of renovation packages considers key building elements to cover, and when it cannot be completed in one step, carefully plans renovation steps, which outline the selection of energy-saving measures and renewable energy installations to be executed, avoiding any lock-in, damaging architectural appearance, loosing heritage values, and can possibly be linked to progressive financial support. To ensure cost effectiveness and price transparency of services provided to homeowners, renovation measures are equipped with cost and cost-effectiveness indicators. The validated renovation solutions will be published as Technical report (D3.2), as well as fed into digital toolset of integrated renovation service. For the latter selected digital models (>30 models of single renovation measures) will be developed to be tested in the digital renovation passport tool (D3.1; D3.3). 11 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Work package WP4 – Building the partnership for integrated heritage home renovation service Work Package Number WP4 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Work Package Name Building the partnership for integrated heritage home renovation service Start Month 1 End Month 36 Objectives This work package will prepare the service design and raise capacity among the enablers of integrated renovation service. The agreed solutions and guidance provided to the owners on how to implement them will contribute to several specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME SpO 1 – Align policy: The service design for the complete journey (from ideation to inspecting outcomes) for energy renovation of heritage homes is analysed, policy gaps are identified and steps are foreseen to bridge the most critical gaps. To do this, we engage authorities in jurisdiction of different ministries (KuM, KLIM, but also RaM – Ministry of Finance, KeM – Ministry of Environment). The government ordinances (~10 acts) regulating various procedures (granting, permitting, …) are analysed for fitness. Financial incentives currently available in the market (MKA, KredEx (including renovation support measures for energy poor households), municipal) and various models applied in EU are analysed for possibilities to blend them for multi-benefit effect. Novel business models are proposed (>5). SpO 2 – Agree procedures: Clarification of objectives, roles and communication of different actors participating the workflow from different jurisdictions. Agreeing joint communication frameworks and packaging the mutually understood content to be presented for the end-users in the digital one-stop-shop. SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: Service design for the digital one-stop-shop to be implemented in T.5.1 SpO4 – Empower of owners: Exploiting the owners’ feedback from T.2.3 to develop the needed service. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: All solutions proposed need to be sustainable after the end of the project, this will be achieved by active participation of policy-makers on highest possible level and development of new business models (>5) for solving the possible service gaps identified in the process. Description T.4.1 Preparing the heritage home renovation service MKA (BEN), KuM (COO), KLIM (BEN) Based on the inputs gathered from T.2.1 and T.2.3 a thorough service design process is foreseen. It needs to engage various stakeholders (elaborated under section 3.3 of the proposal and illustrated in Figure 12). We’ll exploit the concept of Double Diamond for Design thinking for the service design facilitation (explained under section 1.4 of the proposal). The hypothetical service flow and interactions between participants of it will be drafted along with beneficiaries and external stakeholders. The drafted concept for the Integrated Service will be validated by end-user feedback both among the representative sample assembly (T.2.3) as well as test group formed from owners that have initiated renovations in the project and selected as a test group for the service (T.6.2). Different interlinked workflows are foreseen within the service design (policy work is foreseen in T.4.2 to initiate the needed changes.): 1) Fitness check of regulatory framework is carried out, to identify possible regulative barriers that would hinder the implementation of the service. 2) Fitness of strategic policy: setting a shared ambition for green transition of heritage homes. 3) Agreeing the workflow to streamlined service between national and regional authorities. 4) Planning the governance changes for Estonian National Heritage Board (MKA). Exploiting the 360 Degree Feedback is an evaluation system or process, the current governance practices and procedures are analysed and the necessary changes are identified to institutionalize energy performance considerations in current decision making workflow. 5) Analysis will be conducted to identify possible service gaps and assess the possibility to include additional internal resources or engage external stakeholders. For identified service gaps business models are drafted, for which more thorough fitness check will be carried out in T.4.3. 6) Analysis of integrated consultation service is carried out, more specifically the service requirements for energy auditors of heritage buildings will be drafted (training programme for the consultants will be piloted in T.4.2). 7) Preparing the terms of reference for the digital information gate for the Integrated energy renovation service for heritage homes, which will be implemented in T.5.1. Interactions with different existing data sources are drafted and content gaps are identified. 12 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET 8) The fundamentals of evaluating an environmentally friendly product and an environmentally friendly service/work related to home renovation are described so that they can be applied to renovation process and their procurement. 9) - consultations of heritage homeowners & permitting procedures: while we expect to set up a digital one-stop-shop, then it will also include direct consultations by heritage authorities. The heritage authorities will be trained during and after the project to provide evidence-based advice/support for the homeowners when requested for information. Also, the service and its components will provide baseline and data-based decision support for future permitting procedures. 10) To secure the streamlined process for the complex and integrated workflow, an internal workplan is to be agreed (MS13). The Workplan will define roles, testing policy, and subtask deadlines for the overall process. It is expected that this process has significant impact on construction and heritage protection laws of Estonia as well as support implementation of them by raised capacity and awareness. To achieve this, the relevant policy makers that are engaged to the project as beneficiaries (KuM, KliM, MKA) will integrate the project results into national thematic policies (permitting procedures, grant schemes, collaboration with regional authorities and local municipalities etc.) T.4.2 Building partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service MKA (BEN), EKA (BEN), TalTech (BEN) This task encompasses both the policy work and coordination of partnerships identified in T.4.1 (to be implemented by MKA), but also specific training and capacity building of the client-facing consultant’s network. More specifically this will include: Successful cooperation requires that all the parties can communicate in the same “language”. At the moment, the vast majority of heritage officials, who in their daily work communicate with house owners and among other things have to solve issues related to energy saving, lack basic knowledge of energy efficiency. In the framework of the project, we will conduct training for 25 heritage officials. Additionally, we will develop the competence requirements that the heritage official should know about energy efficiency while advising the homeowners, with a purpose to continuing training (aiming to improve understanding of the performance and effects of solutions developed in T.3.2 - T.3.3). Strong emphasis is put to training heritage authorities how to raise awareness of homeowners. For this a new educational solution is proposed - using prototypes (TRL 3-4) of the most important joints of the building envelope structures (for example, the joint of the external wall and window, external wall and basement wall joint, eaves) are also built so that it is possible to assess the construction solution on a 1:1 scale. On the other hand, there is a great need for specialists who can give balanced recommendations for the energy efficiency of architectural monuments and buildings of the heritage conservation areas. Today, there are lack of competent specialists who have knowledge of both energy efficiency and heritage. In the course of the project, we will develop the professional requirements for a specialist who could give recommendations to owners of architectural monuments and buildings of high value category on energy efficiency. We will train 20 consultants of heritage energy efficiency who would advise both homeowners and, if necessary, heritage officials. We propose competence models for vocational program: heritage – energy consultant specialist competence model or similar. The aim is to ensure regional coverage of the consultants energy efficiency of heritage homes. In addition to identified experts, trainings are also developed for other participants in the renovation process (architects, engineers, designers >50 experts). Professional-specific training covers the skills, knowledge and experience that are missing in regular education and professional work. Instead of the usual talk-listen-watch lecture, the focus is on a more active and involved learning process. Workshops are organized to support the various stages of the renovation process: from the conceptual design of the initial stage to the detailed design documentations that will be the basis of the renovation works. Construction companies & renovation professionals are engaged to identifying existing best practices for delivering energy efficiency measures in renovation of heritage buildings (T3.1) as well as in later stages of the project informed about the developed renovation solutions (T3.2, T3.3) and facilitation services made available via digital one-stop- shop (T5.2). This is expected to have a positive influence on technical quality of the buildingworks. Also, the validated solutions also increase the interest of professionals to participate the renovation market. T.4.3 Fitness check of renovation business models for owners of heritage homes KuM (COO), KLIM (BEN), MKA (BEN) The energy renovation of private homes is currently grant dependent even in regular residential buildings. As energy renovation works of heritage buildings are comparatively more expensive, the owners’ interest to implement these is limited. This task will analyse the fitness of the different available business models to the socio-economic setting in Estonia. Various existing best practices are analyzed for replication for incentivizing renovation of heritage buildings in Estonia The service gaps identified in T.4.1, and namely the need for additional financial incentives for supporting energy renovations of heritage homes will be a baseline for selecting the sample of business models to be analysed for the fitness of applicability. We’ll build on the models developed for conventional residential buildings (e.g. LINK or LINK) and 13 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET the existing business models exploited in Estonia. Based on the fitness check most feasible business models (>5) are developed to policy recommendations. The preliminary list of models to be analysed: 1) on-bill schemes and repayment programmes; 2) climate claims & offsetting; 3) efficient blending of existing grants; 4) financing through rent increase and reinventing the use of semi- abandoned houses; 5) crowdfunding models, 6) carbon taxing by considering environmental impacts throughout the life- cycle (LCA). In terms of internal service gaps the possible financing models (including LCC) also will be discussed. As a baseline we’ll exploit a comprehensive analysis carried out by Renowave project coordinated by KLIM (financed by DG Reform Technical Support Instrument). Renowave has listed various potential incentives (fiscal, financial, regulative, etc.) LIFE heritageHOME will narrow the broad list of measures according to the relevancy regarding the heritage buildings and further analyze the feasibility of implementing the business models in Estonia. During the project the market potential of various monetized digital services that can be interlinked to the renovation passports and digital one-stop-shop will be investigated. To achieve this the service concept will be introduced to possible interested service suppliers (>3 contacts and rapid assessment of business potential carried out). The other aspect of the business model regarding the operation of the digital one-stop-shop is securing the upkeep and further development of the proposed one-stop-shop, which will depend clearly from the state budget. The model to finance the service gaps is to be agreed within the policy work foreseen in WP2 and WP4. The policy work regarding implementing the business models will be at parts supported by the project expertise. Work package WP5 – Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage homeowners Work Package Number WP5 Lead Beneficiary 3. KLIM Work Package Name Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage homeowners Start Month 1 End Month 36 Objectives This work package will develop the digital tools facilitating the integrated renovation service for heritage homes. The agreed solutions and guidance provided to the owners on how to implement them will contribute to several specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME. SpO 1 – Align policy: N/A SpO 2 – Agree procedures: N/A SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: a pilot digital renovation passport tool for heritage homes is launched (T.5.1) demonstrating how it is possible to simplify the ideation stage of energy renovations in heritage homes. The workpackage also includes a key output of the project, the digital dashboard for the integrated renovation service for heritage homes (T.5.2). SpO4 – Empower of owners: The digital tools developed by the project need to be compatible to the end-user needs, simplifying technical information sufficiently to find right information. Within the tool we integrate the different features, gadgets and information upgrade in a manner, that owners are also educated about the energy renovations throughout the journey. Establishment the owners platform to the digital dashboard encourages the peer-to-peer learning among homeowners. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: By integrating the digital one-stop-shop with various existing services developed and maintained by state allows to sustain the service in the future. Moreover, the digital solutions developed for the heritage homes have also value for owners of historic and conventional homes (~100 000 detached buildings and ~14 000 apartment buildings) in Estonia and transfer potential to heritage homes in other countries. Description T.5.1 Piloting heritage home renovation passports TalTech (BEN); KLIM (BEN); EKA (BEN) KLIM is currently developing the national system for Renovation Passports by LIFE IP BUILDEST project. The planned decision support is intended to support preliminary design decisions for building renovations. Within LIFE IP BUILDEST the tool will be designed for regular buildings. While the general framework for the service can be applicable to all buildings, the uniqueness of heritage homes is not considered in the generic tool. The LIFEheritageHOME will propose an add-on for the generic tool and pilot it based on >20 test-buildings using the model buildings analysed WP3 of the project. The tool is aimed to simplify the ideation process of energy renovations in heritage homes. 14 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Piloting heritage home renovation passports require involvement different professions, who may have different background and may speak in different “language”. Making good decisions requires knowledge, time and money. But due to the general lack of these resources, the approach must be fit for purpose. Due to more complexity, more resources should be given to the planning process. Because tailored solutions are not possible in all cases, there will always be some need for general recommendations and simple rules of thumb (he main focus is on private non-professional decision makers). In this task, we develop fuzzy applications to facilitate decision making and comparison of renovation options: Assessment of energy performance of buildings based on: • building geometry from Estonian building register digital twin data, building typology (result of T.2.2) or user defined input data. • buildings structures and service systems based on data from improved National Heritage Register (result of T.2.2), building register (www.ehr.ee), building typology or user defined input data. • possibility to use energy from renewable sources based on data from improved National Heritage Register (result of T.2.2) and Estonian building register digital twin data (roof orientation and angle). • deep renovation criteria: reduction in primary energy consumption - energy savings or maximum primary and/ or final energy consumption (minimum energy needs, EPC rating), or maximum kgCO2/m²/year (operational phase). For the engine of the tool, we use the existing spreadsheet method of energy calculation for apartment buildings, which we adapt to suit also to detached house. The user interface will be web-based and simplified in such a way that even the owner of the building can handle it (no professional prior knowledge is required). The tool is primarily intended for the comparison of renovation options. During further design, professional energy calculation software is already used. Both tools are simplified to a certain extent so that they can be used by all participants in negotiations. This ensures greater transparency and trust between participants in the decision-making process. It also allows change the role of the architect/engineer and heritage specialist / conservation scientist understanding the arguments of the other side better and participating more actively in planning, predicting the consequences of different alternatives and contributing more actively in the early stages of the renovation process. As the Renovation Passport is aimed towards homeowners with non-technical expertise, the solution needs to be tested for clarity and consistency towards delivering accurate information on needed renovation works. The committed test group (engaged in T6.2) along with additional test-users are to be integrated in developing the digital tool with the functionality needed by the homeowners. T.5.2 Setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service KLIM (BEN); MKA (BEN); TalTech (BEN), EKA (BEN) The concept for the digital one-stop-shop for integrated renovation service of heritage homes is illustrated in Figure 13. We’ll aim to package the whole customer journey in a manner that homeowner can easily find its way with a easy access from home, or from the entry point of first contact. The digital dashboard will exploit various existing digital developments in the field (as explained in section 1.6 of the proposal and illustrated in Figure 14), but the LIFE heritageHOME project will allow to develop and integrate the specific features of heritage homes into the system. Presentation layers (front-ends) and data access (back-end) will be upgraded for specific purposes of assisting homeowners to find the right information in clear and concise manner. Digital dashboard will provide information on: • the expected steps in the workflow, requirements and procedures to improve trust towards such integrated services. • links to other specific tools, among others renovation passport tool piloted in the project (T.5.1), but also digital energy audit tool, incentive calculators etc (developed externally from the project). • easy to understand guidance on renovation concepts (renovation building fabric, integrating renewable technologies, quality assurance etc.). • streamline access to various support measures (including for specific target groups), guidance on how to prepare for these. • information exchange platforms for experts and owners. • contact lists for consultants, supervisory authorities and consumer protection as well simplified and improved search and co-ordination of contractors. Work package WP6 – Disseminating the best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication Work Package Number WP6 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Work Package Name Disseminating the best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication Start Month 1 End Month 36 15 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Objectives This work package will disseminate the integrated renovation service for heritage homes for sustainability and replication. The tasks foreseen in the WP will contribute to several specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME. SpO 1 – Align policy: N/A SpO 2 – Agree procedures: N/A SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: N/A SpO4 – Empower of owners: The dissemination of the service and the need to improve energy performance of heritage homes is directly targeted towards empowerment of owners. With the project outreach (T.6.1, T.6.2) we’ll aim to engage >30 000 homeowners in heritage protection areas. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: The workpackage is namely focused to sustaining the service by disseminating it among possible end-users (T.6.1 – T.6.2) as well as promoting the concept among possible followers for amplified effect (T.6.3). By the foreseen outreach we aim to introduce the service concept for at least 10 follower countries. Description T.6.1 Highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions KuM (COO), MKA (BEN), ICOMOS (BEN), KLIM (BEN) For disseminating the service as well as drawing attention for the challenge of energy renovations of heritage homes in the society the different outreach tools need to be published. Within this task we comply, edit and publish different dissemination materials for intended target groups of the project. These are: A) Energy renovation atlas of heritage homes: Target group: HOMEOWNERS The solutions analysed and developed in WP3 are oriented towards professional end-users, within this task we target the same solutions to homeowners, for which different presentation is required. To reach all stakeholders groups, the quality of visual information transfer is very important - specially to building owners: photos, short and concise texts, easy-to- read diagrams, detailed drawings of solutions and the experience of peers. A good browsing experience is also very important. The best practice examples should inspire stakeholders. Therefore, the presentation begins with images of the entire building and its interiors, describing with photos and text the aesthetic and historical values and how the responsible modernization improved the comfort of the residents. Subsections from the content of the atlas will be published as renovation info-charts and included to the set produced and published in LIFE IP BUILDEST. B) Best practice demo-videos: Target group: HOMEOWNERS Based on the best practice analysis carried out in WP3, the flagship solutions will be selected for be documented in demo-videos to inspire followers. Videos will provide owners insights, demonstrate end-results, describe challenges and solutions how to overcome these. Videos will be integrated to the campaign to launch the service among homeowners (T.6.2). C) Legacy report Target group: INTERNATIONAL HERITAGE COMMUNITY A synthesis report of the results, learnings and planned follow-ups and recommendations for the future of the LIFE heritageHOME. The learnings and recommendations will beshared with the international heritage community (ICOMOS national councils, heritage authorities and collaborating networks). However, while targeted towards heritage protection experts the content is also relevant for wider audience of European Renovation Wave. The legacy report will constitute the final publishable report presenting the key results, main lessons learnt, and recommendations for the future. It will be professionally designed, attractive and tailored to the target group. The content and final draft of the report must be discussed with CINEA before publication The legacy report is distributed via web, but also in the printed format to be shared at international thematic events. T.6.2 Launching integrated renovation service for heritage homes MKA (BEN), other beneficiaries contribute This task encompasses 2 workflows: A) Engaging test-users group for assessing the integrating renovation service: Various co-creation methods are exploited for the design of the integrated renovation service (outreach to owner’s heritage assembly (T.2.3), engagement of owner’s spokespersons to the expert panels (T.2.1) and integration of continuous feedback from the market). However, to sustain the model in long-run, we aim to test and validate the tool among homeowners (~10-15 people) who initiate energy renovations of their heritage homes in 2024-2025. The test- users will be actively providing feedback for the whole service and its specific tools to avoid failures before launching the service to a broad audience. 16 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET B) Series of events to introduce the service for the homeowners: 11 public events to introduce the whole integrated service to homeowners residing in heritage conservation areas in Estonia will be carried out. Planned as a road-show the web interface, specific tools, consultant network and developed incentives will be introduced. Also, communication campaign is carried out including social media, public broadcast and printed media to introduce the tools and service provided and the challenge we aim to face in energy renovations of heritage homes. This outreach aims to engage the attention of homeowners to whom the service is developed for. T.6.3 Networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU ICOMOS (BEN), MKA (BEN), KuM (COO), KLIM (BEN) LIFE heritageHOME concept for the integrated service of energy renovations of heritage homes is introduced via different professional networks, including: • Scientific community: solutions developed with LIFE heritageHOME are introduced at national scientific conferences (>5 events, like International Conference on Energy Efficiency in Historic Buildings, Renewable Energy Conference, International Conference on Durability of Building Materials and Components, Central European Symposium on Building ,Central European Symposium on Building Physics, Nordic Building Physics Conference, etc.) and published at peer-reviewed scientific journals (>3 articles, in journals like: Journal of Cultural Heritage, Heritage, Building and environment etc). • Heritage community (ICOMOS) events: >10 participation at EU national councils and global council meetings and symposiums to introduce the project, its results and outcomes. ICOMOS Estonia is active participant in Climate and Heritage Working Group, the process and results will be introduced and consulted in that group. In 2023 the president of ICOMOS Estonia is co-chair of “Heritage for Climate” in ICOMOS International General Assembly and Symposium. This project can be introduced there. And in forthcoming Europe Group meeting and symposium in Tartu 2023. • Heritage authorities in neighbouring countries: joint workshops (>4 events) with Swedish, Finnish (see LoS), Latvian, Norwegian (see LoS) Heritage Agencies and governmental authorities (>3 events) to discuss green transition of heritage homes. • Integration of project results into outreach flow of LIFE IP BUILDEST to expand and amplify the results of both projects. 17 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET STAFF EFFORT Staff effort per participant Grant Preparation (Work packages - Effort screen) — Enter the info. Participant WP1 WP2 WP3 WP4 WP5 WP6 Total Person-Months 1 - KUM 23.40 5.80 7.20 10.80 47.20 2 - MKA 3.60 4.80 9.00 18.00 2.40 3.60 41.40 3 - KLIM 2.00 2.40 3.60 18.00 1.80 27.80 4 - TalTech 2.00 5.00 28.80 2.50 11.60 0.50 50.40 5 - EKA 2.00 18.20 16.50 7.20 1.20 0.50 45.60 6 - ICOMOS 3.00 7.00 10.00 Total Person-Months 36.00 36.20 54.30 38.50 33.20 24.20 222.40 18 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIST OF DELIVERABLES Deliverables Grant Preparation (Deliverables screen) — Enter the info. The labels used mean: Public — fully open ( automatically posted online) Sensitive — limited under the conditions of the Grant Agreement EU classified —RESTREINT-UE/EU-RESTRICTED, CONFIDENTIEL-UE/EU-CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET-UE/EU-SECRET under Decision 2015/444 Deliverable Deliverable Name Work Lead Beneficiary Type Dissemination Level Due Date No Package (month) No D1.1 Coordination tools (communication plan, WP1 1 - KUM R — Document, report SEN - Sensitive 6 sensemaking plan, replication strategy) D1.2 Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI WP1 1 - KUM R — Document, report SEN - Sensitive 9 webtool D1.3 Updated extract of the project data from the WP1 1 - KUM R — Document, report SEN - Sensitive 36 LIFE KPI webtool D2.1 Public registry data model for heritage WP2 2 - MKA R — Document, report SEN - Sensitive 12 buildings D2.2 Synthesis report for owner centred service WP2 2 - MKA R — Document, report PU - Public 24 design process D2.3 Green Transition Charter of Estonian WP2 2 - MKA R — Document, report PU - Public 24 heritage buildings D3.1 Technical solutions for single renovation WP3 4 - TalTech R — Document, report PU - Public 12 measures (Month 12) D3.2 Technical report on the renovation solutions WP3 4 - TalTech R — Document, report PU - Public 30 D3.3 Technical solutions for single renovation WP3 4 - TalTech R — Document, report PU - Public 30 measures and configuration criteria 19 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Deliverables Grant Preparation (Deliverables screen) — Enter the info. The labels used mean: Public — fully open ( automatically posted online) Sensitive — limited under the conditions of the Grant Agreement EU classified —RESTREINT-UE/EU-RESTRICTED, CONFIDENTIEL-UE/EU-CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET-UE/EU-SECRET under Decision 2015/444 Deliverable Deliverable Name Work Lead Beneficiary Type Dissemination Level Due Date No Package (month) No D4.1 Implementation report for owner centred WP4 2 - MKA R — Document, report PU - Public 36 service design process D5.1 Replication guideline for digital one-stop- WP5 4 - TalTech R — Document, report PU - Public 34 shops of heritage home renovations D6.1 Energy renovation atlas of heritage homes WP6 2 - MKA R — Document, report PU - Public 30 D6.2 Legacy report of LIFE heritageHOME WP6 1 - KUM R — Document, report PU - Public 34 20 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Deliverable D1.1 – Coordination tools (communication plan, sensemaking plan, replication strategy) Deliverable Number D1.1 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Deliverable Name Coordination tools (communication plan, sensemaking plan, replication strategy) Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level SEN - Sensitive Due Date (month) 6 Work Package No WP1 Description Coordination tools for the project. PDF documents in Estonian, available at request. Deliverable D1.2 – Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool Deliverable Number D1.2 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Deliverable Name Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level SEN - Sensitive Due Date (month) 9 Work Package No WP1 Description PDF documents in English, submitted to CINEA. Deliverable D1.3 – Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool Deliverable Number D1.3 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Deliverable Name Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level SEN - Sensitive Due Date (month) 36 Work Package No WP1 Description PDF documents in English, submitted to CINEA.. Deliverable D2.1 – Public registry data model for heritage buildings Deliverable Number D2.1 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Public registry data model for heritage buildings Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level SEN - Sensitive Due Date (month) 12 Work Package No WP2 Description PDF document, stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian. 21 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Deliverable D2.2 – Synthesis report for owner centred service design process Deliverable Number D2.2 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Synthesis report for owner centred service design process Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 24 Work Package No WP2 Description PDF document, published on project web-page. Report will be complied in English. Deliverable D2.3 – Green Transition Charter of Estonian heritage buildings Deliverable Number D2.3 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Green Transition Charter of Estonian heritage buildings Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 24 Work Package No WP2 Description PDF document, published on project web-page. Report will be complied in Estonian Deliverable D3.1 – Technical solutions for single renovation measures (Month 12) Deliverable Number D3.1 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Deliverable Name Technical solutions for single renovation measures (Month 12) Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 12 Work Package No WP3 Description PDF and dwg document, stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian and ENG summary. Deliverable D3.2 – Technical report on the renovation solutions Deliverable Number D3.2 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Deliverable Name Technical report on the renovation solutions Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 30 Work Package No WP3 Description PDF and dwg document, stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian and ENG summary 22 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Deliverable D3.3 – Technical solutions for single renovation measures and configuration criteria Deliverable Number D3.3 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Deliverable Name Technical solutions for single renovation measures and configuration criteria Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 30 Work Package No WP3 Description Technical drawings (50 + configuration criteria) for renovation solution prototypes are to be integrated to the piloted digital renovation passports. Deliverable D4.1 – Implementation report for owner centred service design process Deliverable Number D4.1 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Implementation report for owner centred service design process Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 36 Work Package No WP4 Description PDF document, published on project web-page. Report will be complied in English. Deliverable D5.1 – Replication guideline for digital one-stop-shops of heritage home renovations Deliverable Number D5.1 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Deliverable Name Replication guideline for digital one-stop-shops of heritage home renovations Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 34 Work Package No WP5 Description PDF document, published on project webpage. Report will be complied in English. Deliverable D6.1 – Energy renovation atlas of heritage homes Deliverable Number D6.1 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Energy renovation atlas of heritage homes Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 30 Work Package No WP6 Description PDF document, published on project webpage. Report will be complied in Estonian, with English summary. 23 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Deliverable D6.2 – Legacy report of LIFE heritageHOME Deliverable Number D6.2 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Deliverable Name Legacy report of LIFE heritageHOME Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 34 Work Package No WP6 Description PDF document, published on project webpage. Limited edition of publications will be printed. Report will be complied in English. 24 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIST OF MILESTONES Milestones Grant Preparation (Milestones screen) — Enter the info. Milestone Milestone Name Work Package No Lead Beneficiary Means of Verification Due Date No (month) 1 Project staff appointed WP1 1-KUM Contract 1 2 Webpage launched WP1 1-KUM Project page available as sub-page of the web of 4 KuM 3 KPI reported at web-tool WP1 1-KUM KPI reported according to GA 6 4 Technical progress meeting with CINEA WP1 1-KUM Meeting recording. Meeting minutes. 9 5 Periodic report submitted WP1 1-KUM Interim report completed according to GA. 20 6 Final report completed according to GA. WP1 1-KUM Final report completed according to GA. Due in 36 36+2 M 7 Green transition scenario seminars WP2 2-MKA Participant list, photos, conclusions 12 8 Owners heritage assembly (1st round) WP2 5-EKA Participant list, photos, conclusions; 12 9 Owners heritage assembly (2nd round) WP2 5-EKA Participant list, photos, conclusions; 24 10 Agreeing the final list of renovation measures WP3 4-TalTech List of single renovation measures agreed 6 developed along with validation methods. Workplan agreed between engaged beneficiaries. 11 Preparatory analysis carried out WP3 4-TalTech Analysis of existing best practices. Systematized 12 datasets handed over for COO 12 Concepts agreed for single technical WP3 4-TalTech Preliminary design of most applicable renovation 18 renovation measures measures (50). Systematized datasets presented to the consortium 13 Service design workplan WP4 2-MKA Agreeing the internal workplan to prepare 3 the heritage home renovation service. Internal 25 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Milestones Grant Preparation (Milestones screen) — Enter the info. Milestone Milestone Name Work Package No Lead Beneficiary Means of Verification Due Date No (month) workplan agreed. Work meeting conclusions Participant list, photos, presentations. 14 Policy recommendations for integrated WP4 2-MKA Agreed roadmap towards improving existing 24 renovation service of heritage home energy service across different sectoral policies. A policy renovations workshop will be held where the roadmap will be presented. Roadmap (PDF document, stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian and ENG summary) Policy workshop Participant list, photos, conclusions; 15 Policy recommendations for implementing WP4 2-MKA >5 business models fitness analyses and policy 24 business models to sustain the energy recommendations. Roadmap (PDF document, renovations of heritage homes stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian and ENG summary) 16 Training events carried out WP4 2-MKA Heritage officials (~25), energy consultants 36 (~20), other professionals (~50) Training material sets (2); Training workshop participant lists, photos, conclusions; 17 Digital renovation passport tool piloted WP5 4-TalTech Digital renovation passport tool for heritage 24 homes piloted for 20 buildings Prototype of the tool 18 Digital dashboard for integrated service WP5 3-KLIM Digital one-stop-shop for heritage home 24 renovations. Online interface for the one-stop- shop launched 19 Best practice demo-videos WP6 2-MKA 10 best practice demo-clips (a’ 2 min videos). 24 Demo video files uploaded on project webpage. 20 Test-user feedback session completed WP6 2-MKA 10-15 test-users have tested and commented 32 the solutions and tools integrated into service. Feedback forms, test-session recordings. 26 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Milestones Grant Preparation (Milestones screen) — Enter the info. Milestone Milestone Name Work Package No Lead Beneficiary Means of Verification Due Date No (month) 21 Service launch campaign WP6 2-MKA 11 events for homeowners in Estonian heritage 35 protection areas. Participant lists, photos, conclusions; 22 International transfer of LIFE heritageHOME WP6 6-ICOMOS >22 events, >3 scientific papers. Photos, 36 concept presentation printouts, conclusions; Publication in peer-reviewed journals. LIST OF CRITICAL RISKS Critical risks & risk management strategy Grant Preparation (Critical Risks screen) — Enter the info. Risk Description Work Package Proposed Mitigation Measures number No(s) 1 Delays due to administrative barriers Likelihood for WP2, WP4, WP5, We have built in time at the start of the project to obtain all necessary permits, regulatory occurrence: low Impact: high WP6 approvals and carry out public procurements. During the preparation of the project, we have already consulted the relevant officials. 2 Citizen Resistance Likelihood for occurrence: WP2, WP6 Co-creation is foreseen to be carried out with representative sample of heritage owners. medium Impact: medium Engagement of the owners can be hindered due to their resistance (previous discouragement etc). We will make an effort to target broad sample and encourage owners to participate. Sufficient preparatory time is foreseen to reach out to additional people, if initial sample will not be available. Similar approach is implemented when engaging the test group (T.6.2). Dissemination of the service as a whole is coupled with public outreach campaign, which aims to create positive background for the service launch. 27 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Critical risks & risk management strategy Grant Preparation (Critical Risks screen) — Enter the info. Risk Description Work Package Proposed Mitigation Measures number No(s) 3 Planned actions do not yield desired energy WP3, WP2, WP4, While the project intervention logic is thoroughly thought through the continuous learning performance benefits Likelihood for occurrence: WP5 and sensemaking is foreseen. We aim to adapt to the end user needs and adapt the actions low Impact: high to benefit the end-users. 4 Results not implemented due to lack of funding WP3, WP2, WP4, A significant effort is made in the project to increase the funding available for renovating Likelihood for occurrence: low Impact: high WP5 heritage buildings. Novel business models will be developed (T.4.3). 5 Lessons learned remain only in LIFE WP3, WP2, WP4, We avoid this by spreading the knowledge gained in this project to research and heritage heritageHOME circle Likelihood for occurrence: WP1, WP5, WP6 protection communities in Europe. medium Impact: medium 6 Low number of pilot buildings and the expected size WP3, WP2, WP4, Project one aim is to bring the field of different funding measures closer to owners of heritage of the test group Likelihood for occurrence: medium WP5 buildings and so widen the audience of people interested and aware of all possibilities to Impact: high renovate their homes and therefore willing to take 28 Proposal Info Proposal ID Call for Proposal Topic Type of Action SEP-210903447 LIFE-2022-CET LIFE-2022-CET-HOMERENO LIFE-PJG LIFE Programme – Application Forms (Part C – KPI) Horizontal KPIs for all LIFE applicants (Mandatory to report on all the KPIs of this section). Innovation Governance Plans & strategies Is your project proposal developing, Is your project proposal improving Is you project proposal implementing demonstrating and promoting governance through enhancing key plans or strategies? innovative techniques and capacities of public and private actors approaches? and the involvement of civil society? Yes No Yes Yes No No Catalytic effect - Financial Catalytic effect - Spatial Catalytic effect - Thematic Will your project trigger additional Will the results of your project be Will the results of your project be investments? replicated beyond its intended replicated (transferred) beyond its geographical scope? intended thematic scope? Yes No Yes Yes No No Catalytic effect - Societal Rio markers for climate, biodiversity and air quality Will your project : Please indicate if your proposal: a) Contribute to the development of new or existing national • Has climate change/ biodiversity/ air quality as their legislation, policies, regulations, incentives and voluntary primary objective commitments? • Has climate change/ biodiversity/ air quality as their b) Achieve a step-change in more effective compliance with secondary objective and provide substantial contributions to and enforcement of Union environmental and climate these objectives legislation and/or in policy implementation? • Does not contribute significantly to climate change/ c) Achieve a step-change in awareness and support of biodiversity/ air quality environmental and climate matters? Climate change d) Establish a new macroregional or national model of cooperation (networking)? Primary Objective Yes Biodiversity No Not contributing Air quality Not contributing Clean Energy Transition – Specific KPIs (Please report on KPIs you consider relevant). Primary Energy Savings Please enter the Primary Energy Savings in GWh/year triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 1 10 GWh/year Submitted 06-10-2023 16:19:24 LIFECETKPI v3 Page 1  Final Energy Savings Please enter the Final Energy Savings in GWh/year triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 1.2 12 GWh/year Renewable Energy generation Please enter the Renewable Energy generation in GWh/year triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 0.2 2 GWh/year GHG emissions Please enter the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in tons of CO2 equivalent per year (tCO2eq/year) triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 128 1,200 tCO2eq/year Investments in sustainable energy Please enter the amount of cumulative invstments in sustainable energy triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 1.6 16 mEUR Legislation And policy Please enter the number of legislation, policies or strategies created/adapted [to include sustainable energy issues] at any governance levels due to the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 10 12 Number of documents Innovation Uptake 1 Please enter the number of products (goods or services), processes and methods launched into the market by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 1 1 Number of products / processes / methods Innovation Uptake 2 Please enter the number of real life implementation sites carried out by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 5 50 Number of real life implementation sites Skills Please enter the number of market stakeholders trained with increased skills and competencies on energy issues due to the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 100 200 Number of people trained Communication Please enter the number of stakeholders reached through media and events during the project Submitted 06-10-2023 16:19:24 LIFECETKPI v3 Page 2  Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 30,000 100,000 Number of people Employment Please enter the number of jobs created in FTE Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 5 15 FTE Submitted 06-10-2023 16:19:24 LIFECETKPI v3 Page 3 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE MGA — Multi & Mono: v1.0 ANNEX 2 ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR THE ACTION Estimated eligible1 costs (per budget category) Estimated EU contribution2 Direct costs Indirect costs EU contribution to eligible costs Maximum B. Total costs Maximum EU Requested EU grant amount6 A. Personnel costs Subcontracting C. Purchase costs D. Other cost categories E. Indirect costs 3 Funding rate %4 contribution5 contribution costs A.1 Employees A.4 SME owners A.5 Volunteers B. Subcontracting C.1 Travel and C.2 Equipment C.3 Other goods, D.1 Financial D.2 Land E. Indirect costs (or equivalent) and natural person subsistence works and support to third purchase beneficiaries services parties A.2 Natural persons under direct contract A.3 Seconded persons Forms of funding Actual costs Unit costs7 Unit costs7 Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Flat-rate costs8 e = flat-rate * (a1 f=a+b+ a1 a3 a4 b c1 c2 c3 d1a d2 + a3 + b + c1 + U g = f * U% h m c+d+e c2 + c3 + d1a) 1 - KUM 170 515.00 0.00 0.00 30 000.00 16 800.00 0.00 51 900.00 0.00 0.00 18 845.05 288 060.05 95 273 657.05 273 657.05 273 657.05 2 - MKA 142 830.00 0.00 0.00 175 000.00 13 800.00 0.00 98 600.00 0.00 0.00 30 116.10 460 346.10 95 437 328.80 437 328.80 437 328.80 3 - KLIM 114 758.40 0.00 0.00 53 529.00 6 000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 200.12 186 487.52 95 177 163.14 177 163.14 177 163.14 4 - TalTech 233 787.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 200.00 0.00 5 000.00 0.00 0.00 17 429.15 266 416.95 95 253 096.10 253 096.10 253 096.10 5 - EKA 154 940.40 0.00 0.00 30 000.00 12 000.00 0.00 5 000.00 0.00 0.00 14 135.83 216 076.23 95 205 272.42 205 272.42 205 272.42 6 - ICOMOS 29 436.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18 000.00 0.00 25 056.00 0.00 0.00 5 074.44 77 566.44 95 73 688.12 73 688.12 73 688.12 Σ consortium 846 267.60 0.00 0.00 288 529.00 76 800.00 0.00 185 556.00 0.00 0.00 97 800.69 1 494 953.29 1 420 205.63 1 420 205.63 1 420 205.63 1 See Article 6 for the eligibility conditions. All amounts must be expressed in EUR (see Article 21 for the conversion rules). 2 The consortium remains free to decide on a different internal distribution of the EU funding (via the consortium agreement; see Article 7). 3 Indirect costs already covered by an operating grant (received under any EU funding programme) are ineligible (see Article 6.3). Therefore, a beneficiary/affiliated entity that receives an operating grant during the action duration cannot declare indirect costs for the year(s)/reporting period(s) covered by the operating grant, unless they can demonstrate that the operating grant does not cover any costs of the action. This requires specific accounting tools. Please immediately contact us via the EU Funding & Tenders Portal for details. 4 See Data Sheet for the funding rate(s). 5 This is the theoretical amount of the EU contribution to costs, if the reimbursement rate is applied to all the budgeted costs. This theoretical amount is then capped by the 'maximum grant amount'. 6 The 'maximum grant amount' is the maximum grant amount decided by the EU. It normally corresponds to the requested grant, but may be lower. 7 See Annex 2a 'Additional information on the estimated budget' for the details (units, cost per unit). 8 See Data Sheet for the flat-rate. Page 1 of 1 Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B ANNEX 1 Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE) Description of the action (DoA) Part A Part B Version 1.0 15 April 2021 1 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B TABLE OF CONTENTS HISTORY OF CHANGES ............................................................................................................................................... 3 1. RELEVANCE ........................................................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Background and general project objectives......................................................................................................... 11 1.2 Specific project objectives ................................................................................................................................... 14 1.3 Compliance with LIFE programme objectives and call topic ............................................................................... 15 1.4 Concept and methodology .................................................................................................................................. 17 1.5 Upscaling results of other EU funded projects .................................................................................................... 21 1.6 Complementarity with other actions .................................................................................................................... 23 1.7 Synergies and co-benefits with other LIFE sub-programmes .............................................................................. 24 1.8 Synergies and co-benefits with other EU policy areas ........................................................................................ 25 2. IMPACT.................................................................................................................................................................... 27 2.1 Ambition of the impacts ....................................................................................................................................... 27 2.2 Credibility of the impacts ..................................................................................................................................... 29 2.3 Sustainability of project results............................................................................................................................ 30 2.4 Exploitation of project results .............................................................................................................................. 32 2.5 Catalytic potential: Replication and upscaling ..................................................................................................... 32 3. IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................................................................. 34 3.1 Work plan ............................................................................................................................................................ 34 3.3 Stakeholder engagement .................................................................................................................................... 40 3.4 Impact monitoring and reporting.......................................................................................................................... 41 3.5 Communication, dissemination and visibility ....................................................................................................... 42 4. RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................................... 43 4.1 Consortium set-up............................................................................................................................................... 43 4.2 Project management ........................................................................................................................................... 45 4.3 Green management ............................................................................................................................................ 46 5. MEMBERS OF THE CONSORTIUM ........................................................................................................................ 48 1- Ministry of Culture ................................................................................................................................................. 48 2 – Estonian National Heritage Board ....................................................................................................................... 49 3 – Ministry of Climate .............................................................................................................................................. 50 4 – Tallinn University of Technology ......................................................................................................................... 52 5 – Estonian Academy of Arts ................................................................................................................................... 55 6 – ICOMOS Estonia ................................................................................................................................................ 56 2  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B HISTORY OF CHANGES Following the order of revision points Date Objective of change/ESR comment Change description 19.07.23 Inclusion of following activity in the The requested specification is included to the Task 1.3 - relevant task of the management work Project visibility. Communication and media activities. package: “Contribute, upon invitation by the Agency, to common activities As a similar collaboration with other projects in EU was related to information (like reporting foreseen (however not specifically elaborated related on impact indicators), dissemination to the events organized by CINEA) then no changes in and visibility, and synergies with other budget are needed. LIFE and EU supported actions.” 19.07.23 Inclusion of the management work As agreed during the first phone call of the revision package a deliverable at month 9 process, we prefer to organize a technical progress entitled ‘Technical progress report’. meeting with CINEA instead of submitting a technical progress report. 19.07.23 Inclusion of the following deliverables The requested compulsory deliverables are included to in the management work package: the workplan as follows: - ‘Extract of the project data from the D1.2 Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI LIFE KPI webtool’ by month 9 webtool: M9. - ‘Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool’ at the end D1.3 Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool: M36. of the project 02.08.23 Inclusion of the relevant task of the The final publishabel report will be merged with the communication work package: legacy report. Following text was added to WP6, task "The project will prepare a final 6.1: The legacy report will constitute the final publishable report presenting the key publishable report presenting the key results, main lessons learnt, and recommendations for the future. It results, main lessons learnt, and will be professionally designed, attractive and tailored to recommendations for the future. The the target group. The content and final draft of the report final publication should be must be discussed with CINEA before publication professionally designed, attractive and tailored to the target group. The content and final draft of the publishable report must be discussed with CINEA before publication". Please insert a deliverable ‘final publishable report’ due 2 months before the end of the project. 19.07.23 ESR comment: A testing phase is In part B, Section 1.4 “Methodology” several included but is not sufficiently paragraphs are added related to elaborated. Furthermore, the practical “Testing the components of the integrated service”; operation of the digital one-stop-shop “Modelling the performance of technical renovation and the interaction with homeowners solutions”; “Engaging committed test users for testing”; is not sufficiently described. “Applying the official test guidance for Estonian state 3  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B digital tools published in 2023”. Under workplan following amendments were submitted: 19.07.23 ESR comment: the practical operation In part A: of the digital one-stop-shop and the interaction with homeowners is not Task 3.2 – a sentence is added «With agreeing the list sufficiently described of single renovation solutions also methods for validating their resilience and performance and fitness for heritage contexts will be determined for allowing adequate modelling for validation and testing beyond available practice. « Task 3.3 A sentence is included : «The validated renovation solutions will be published as Technical report (D3.2), as well as fed into digital toolset of integrated renovation service. For the latter selected technical solutions in digital form (>30 models of single renovation measures) will be developed for the digital renovation passport tool (D3.1; D3.3). « Task 4.1 A sentence is included : To secure the streamlined process for the complex and integrated workflow, an internal workplan is to be agreed (MS13). The Workplan will define roles, testing policy, and various subtask deadlines for the overall process. Task 5.2 A paragraph is included : As the Renovation Passport is aimed towards homeowners with non- technical expertise, the solution needs to be tested for clarity and consistency towards delivering accurate information on needed renovation works. The committed test group (engaged in T6.2) along with additional test-users are to be integrated in developing the digital tool with the functionality needed by the homeowners. The following milestones are added: MS10 Agreeing the final list of renovation measures developed (Month 6) MS13 Service design workplan (Month 3) The following deliverables are added: D3.1 Technical solutions for single renovation measures (Month 12) ; D3.3 Technical solutions for single renovation measures and configuration criteria (Month 30).* 19.07.23 ESR comment: The selection of pilot In part B, Section 1.4 “Methodology” several buildings and support offered besides paragraphs are added on: the digital tool are insufficiently - Pilot buildings of test group (15 buildings) 4  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B developed for the pilot phase (T.6.2 - Buildings for which Renovation Passports are to “Launching integrated renovation be developed (aforementioned test group + >5 additional buildings – total >20 buildings) service for heritage homes”). - Case study buildings based on which the 50+ renovation solutions 19.07.23 ESR comment: The impacts of the 2.1 Ambition of the impacts part was elaborated for one-stop-shop service on the target each expected impact (regarding systematisation of relevant information needed to implement energy group are not fully evidenced (e.g. the renovation tasks in heritage buildings; investments in number of renovations expected to be sustainable energy; partnerships, availability of induced by the service is lacking), and adequate financing). Elaboration was given in task 4.3. baselines, benchmarks and assumptions are not sufficiently A clearer target was set: within 5 years of operation of explained. the services the system will facilitate renovations of up to 200 building per year 02.08.23 Could you envisage a more specific This was shown in Table 3 Assumptions of LIFE KPI (number of people reached, heritageHOME KPI. The number of partnerships formed number of people trained, number of was added to the tabel. partnerships formed etc) 19.07.23 ESR comment : The expected impacts Further information was given: The estimated range for in terms of energy savings (based on the energy saving potential is derived from previous 20-60% savings in F-labelled heritage successful renovations of such buildings and that buildings entering the renovation impact is achieved either by implementing only single process), renewable energy production measures (20%) or undergoing the deep renovation and investment triggered during and affecting the whole building (60%). The estimated after the project lifetime are expected impact is assessed using the Estonian quantified. However, they are not methodology for assessing building performance of sufficiently evidenced. buildings, baseline calculations are available if needed. 02.08.23 ESR comment: There are insufficient Elaboration was given in task 4.3 e.g The model to activities dedicated to exploring finance the service gaps is to be agreed within the policy work foreseen in WP2 and WP4. The policy work business models for running the service regarding implementing the business models will be at without public funding. parts supported by the project expertise. 19.07.23, ESR comment: Exploitation relies on Text was elaborated in task 2.1 02.08.2023 research activities, collaboration and engagement with commercial market The LIFE heritageHOME results are to be exploited also in: participants as well as synergies with the LIFE IP BUILDEST project, which is - policy work regarding the energy renovations of relevant. However, these elements are heritage homes (coupling the challenges of solving the not sufficiently elaborated. challenges of energy poverty and protecting the European built heritage authenticity). key ministries are engaged to the project as beneficiaries as well are the significant state authority and the leading civil society organization, all findings of the project will integrate in policy work. - policy work regarding the energy renovations of historic homes (milieu-valuable buildings protected locally). Project findings will be as much possible 5  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B integrated in the planning and construction laws of Estonia. Text was elaborated in task 4.1 9) consultations of heritage homeowners & permitting procedures: while we expect to set up a digital one-stop- shop, then it will also include direct consultations by heritage authorities. The heritage authorities will be trained during and after the project to provide evidence- based advice/support for the homeowners when requested for information. Also, the service and its components will provide baseline and data-based decision support for future permitting procedures. 10) To secure the streamlined process for the complex and integrated workflow, an internal workplan is to be agreed (MS13). The Workplan will define roles, testing policy, and subtask deadlines for the overall process. It is expected that this process has significant impact on construction and heritage protection laws of Estonia as well as support implementation of them by raised capacity and awareness. To achieve this, the relevant policy makers that are engaged to the project as beneficiaries (KuM, KliM, MKA) will integrate the project results into national thematic policies (permitting procedures, grant schemes, collaboration with regional authorities and local municipalities etc.) Text was elaborated in task 4.2 We propose competence models for vocational program: heritage – energy consultant specialist competence model or similar. /…/ Construction companies & renovation professionals are engaged to identifying existing best practices for delivering energy efficiency measures in renovation of heritage buildings (T3.1) as well as in later stages of the project informed about the developed renovation solutions (T3.2, T3.3) and facilitation services made available via digital one-stop-shop (T5.2). This is expected to have a positive influence on technical quality of the buildingworks. Also, the validated solutions also increase the interest of professionals to participate the renovation market. 19.07.23 ESR comment: Deliverables and Additional milestones/deliverables were included for milestones are overall appropriate and WP3 (for renovation solutions and their digital models) relevant. However, their timing is not and the digital dashboard is brought forward in always fully suitable. For example, the schedule (month 24). changes were made in partB. Technical Report on renovation solutions (D3.1) is not due until month 30 and the Digital Dashboard for integrated services (M14) is not due 6  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B until month 36, which limits the actual use phase. 19.07.23 ESR comment: It is unclear why several Explanation was given: All partners have been assigned partners do not have resources management effort (min 1 PM per reporting period). By this change the total effort of WP 1 has increased from assigned for management (WP1)”. 28.8 to 36 PM-s. The change in budget is covered partly by transferring effort from other work-packages and from the skipped audit (according to RP15d). 02.08.23 ESR comment: The risk of low risk assesment was added to risk management section engagement of citizens and other key 4.5 regarding the number of pilot buildings and the expected size of the test group. stakeholders is not sufficiently addressed. 04.08.23 ESR comment: Some significant additional justification was provided in budget annex subcontracting costs such as the rows 38 and 40 “Development of the web interface for technical guidance for heritage homes under Ehitusgiid” and other costs such as the publishing costs for the energy renovation atlas are not sufficiently justified in the context of the proposed activities. 19.07.23 The average monthly salary rate Explanation was given: TalTech has assigned senior foreseen for beneficiary 4. Tallinna level research staff (in the field of building energy performance, renovation, building physics, digital Tehnikaülikool seems to be very high construction) to the project. Their expertise is highly for what is observed in Estonia for valued also in commercial construction sector. To similar activities, the mentioned respond to the competition, the PM rate for the beneficiary is kindly invited to justify renovation and building performance, digital or reduce their personnel costs. If they construction is higher than the Estonian average. Moreover, it needs to be acknowledged that for the decide to maintain these costs heritage buildings the top-level experts, who have unchanged, be aware that even if specific expertise on the culturally valuable buildings budgeted, the costs may be subject to and their preservation is required, which narrows down ex-ante checks at final payment stage the possibilty to replace the senior experts with less or ex-post audits after the final experienced staff. payment and could still be rejected if not complying with the eligibility criteria. 19.07.23 In the Annex “detailed budget table”, the budget item was removed from the table and Beneficiary 1. Kultuuriministeerium transferred to the budget under project management budgeted, among its purchase costs to secure internal financial management. for “other goods, works and services”, 10,000 EUR for “project audit”. If this cost is aimed a covering a financial audit please note that, as the threshold for mandatory audit is not reached by any of the beneficiaries, such cost is not eligible and it should be removed, otherwise please explain the type of audit it is meant to cover. 7  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 19.07.23 The following expenditures foreseen Cost items transferred to Other goods, works and under “subcontracting” in the annex services. “detailed budget table” do not appear to imply the implementation of part of the action. seem to be better fit in the category of Other cost: International thematic experts heritage & energy renovations (~3 experts, 1-2 day assignments related to project events) foreseen by beneficiary 1. Kultuuriministeerium in the framework of work-package 2. External consultancies engaged to the training events (~10 experts, 4 days, a' 250 eur) foreseen by beneficiary 2. Muinsuskaitseamet in the framework of work-package 4. 19.07.23 Please be so kind to further clarify the Clarification and explanation was given about what is justification of the following costs: behind these figures: In the budget calculation, the cost Setup of the front-end from MKA web of IT development has been taken into account based for the digital Integrated Renovation on a duration of five months (with the development Service interface (1 service) foreseen team expenses amounting to average 10,000 euros per by beneficiary 2. Muinsuskaitseamet month), effort estimations for development of the web and interface for technical guidance for heritage homes Development of the web interface for under Ehitusgiid are planned based on previous technical guidance for heritage homes contracts outsourcing similar activities, inflation rate under Ehitusgiid foreseen by ~5% per year is considered). beneficiary 3. Majandus Ja Kommunikatsiooniministeerium in the framework of work-package 5. the “Service testing (15 homeowners, a' 2000 eur fee) and Service launch campaing (11 events, a' 3000 eur)” foreseen in the annex “detailed budget table” under “purchase costs e.g. for other services” by beneficiary 2. Muinsuskaitseamet. In particular, with reference to their purpose, need and work-package. 17.08.23 The following cost seems to be partially Justification was given and detailed budget was overlapping/duplicating. Could you be updated: so kind to check and adjust either the estimate or the description as The cost items are from now on described as: necessary? Facilitation of Service and Interaction Design for the heritage home renovation service (T4.1): 30 000 eur • “Service & interaction design for the digital Integrated Renovation Setup of the front-end/back-end web solutions from Service interface (1 service)” for a total MKA (T5.2): 50 000 eur of 30.000 EUR budgeted by beneficiary 8  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B MKA in the subcontracting category for Development of the web interface for technical WP4; guidance for heritage homes under Ehitusgiid. The digital technical guidance in the form of web interface • “Setup of the front-end/back- is planned as smart renovation passport, assisting end from MKA web for the digital homeowners in planning, designing and implementing Integrated Renovation Service renovations (T5.2): 53 529 eur interface (web platform)” for a total of 50.000 EUR budgeted by beneficiary MKA in the subcontracting category for WP5 and • “Development of the web interface for technical guidance for heritage homes under Ehitusgiid.” for a total of 53.529 EUR budgeted by beneficiary KLIM in the subcontracting category for WP5. 17.08.23 Please be so kind to clarify what type of Budget was changed and further details were provided costs you intend to cover with the on what costs have been planned instead of the budget provision of 30.000 EUR budgeted by that was originally planned as generic service testing 30 beneficiary MKA in the category other 000 eur. goods works and services for “Service testing (15 homeowners, a' 2000 eur)”. Subcontracting. 2 - MKA. 22500 eur. For the buildings participating in the testing, an energy audit is compiled, Please be so kind to consider that taking into account the constraints arising from the support to third parties cannot be value of the buildings, and proposing suitable energy considered an eligible cost in the efficiency packages accordingly. The energy audit is framework of the Life Clean Energy part of the essential preliminary data that need to be Transition (LIFE-2022-CET), please see determined for the buildings involved in the project, point 10 page 74 of the call document. this is also relevant among buildings that have already undregone a renovation to evaluate the outcome compared to the result they were aiming to achieve (15 buildings, a' 1500 eur). Other direct costs. 2 - MKA. Other goods, works and services: 7500 eur Service testing will cover various direct costs related to the testing period in which the test users are engaged (study trips, meetings, logistics, etc) 17.08.2023 Please be so kind to confirm that the Confirmation was given and initial vision of the events cost “Service launch campaign (11 were given as follows: events, a' 3000 eur)” has been budgeted by beneficiary MKA in the The specifics of the service launch campaign is to be category other goods works and determined during the project, various events in services is intended to cover only the different regions of Estonia will be held to introduce logistics for the organization of the service and its components. 1-2 events will be held separate meetings and that the indoors as a introduction seminar. The other events are purpose, content and agenda of the conducted in the form of a tour, encompassing various meetings will be defined by the types of buildings that face the challenge of achieving beneficiary. energy efficiency, such as the main buildings of valuable estates with exquisite interiors, simpler estate 9  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Otherwise please be so kind to move utility buildings, rural architecture, heritage area the related cost in the “subcontracting” apartment buildings, etc. During the tour, different category as it would represent the options and already implemented solutions are implementation of part of the action. introduced. 17.08.2023 The “Publishing cost for energy this row was moved to «subcontracting » renovation atlas” budgeted by beneficiary MKA in the category other costs appears to represent the implementation of part of the action and, as such, it should be moved to the subcontracting category. Please be so kind to make the necessary adjustment or to explain the reasoning behind its inclusion in “other cost”. 10 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 1. RELEVANCE 1.1 Background and general project objectives Background and general project objectives CHALLENGE OF ENERGY PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT OF HISTORIC HOMES EU policy makers have for a long time recognised the importance of building performance in the effort to mitigate climate change - starting with the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) and the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED). However, by acknowledging the need, then capturing the energy saving potential of the building stock is still posing a challenge. However, with the current rate of building stock replacement in EU (1% per year), retrofitting existing buildings is therefore one of the key strategies in achieving the efficiency aims for the built environment. It must be acknowledged that the EU building stock is very heterogeneous. Across all Member States, the majority (EU average 75,82%) of the floor area of existing buildings is composed by private housing. Moreover, a significant share (~20%) from European homes encompass some historic value (Figure 1). Figure 1 Breakdown of residential building by construction year. Historical buildings, and moreover the ones of significant heritage value usually have very poor energy performance in their original condition. The preservation, protection needs and retrofit compatibility with heritage values needs always to be considered first for heritage buildings. Due to this the current EU Renovation Wave, likewise the EPBD, have exempted buildings officially protected as part of a designated environment or because of their special architectural or historical merit from energy performance requirements. Allowing this exception, the directive still encourages energy renovations that can be implemented without altering the buildings character or appearance. Moreover, EC directive 2018/844 stresses that research into, and the testing of, new solutions for improving the energy performance of historical buildings and sites should be encouraged, while also safeguarding and preserving cultural heritage. Although the energy-saving potential in the historic building stock is somewhat insignificant in relation to the entire stock, the homeowners themselves want to reduce the building's energy consumption and their energy costs. The topic is especially relevant right now because recently the cost of energy has increased several times. Until recently the owners of heritage homes have been treated as a transient phenomenon for the monument. Also, non-renovation of heritage buildings (caused by heritage protection restrictions) have been comforted by the expectation that new and more capable owners will take over and set up a feasible heritage-driven business models for the buildings. In the case of homes, we cannot talk about the business idea of living and we need to acknowledge that the majority of the residential heritage 11 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B buildings have no potential of becoming business cases even with the most capable owners. Several sources indicate that the heritage protection regime increases the value of real estate, this however is not a case in shrinking and ageing communities well spread across the whole Eastern Europe. Moreover, if a person wants to live in his/her home, a high property value does not make the living conditions better. It can be useful when the homeowner has to sell his/her home however in this stage the problem has already gotten too far. The owner must be able to sustainably maintain and manage his/her home, especially when as doing so, they’ll maintain and manage the joint heritage. While energy retrofits of private housing are considered cumbersome for the owners, the road to energy efficient home is much more challenging for the owners of historical buildings. As the architectural characteristics must be preserved, standard solutions that are feasible for other buildings will be unacceptable for heritage buildings if they bring a change in appearance and character. Even when technical solutions exist feasible, it still means that relative prices for energy improvement of historic homes are much higher compared to other building types. Also, the rules of possible financing schemes for energy efficient renovation may put heritage buildings at a disadvantage, where all applications are judged on an equal basis. Unless subsidised or supported in other ways, heritage buildings may not succeed in obtaining public funds because there is no recognition of the higher investment-to-savings ratio. Moreover, as also the bureaucracy of the permitting processes encompasses more hurdles, leaving homeowners discouraged to even attempt to make a change. The multifaceted barriers hindering energy renovations of historic homes do not only leave us with leaking buildings with high energy use – in long run such homes are abandoned, putting the built heritage in even higher risk. It must be acknowledged that historic homes, which as such hold a great public value clearly need improved market conditions as well as integrated services to facilitate the energy renovations. In 2021, the European Cultural Heritage Green Paper subtitled “Putting Europe’s shared heritage at the heart of the European Green Deal”, was published. This document, commissioned by the European Commission and complied by the acknowledged experts of the field, delineates a conceptual framework for how cultural heritage could help with the European efforts to achieve the climate neutrality. Concepts like resource efficiency and resiliency that are prioritized in the Green Deal, a deeply rooted principles in heritage preservation. The time-tested technologies, the product of place-adapted innovation still can be exploited for climate proofing contemporary buildings, especially as they typically not addicted to oil-dependent economy). Moreover, the paper highlights that addressing energy poverty of Europe’s lower income populations who live in historic housing is a must. BUILDINGS IN THE SCOPE OF LIFE heritageHOME LIFE heritageHOME project clearly focus on the energy performance improvement of residential (single or multi-family buildings) heritage monuments and of residential buildings located within the borders of national heritage protection areas. In total there are 5268 building monuments and ~5700 built-up properties in the urban heritage protection areas (old towns of Tallinn, Tartu, Pärnu, Rakvere, Kuressaare, Lihula, Paide, Haapsalu, Viljandi, Võru, Valga). For both building types, similar heritage protection regulations apply for energy renovations. Of the listed heritage buildings approximately 7000 are considered to have (at least partial) residential use. Moreover, most of the residential housing in Estonia is privately owned. While no energy performance requirement is enforced for such buildings, the private homes located in the historical town centres encompass a significant value not only for having preserved authentic usage, but also for resource efficient urban layout. Heritage buildings are the flagship examples for resilient building stock, demonstrating resource efficiency and resilience and adaptability to changing conditions, which is due we need to assist their owners in their pursuit to better living environment and lower energy cost. Moreover, when focusing on developing streamlined renovation services for the homeowners of heritage buildings (non-professional decision makers), we will also empower owners of historic homes in general. Many conventional renovation solutions are not applicable for the homes built prior to II world war (~60 000 buildings, 18% from the national residential building stock), however the services and solutions provided for heritage homes are well fitted also for these. Typical building in the scope of project (examples presented in Figure 2) has one or two stories and is made of traditional, locally available building materials such as wood, bricks or natural stone. The wall construction material could be exposed but, in most cases, it is covered either by plaster or wooden boards. Majority of the buildings have at least some decoration elements and preserving these is essential for keeping architectural character as well as keeping the original design of windows and doors. 12 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 2 Residential buildings in Võru town centre. THE BARRIERS HINDERING ENERGY RENOVATION OF ESTONIAN HERITAGE HOMES Built heritage is a cornerstone of the European identity and has an important role in creating and preserving community values and we-feeling also in Estonia. Although neither the European strategic documents on green transition nor Estonian regulations require the energy renovations of architectural monuments or buildings that have noteworthy heritage value, the owners of such protected buildings are obligated to maintain them according to Heritage Conservation Act. A heritage home has meaning to the broader community; however, its significance typically does not reflect in higher property value. Being built long ago, heritage homes often lack more recent energy-saving features and thus generate high energy costs. Homeowners who want to renovate their homes to meet today’s energy efficiency needs would not only face the various barriers of coordinating the bureaucracy, contractual management, and financing of the retrofit, they also must be aware of the challenges and opportunities that come with a heritage building. Heritage conservation regulations typically require renovation and conservation of a heritage building in accordance to specific requirements so the building and neighbourhood continue to look historically authentic. However, the regulations do not completely restrict energy efficiency measures. Rather than the protection regime, the renovation plans become cancelled due to a list of various other barriers, which we aim to solve within this project. The most relevant barriers hindering energy renovation of Estonian heritage homes are listed below: Contradicting instructions & incomprehensible communication: the information about the possible renovation interventions, right sequence of needed procedures is often partial or misleading. Instructions, being currently scattered between different sources, can at times be contradicting. Non-expert homeowner lacks capabilities to seek for the answers to questions “which authority to contact first”, “what are the baseline requirements that need to be met in preserving the heritage values”, also when starting the renovation journey, owners are unaware, what is expected from the process. Solving the information barriers is the key aim of this project. Limited knowledge on multi-benefit renovation solutions: energy retrofit of heritage buildings is a relatively new task for the construction sector, as it is also unfamiliar challenge for the heritage community. It is therefore important to offer reliable solutions to practitioners and end-users that prevent any undesired outcome. Often, the lack of trust and awareness of the available solutions (incl. renovation, integration of renewable energy solutions and implementing energy saving technologies etc.) is limiting the extent of interventions. This has a negative effect on the final energy savings and occupants’ comfort, important factors when it comes to the use and conservation of historic buildings. Moreover, failures in implementing renovation measures, have long term effects – damaged heritage value and lost investments hindering any repair of failures. Limited knowledge on the right sequence of renovation works: As the renovation of heritage buildings is expensive and the owner’s financial capacity usually is limited, then the renovation is typically implemented using stepwise approach, in such manner the applied solutions deviate from optimal and in worst case harm the hygrothermal performance or heritage value of the building. Also, it can happen that the stepwise approach locks the following interventions, due the owners reaching the loan ceiling or becoming discouraged from the discomfort and inconveniences of the renovation works. Within LIFE heritageHOME project, we will develop technical deep renovation solutions for most typical building envelopes and service systems of historic buildings. Also, we’ll train the enablers of heritage home renovations. Ineffective coordination among the enablers: the current procedures and practices do not favour collaboration between different participants of coordination of the renovation process. Instead, the current practice has led to confrontation of heritage specialists and designers of deep renovation measures. Such contradiction, combined with perception that heritage preservation excludes energy retrofit, is misleading to the homeowners. The roots of the problem lay in the fact that the different disciplines do not use the same “vocabulary” and often the most significant decisions about the renovation are made without 13 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B analysing the feasibility of possible alternatives. We’ll facilitate the concerted collaboration of actors, both for discussing the overall goals of the green transition of built heritage but also will agree streamlined procedures for future interdisciplinary collaborations. The clarified coordination coupled with developed digital toolset, will make a significant step in simplifying the process of deep renovations for homeowners. Limited financial capacity of homeowners and lack of feasible business models to finance energy renovations of heritage homes. Investment and financing are crucial arenas of action in all efforts to accelerate the green transition of our societies. This is also a case for energy renovations of the heritage homes. Large amount of privately owned heritage buildings is in a poor technical status and thus require urgent renovations. However, given that the renovation does not include energy retrofit by default, it takes focus, expertise, and funding to realise a building’s full energy saving potential by limited resources available. In case of private heritage buildings, the gap between the incentives to renovate and funding is especially difficult to bridge in short term. Thus, the financial solutions must be secured, guaranteed and solutions must be developed how to transparently blend the different available funding sources. Urban shrinkage and challenging socio-economic settings. Estonia has 12 heritage conservation areas, 11 of which can be found in city centres. Except the ones in larger cities, each of them is affected by population decline. As population decreases, the housing supply may exceed demand, leading to an increase in vacant properties and a decrease in property value. While empty buildings in city centres can constitute an unused potential for local development then the nexus of challenges consisting of aging communities, strict heritage regulations, low financial capacity of owners and local governments and seasonality of the demand for additional services in the town centres can lead to abandonment of more and more heritage buildings. The challenge of shrinkage, abandonment and unfavourable market conditions contributing to it are given in Figure 3. Figure 3 - Abandonment of buildings in heritage conservation area of Võru illustrated by the energy consumption of buildings (LEFT). Red hexagon illustrates the region in town, in which the number of buildings consuming energy have declined. As a comparison the average property value based on real-estate transactions (RIGHT). In Võru town (marked with an arrow) the average price for a residential property (apartment) is 216-356 eur/ m². The deep energy renovation of heritage homes is a long-term sustainable solution only if it also supports the well-being of the residents. If this is not done, the homes may leave vacant and in need demolition. On the positive side, a focus on the potential for social value creation and a holistic approach to sustainability can help justify more expensive energy renovation measures. The "co-benefits" can be qualitatively translated into "willingness to pay" that can be incorporated into multiple methodologies with traditional life cycle cost (LCC) and life cycle assessment (LCA) analysis. PROJECT OVERALL OBJECTIVE The overall objective of the LIFE heritageHOME is to pilot integrated renovation service that will support the whole customer journey for owners of Estonian heritage homes who aim to improve the energy performance of their properties. 1.2 Specific project objectives Specific project objectives 14 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B LIFEheritageHOME has the following specific objectives: SpO 1 – ALIGN POLICY: We aim to align and improve policy measures for deep renovations for heritage buildings currently being exempted from energy performance requirements. We’ll be targeting 6000 buildings in Estonia that are a home for >20 000 residents, by the concerted policy measures we expect to facilitate implementation of energy efficiency measures (incl. renovations). We will coordinate and agree the procedures for transparent blending of various funding instruments (home renovation, heritage protection, municipal support if available and other novel financing models). Moreover, in the frame of service design process we will analyse the fitness of current policy and governance procedures and will present he recommendations for improving the current policies. SpO 2 – AGREE PROCEDURES: We will set up a coordinated system between different enablers facilitating renovations. We’ll pave the way for the whole customer journey of heritage home energy renovations covering the instructions and guidelines for phases like ideation and consultation, overall budgeting, design and obtaining permits, finding qualified professionals, contractual coordination and project management, preparation, implementation and tracking the renovation. The integrated service will align cross-sectoral authorities (heritage, municipal planning and building, technical inspecting etc.), agree right sequence for interdisciplinary goal setting and raise the capacity of the participants enabling the process. The service will be implemented across Estonia, all regional heritage specialists (~20 county level consultants), municipal authorities (~79 local municipalities), administrative collaborators (~10 city level consultants) and external thematic consultants will be informed from the coordinated system and implement it by 2025. SpO 3 –DEVELOP USER SPECIFIC TOOLSET: Develop and institutionalize the necessary toolset for the integrated renovation service of deep energy renovations of heritage homes. We’ll equip the enablers with improved guidelines and agreed procedures, provide the validated best-practice catalogues to be relied on and establish a coordination system which includes policy, governance, joint sensemaking and improved digital tools. Moreover, our approach is client-facing – we'll set up a digital one-stop-shop for owners of heritage homes, assisting them throughout the whole journey of renovation. The toolset developed by the end of LIFE heritageHOME project will consist of different levers like technology & solutions, coordinated policy procedures, engagement and co-creation platforms for participation, funding solutions and learning platform all integrated to a digital one-stop-shop platform. SpO4 – EMPOWER THE OWNERS: We aim to enable the homeowners to take active part in service design and policy making. The owners of Estonian heritage homes have until now not formed strong alliances (only owners of manor houses have formed a union), due to which the peer-to-peer learning for experience exchange on feasible practices (funding, contracting etc) is hindered and the participation in policy design is insufficient. We aim to engage a representative group of >50 owners to the owners’ heritage assembly, with the aim to co-design the requirements for the integrated service. During the project we will set up an owner's learning platform in the digital one-stop-shop, in which we aim to encourage we- feeling and mutually beneficial sensemaking among owners. SpO 5 – SUSTAIN AND REPLICATE: We aim to sustain the viability of the developed service and branch out to replicate the service. The different levers combined to the integrated service will need to be self-sustaining and viable after the end of the project, this will be secured by the policy makers coordinating and supporting the project (KuM, KLIM and MKA). To boost the replication of the solutions we will collaborate synergistic projects, use the platform of LIFE IP BUILDEST and engage the network of ICOMOS council. We aim to actively spread the technical renovation solutions to enablers of heritage renovations in cold climate regions of Europe (Nordic-Baltic and Alpine regions) and introduce the integrated service among the members of ICOMOS network. 1.3 Compliance with LIFE programme objectives and call topic Compliance with LIFE Programme objectives LIFE heritageHOME specific objectives align with the ones of the sub-programme ‘Clean Energy Transition’ as follows: Our project develops, demonstrates and promotes innovative techniques, methods and approaches applicable for heritage buildings for reaching the energy efficiency goals set by EU, and to contribute to the knowledge base and to the application of best practice in the matter. More specifically, we will set an example in Estonia how to support the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement 15 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B of the policy on the transition to sustainable renewable energy or increased energy efficiency in heritage buildings. We’ll engage quadruple ecosystem stakeholders to improve governance and coordination, in particular through enhancing capacities of public and private actors (heritage authorities, energy audit consultants, designers/architects and engineers). We’ll enforce the civil society and engage the owners into co-creation of the developed services. Acknowledging the various barriers hindering energy renovations of heritage homes (concluded in section 1.1) and most of all the investments required to implement the costly renovation measures, we’ll investigate the potential for mobilising investment and improving access to finance. By doing this we’ll support the transition toward an energy-efficient, renewable energy-based, climate-neutral and -resilient heritage buildings, which has high replication potential across Europe. These actions, of high EU added value, aim at breaking market barriers that hamper the socio-economic transition to sustainable energy in heritage protection areas. Due to the specifics of the sector (unique crafts, tailor-made solutions etc.) we’ll be engaging multiple small and medium-size stakeholders, multiple actors including local and regional public authorities and non-profit organisations, bearing in mind the final end-user of the services. LIFE heritageHOME will contribute to the implementation of the energy-related actions of the Green Deal, including the ‘Renovation wave’ initiative for the heritage building sector. It will contribute to the Just Transition objectives by accompanying the territories and the groups of citizens negatively affected by the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, by building capacity of actors and fostering clean energy investments, mainly in energy efficiency and locally available, sustainable, renewable energy sources. Compliance with the call topic LIFEheritageHOME is fit to LIFE CET HOMERENO call as it: 1. Improves market conditions and develops integrated home renovation service for Estonian homeowners of historical and heritage buildings. The service will reduce complexity and simplify decision making for historic homeowners to stimulate demand for energy performance improvements and deep renovation. Also, we expect to set up a system that aligns various bureaucratic procedures as well as necessary services required along building energy performance investment processes. The integrated service will connect relevant actors in the value chain (e.g. policy makers, heritage authorities, energy audit consultants, architects and engineers for the technical solutions etc.). The project will bridge gaps in access to various support measures and propose solutions to blend available funding instruments investigate the potential of novel funding opportunities. By establishment of the integrated service, we’ll expect to improve awareness and trust towards feasibility and effectiveness of energy renovations of historic homes, through clear accountability, quality assurance and owner-focused approach. 2. Proposes self-sustained business model for the integrated home renovation service of heritage buildings, by integration of existing services offered by dedicated operators (public measures like renovation subsidies paid by Foundation of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, state support measures for heritage protection, consultancies, and generic energy renovation one-stop shops) and/or through an improved co-ordination between existing local actors. We expect to set up a system, which encompasses capable experts, digital support system, agreed procedures and established policy. We will investigate the prospect of different possible business models to target sustainability of the deep renovations of heritage homes to long term. 3. The established integrated renovation service of LIFE heritageHOME will provide methods and support for heritage homeowners, by: − Building expertise and raising organisational capacities needed to facilitate the energy renovations of heritage buildings. − Reducing costs on tailor-made design of renovations through standardised approaches (e.g. optimised processes, validated technical solutions, design preparation via renovation passport tool etc etc.). − Investigating the potential to blend funding instruments and set up more viable business models for heritage home renovation and ensure the transparency in blending various funding schemes (climate claim investments, ESCO schemes and crowdfunding etc.). − Supporting the streamlining of standards and practices into consistent and transparent processes homeowners and potential additional investors can rely on, and overall improve financing conditions of renovations. 16 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 4. Moreover, we’ll communicate the feasible technical and organisational solutions, adapted to local contexts for mainstreaming best practices for buildings in Estonia not in scope of the current project as well as to countries struggling with similar challenges. We’ll also be developing and institutionalizing participatory processes for helping to improve legal and regulatory environments. Doing so, we’ll demonstrate a high degree of replicability and include a clear action plan to communicate experiences and results towards potential replicators across the EU. 1.4 Concept and methodology Concept and methodology INTERVENTION LOGIC In the broad view the project is set up from interlinking work-packages that help to prepare, develop and sustain the integrated renovation service for owners of heritage homes (Figure 4), more details about the work-packages are provided in sections 3.1-3.2 of the proposal. Whereas state-wide efforts to streamline home renovations are made in the frame of LIFE IP BUILDEST project, the LIFE heritageHOME will bridge the gaps that have been identified for the specifics of heritage homes. Figure 4 Intervention logic of LIFE heritageHOME We have aligned our intervention logic with the key recommendations from European Heritage Green Paper outlined the for policymakers and operators that are needed to support deep energy renovations of built heritage. The comprehensive report provided by the large community of acknowledged experts has identified the most relevant intervention points, in which the most urgent action is needed. We’ll respond to each of them as follows: Recommendation 1: Utilise new guidance on the Energy Efficiency First principle to help public authorities address renovation of public and privately-owned social infrastructure, to address energy performance standards while safeguarding cultural values. Our response & assumptions: The integrated renovation service with the tools and solutions developed for the homeowners will provide and streamline the utilisation of the needed guidance on energy renovations of Estonian heritage homes. See details: WP 3 (technical solutions); WP 4 (client-facing procedures and service design); WP 5 (digital one-stop-shop). Recommendation 2: Integrate in revisions of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive new approaches to energy performance standards that include the historic built environment, and allow alternate pathways to compliance based on smart, ‘whole hose’ planning and performance assessment, adapted to the needs and values of historic buildings and traditional building systems. Our response & assumptions: We’ll develop and agree procedures for energy audits for heritage homes as well as raise capacity of energy auditors on preservation on built heritage as well as educate heritage 17 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B conservation experts on the possibilities and benefits of energy preservation measures. See details: WP 4 (client facing procedures and service design, training of enablers). We’ll pilot a digital Renovation Passport tool for heritage homes, allowing to carry out preliminary assessment of potential measures possibly improving energy performance of the building. See details: WP 5 (renovation passport). Recommendation 3: Match any extension of building performance standards to heritage buildings with commensurate public incentives. The InvestEU Social Investment and Skills Window and the Sustainable Infrastructure Window should support the design of financial schemes tailored to the owners and occupants of historic buildings, while the newly established European Initiative for Building Renovation should support financing for owners of heritage buildings. Our response & assumptions: We’ll analyse the various business models developed for financing renovations of (heritage) homes and carry out a fitness check to investigate the suitability of such models for supporting improvement of Estonian heritage homes. Based on this policy recommendations will be provided. See details: WP 4 (fitness check of business models). Recommendation 4: Increase funding of heritage agencies in order to support energy efficiency efforts across Europe’s historic built environment. Our response & assumptions: LIFE heritageHOME provide significant help in raising the momentum in the policy field of energy performance of built heritage. The consortium of the project includes the key policy makers, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications and Ministry of Culture allowing to integrate and institutionalize the conclusions of the project. See details: WP 6 (sustainability of the project). Recommendation 5: Link heritage trades, skills, and education to the demands of the Renovation Wave including through enhanced Vocational Education and Training and Continuous Vocational Education and Training. Utilise the Skills Agenda and Pact for Skills to bring together relevant construction and heritage stakeholders to help achieve these objectives. Our response & assumptions: We’ll raise the capacity of the key enablers of deep energy renovations of heritage homes by co-creation of solutions (WP 3), by training of specialists, establishment of coordination routines and agreeing procedures (WP 4). Recommendation 6: Feature the adaptive reuse of historic buildings for affordable housing in the Affordable housing initiative for 100 lighthouse projects. Our response & assumptions: While we’ll not be supporting concrete renovations nor provide direct support for establishment of lighthouse renovations of heritage homes, we will be analysing and disseminating the best renovation solutions worth highlighting as national lighthouses. Also, the integrated service along with its components is expected to support establishment of future lighthouse solutions from complementary (blended and aligned) funds. See details: WP 6 (disseminating best practices). Recommendation 7: Embrace the heritage and Baukultur sectors in the expanded High-Level Forum on construction. Our response & assumptions: The integrated renovation service for owners of heritage homes is expected to serve as a one-stop-shop on a digital platform, allowing to facilitate the necessary permitting procedures, provide support and instructions how to exploit and blend existing financial subsidies, provide technical instructions, contacts of the key enablers and possible contractors for the renovations. See details: WP 5 (digital one-stop-shop). Recommendation 8: Duly integrate the full breadth of culture – from arts to heritage – in all the multi- dimensionality elements of the New European Bauhaus and include cultural heritage representatives in the advisory board of external experts who will co-steer the initiative. Our response & assumptions: We have set up a consortium representing the key actors in the field, policy makers, state heritage operators, civil society and academia. The experts engaged actively work also with policy fields like “Strategy for high-quality living environment” and other national initiatives relating to the concepts of New European Bauhaus (inclusive, sustainable, enriching). Moreover, the LIFE heritageHOME is foreseen as a complementary project for LIFE IP BUILDEST, which is launched to raise the national capacity in pursuing the objectives of Estonian Renovation Wave. While the integrated project aims to facilitate the full implementation of the Estonian Long Term Renovation Strategy and also in bits touches the field of historical buildings, it has clearly identified the urgency of the renovations of the heritage homes. METHODOLOGY 18 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Technical solutions: The International Council on Monuments & Sites (ICOMOS) has stated that “due to homogenisation of culture and of global socio-economic transformation, vernacular building structures all around the world are extremely vulnerable, facing serious problems of obsolescence, internal equilibrium and integration”. While the energy saving pursued in such buildings needs to be led by homeowners need to improve the internal comfort conditions, then the core of our approach lays in the understanding that the renovation solutions must not deteriorate the heritage value of the given buildings. However, we acknowledge that buildings last only as long as they are used. Thereby providing users with current standards of comfort is a crucial requirement to ensure the continued use of historic buildings over time and with that their conservation and durability. We’ll build our solutions on existing best practices acknowledged as local best practices, or the international examples like presented by Historic building atlas (2018) or other national guidelines as developed for example in Norway. We acknowledge the challenge of possible paradigm confrontation, as our consortium engages experts both from the techno-economic as well as cultural heritage management paradigm (Table 1). However, we expect that engaging different perspectives, approaches and mindsets will result in mutually acceptable solutions. Facilitated expert discussions within the project free homeowners from conflicting guidance provided by experts who „do not speak the same language“. This helps to reduce complexity, simplify decision making for homeowners and will stimulate demand for building renovation and energy performance improvements of heritage homes. Digital tools: Considering the limited resources of the Estonian authorities, but exploiting the various available and developed digital tools, we’ll set up the one-stop-shop as a digital service, available in every location in Estonia and at any time, necessary. Project will prototype the solutions, that will be integrated to the state-wide tools. Estonia is a frontrunner in digitalization of its heritage as well as leading operator of digital logbook of buildings. We aim to build on these and deliver recommendations how the renovation passports of heritage buildings could be set up and exploited. Table 1 Two cultures of decision-making. A characterization of how professionals can perceive and approach the same problem with different perspectives. 19 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 5 Design thinking double diamond Service design: We’ll adapt the double diamond for design thinking for service design process (Figure 5), which includes discovery process, definition of outcomes based on insights gathered there, development of the service and delivering and testing the results. In our project the design thinking steps are divided by different work packages but cross-fertilized by joint sensemaking for the end result. In terms of content, we’ll use the process-outcome flow agreed in European Standard CSN/EN 16883, Conservation of cultural heritage - Guidelines for improving the energy performance of historic buildings. We’ll upgrade the standardised procedure by rethinking the customer journey of a homeowner within this (Figure 6). We will branch out homeowners to understand the end-user specifics that need to be considered. Figure 6 Project aims to reinvent the standardized processes to be applied as user driven customer journey in which the homeowners’ entry level capacity will become the starting point for their service. Testing the components of the integrated service: The aim of the whole heritageHOME project is to develop a client facing service, in which the different components are relevant and applicable for a wide range of targeted homeowners. As the heritageHOME project pilots several novel tools and services it is important to ensure that the intended design meets the needs and expectations of end-users and this is achieved by testing the prototypes with real users before launching the service on the market or scaling the digital tools to the wide audience. • Modelling the performance of technical renovation solutions: LIFE heritageHOME will develop both the single technical renovation solutions (T3.2) as well as set up those single measures for renovation packages (T3.3) fitting for heritage buildings. The solutions that we develop and propose as “best practice” will be validated based on tested in externally financed real-life case studies and modelled using state-of-the-art standardized methods for building performance and long-term resilience. 20 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B • Engaging committed test users for testing the integrity and performance logic of the holistic service and its components: A representative sample of test users will be engaged to the service design process (T6.2). A minimum of 15 individual homeowners who have initiated renovation process (and are in different stages of it in the first half of 2024) will be selected and contracted for participating the test group. The prototypes for the digital renovation passports (RP) will be developed for the homeowners, allowing to interlink the characteristics in RP with building specific features of the integrated service and components of it relevant for the specific case. • Applying the official test guidance for Estonian state digital tools published in 2023: We will use the state of the art methods for testing the novel solutions/tools during their development (not in the end stage). In addition to the designated test group, we’ll approach specific additional test audiences as it is relevant. The sensemaking, evaluation and learning (T1.2) integrated to the project management work package establishes interlinkages and adjusts the project workplan based on testing feedback (including engages resources for additional validation of the tools). Selection of pilot buildings: Real life case studies are engaged to the LIFE heritageHOME in different aspects, and the engagement of the case-study building varies in terms of complexity: - Pilot buildings of test group (15 buildings): LIFE heritageHOME project supports development of specific renovation solutions (WP3), Renovation Passport prototypes will be developed for the buildings and the test users are to be integrated to the service design process (T6.2 with links to WP4 and WP5). The pilot buildings integrated into the test group are to be selected from the homeowners that have initiated renovation process (i.e., have applied any of the renovation subsidies available for heritage buildings, have applied for the special heritage conditions for the renovation or acquired permits needed for the works in our scope). The selection criteria (representativeness of the sample buildings, capacity to undergo the planned renovation, variety in expected impact in energy savings etc.) is to be detailed in the start of the project. The building owners will be contacted and engaged to the process, project will assist with facilitating the complex process of planning, designing, implementing, and controlling the renovations, different test users will be provided the full range of services relevant for their planned process. As a motivation the cost of test users related to participating in project events (including study trips) is to be covered also possibilities to engage various municipal and state subsidies are introduced and if necessary, the homeowners are assisted with the technicalities of the applications. - Buildings for which Renovation Passports are to be developed (aforementioned test group + >5 additional buildings – total >20 buildings). Owners of these additional buildings will not be engaged fully into service design and if relevant in terms of building typology, then here also completed renovation might be considered for piloting the data management, service integration and interface logic of the Renovation Passport. The extra buildings are needed to cover representativeness of the sample buildings and test functionality based on buildings for which different baseline data is available). - Case study buildings based on which the 50+ renovation solutions are to be developed. In addition to the aforelisted pilot buildings additional case study objects are to be engaged. 1.5 Upscaling results of other EU funded projects Upscaling results of other EU funded projects A LIFE integrated project was launched in 2021 in Estonia (LIFE IP BUILDEST) to raise the national capacity in implementing the Estonian Long-term renovation strategy. It consists of a set of 21 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B integrated work-packages targeting the renovation policy, improvement of knowledge about technical solutions and demonstrating them in practice. It also deals with climate adaptation and resource efficiency of the renovations, making the solutions more sustainable and climate proof. Different digital solutions are developed as large-scale campaigns to raise the awareness of private property owners is carried out. All the solutions developed in LIFE IP BUILDEST are targeted towards the most typical buildings in Estonia and no focus there is put to heritage homes. However, several of the solutions, as well as lessons learnt are universal and can be exploited for the LIFE heritageHOME project, which will bridge the gaps that have been identified for the specifics of heritage homes. KLIM acting as a coordinator of the LIFE IP BUILDEST project participates LIFE heritageHOME as a beneficiary and aims to coordinate the amplification of results of both project for the benefit of the cause. EAA & Norwegian Grants project Historic Town Centres Revitalized Through Heritage-Based Local Development. The project supported development of new and sustainable uses of cultural heritage buildings in small towns across Estonia, through capacity-building for municipalities and cultural heritage professionals as well as cooperation with vocational schools, restoration centres, local governments, and local communities. The project was mostly targeted towards raising awareness on rejuvenation of built heritage, in the framework of which the urgency of clarifying procedures and developing validated solutions for energy renovation measures became highlighted. The energy performance of historic buildings is not too well studied field. For example, on the list Horizon 2020 Cultural Heritage. The list of projects 2014-2018 was only one project deeply concentrated on energy performance or historic buildings - Robust Internal Thermal Insulation of Historic Buildings (RIBuild). RIBuild strengthened the knowledge on how and under what conditions internal thermal insulation is to be implemented in historic buildings, without compromising their architectural and cultural values, with an acceptable safety level against deterioration and collapse of heavy external wall structures. RIBild project concentrated on Central-European mild climate. Lately defenced Paul Klõšeiko’s doctoral thesis in TalTech studied hygrothermal performance of masonry walls retrofitted with interior insulation in cold climate. This knowledge allows to upscale existing knowledge. No climate data about Estonia exists in RIBild calculation tool and only stone and brick structures exist as a reference. In Estonia al lot of historic buildings are construed by wooden log. LIFE heritageHOME develops the existing results forward and adapts them to the needs of Estonia heritage homes. An ongoing H2020 DRIVE0 (Driving decarbonization of the EU building stock by enhancing a consumer centred and locally based circular renovation process, TalTech is a partner) project is developing a new methodology for ‘circular renovation’ of buildings, based on 100% life cycle renewable energy: in a circular renovation, all materials used within the system boundaries are part of infinite technical or biological cycles with the lowest quality loss as possible. Although some of the Drive 0 project's design principles and technical solutions are adaptable to historic homes, renovation processes for industrial buildings are not always suitable for them, as historic buildings require more personalization. LIFE heritageHOME adapts the principles of circular renovation to historic homes in urban mining, demountability of buildings, reuse of materials (the best use of what is locally available) and other adaptable parts. An ongoing H2020 project Energy efficiency Building ENhancement through performance guarantee Tools (EBENTO, TalTech is partner) is aiming to develop an integrated platform for actors involved in building and renovation sector to provide one-stop-shop to better coordinate and manage Energy Performance Contracting, bringing together the needs from all actors involved in enhancing the building stock. EBENTO will ensure the exchange of relevant information between the different actors, making the renovation process cost-efficient and easy to operate and replicate. The platform will collect data related to performance contracts and guarantees, devices monitoring, energy savings, building information modelling, users’ opinions and comfort levels, among others. The LIFE heritageHOME project uses EBENTO's replication potential for heritage home renovation. Collaboration is planned with the project SCORE (Solutions for green restoration and rehabilitation works) on the following topics: Principles of the circular economy, Heritage protection, including the appreciation of built cultural heritage, Development of vernacular sustainable and durable conservation techniques, Life cycle assessment techniques to assess and minimize the ecological footprint, Forecasting service life to ensure durability in current and future climate conditions, Improvement of preservation characterization techniques. The cooperation is beneficial for both parties, as SCORE's regional focus is not in cold climates, but the research object is the same - a historical building. With the HiBERtool (developed with Interreg AlpineSpace project) possibility is given to explore and find different solutions for the energy-efficient retrofit of historical buildings. The tool documents solutions for windows, walls, ventilation, heating and solar. The tool points to visual information transfer to reach end- users – especially building owners as well as planners and architects –: photos, short and concise texts, 22 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B easy to read charts, drawings of solution details, and peer experience. Unfortunately, this tool is not finally usable in Estonia because many of the original constructions and other construction solutions are different from those of the tool. It is possible to use the principle of the tool, but we have to supplement the content with the characteristics of Estonian historic buildings and with technical and architectural solutions suitable for Estonia's cold climate. HeLLo project analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of the most common energy retrofit technical solutions for historic buildings. Solutions related to cold climates (in Estonia) still need to be further analyzed. Erasmus+ funded project, HERIT – Heritage Efficient through Relevant IT use. The project specifically aims at boosting the digital education readiness of the private owners of historic houses, helping them to face the dramatic impact of the COVID-19 crisis on cultural tourism. The central element of HERIT is the creation of a massive open online course (MOOC) tailored for private owners of historic houses. The course will aim at developing and enhancing the expertise of the owners themselves in business development and in the use of digital tools, as well as their knowledge of the regulatory and legal framework in the cultural heritage sector at the national and European level. The experiences of HERIT in establishing digital homeowners’ consultation platform will be investigated by LIFE heritageHOME and further advanced to developing a user-driven digital service. TalTech Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture and the FinEst Twins - FinEst Centre for Smart Cities are developing. REnovation Strategy TOol (RESTO). RESTO is an innovative digital platform for municipal decision-makers that would allow them to optimize required investments into their building stock. Pilot is carried out together with Võru city government in their town centre. RESTO would allow to evaluate the impact of alternatives in connection to different aspects such as technology, building and infrastructure design, urban planning, and business models. RESTO would allow municipalities to define, generate, simulate and quantitatively analyse renovation scenarios adapted to specific districts and buildings in order to make sensible investment decisions. 1.6 Complementarity with other actions Complementarity with other actions Estonian National Renovation Marathon. According to the national Long Term Renovation Strategy, all buildings in Estonia erected before 2000 need to be renovated by 2050 to the energy performance level C. To achieve this goal, the state is developing and implementing various incentives (financial, regulative, informative etc.). Significant amount of the funds allocated according to the Operational Programme for Cohesion Policy Funds and Recovery and Resilience Funds will be directed to supporting renovation of private residential buildings (with a focus on apartment buildings). LIFE IP BUILDEST project (described above under section 1.5) will raise the needed capacity among key enablers for supporting the Estonian National Renovation Marathon and accelerate the renovations with novel solutions. LIFE IP BUILDEST project is coordinated by KLIM and will run until 2028. Life IP BUILDEST has set its focus on the most typical buildings in Estonian building stock. While some historical buildings are in the scope of the BUILDEST project, it does not deliver specific services or renovation solutions for heritage buildings. There’s though a clear synergistic effect between two projects, which is due current project will serve as complementary initiative for the LIFE IP BUILDEST project. E-Ehitus development programme, Estonian LTRS pinpoints the need to develop various digital tools for improving data access both for the building owners and public policymakers. Due to this, as well as the long-term strategy of the construction sector “Long view to Construction”, significant funds from national programme for Recovery and Resilience Funds have been allocated for reinventing the national building registry. A 3D digital twin for the buildings covering the whole country is being developed, as well as an end-user oriented interface for guidance on construction matters (ehitusgiid). The digital building logbook and various components of it are developed on an ongoing basis. Current project will develop needed interfaces and prepare information for the heritage home services to be well integrated to the E-ehitus development initiatives. Roadmap for Green Construction 2040, KLIM is currently preparing a roadmap for green transition in the construction sector. The roadmap is codesigned with an expert panel. The roadmap will be completed by March 2023. While the roadmap will just briefly cover the specifics of the heritage buildings, it will well frame the overall pathway towards more green construction. The roadmap will serve as input for the green transition scenarios of heritage homes developed in the current project. 23 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Management planning of heritage conservation areas, Estonian National Heritage Board has commenced a process of compiling new regulations for Estonian heritage conservation areas. There are 11 urban heritage conservation areas and one landscape heritage conservation area in Estonia. The urban heritage conservation areas include mostly historic city and town centres and surrounding environment which cover more than 10 000 buildings, of which about 5000 are private properties. In the framework of drafting the new regulations the buildings of the heritage conservation areas will be divided into categories based on their heritage value (A, B and C). For most of the buildings assigned to a higher value category (B category) only the exterior is protected by the regulation, and to a lesser extent (A category) both the interior and exterior are protected. For homeowners, whose house is assigned to a higher value category, this means prescribed requirements and restrictions on building insulation and changing the appearance. National subsidies for the restoration of a historic building are very low, and thousands of owners of properties in the heritage conservation areas compete with the owners of architectural monuments for subsidies. Therefore, it is often the case that even one finds resources on his own to renovate or increase energy efficiency of the house, he lacks of knowledge of possible solutions. This often leads to unsuitable solutions for the heritage conservation area and the building and the usage of materials that damage the historic building (for example plastic windows and external insulation of 30 cm). These solutions may also not be the most environment friendly. Therefore, the guidelines and tools created within the LIFE heritageHOME project and receiving advice from trained experts and consultants would significantly contribute to the actions of the owners themselves in increasing the energy efficiency of the building and reduce the pressure on state subsidies. The guidelines and tools of the project could also be an additional data and basic material for the regulations of the heritage conservation areas. Support for the preservation of farm architecture. In order to support the preservation of Estonian traditional rural architecture and the uniqueness of the rural landscape, a support for the preservation of farm architecture has been created. To receive support for the farmhouse, it must be a residential building that is or has been a part of a historic farm complex, i.e., a detached house, which has been built before 1940. The building does not have to be listed as an architectural monument. The application round supports activities that restore or replace the roof covering of a farmhouse and, if necessary, roof structure, using original materials, i.e., materials characteristic to the region, building type and construction period. The technical guidance for heritage homes and services integrated to the digital one-stop shop would facilitate planning and preparing for also implementation of this subsidy scheme. National grant for renovation of public heritage buildings. Ministry of Finance of Estonia is preparing a funding instrument for authentic restauration of publicly used heritage buildings. The funding instrument (~24 M eur) is planned to be implemented during the period of 2022-2026. When the instrument is launched and projects will be implemented with these funds, LIFE heritageHOME aims to establish strong interaction for knowledge transfer for technical solutions successfully implemented there. 1.7 Synergies and co-benefits with other LIFE sub-programmes Synergies and co-benefits with other LIFE sub-programmes LIFE heritageHOME builds synergies and has spillover effects with the following LIFE sub-programmes: Circular Economy and Quality of Life Under the sub-programme Circular Economy and Quality of LIFE the heritageHOME project will create multi benefits with several scopes of projects falling under the priorities of the call “Circular Economy, resources from Waste, Air, Water, Soil, Noise, Chemicals, Bauhaus”. More specifically the project will create synergies with the priorities of: • Circular Economy and Waste: Acknowledging that the construction sector is the biggest source of waste (after oil-shale industry) in Estonia, we are eager to demonstrate the possibilities on how to restore and recycle the building materials in heritage buildings. In many cases the solutions exploited for heritage buildings can be replicable for conventional houses. The technical solutions developed in WP3 (T.3.2-T.3.3) will provide guidance on how to avoid waste and propose restoration or alternate use solutions for building materials disassembled from the renovated buildings. Within the technical renovation solutions developed by the project we also set a high ambition in avoiding future waste, to do this, materials and solutions are preferred, which support disassembly in the future. This will support implementation of the EU circular economy action plan. 24 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B • Air: Project has spillover effects to improving the urban air quality in the historic town centres. The wood-heated ovens are still widely exploited in the buildings located in the heritage protection areas. Based on the year-round monitoring of air quality carried out by Environmental Research Centre, it has been proven that European urban districts that are densely filled with wood-heated houses can have, in peak times, as harmful air as some of the famously polluted Chinese cities. The LIFE heritageHOME will not be directly targeting homeowners to switch the heating sources, but to improve the energy performance and living comfort alternate solutions will be proposed and recommended for homeowners. This will support implementation of the EU Zero Pollution action plan. • A New European Bauhaus: LIFE heritageHOME aligns with the concept of New European Bauhaus (NEB) initiative, as combines the environmental, economic, and cultural aspects in the design, sustainability, accessibility and affordability of renovation of heritage homes in order to help deliver the European Green Deal. We expect that preserving the authentic residential use in heritage buildings is enriching to the societies, as living environment inspired by art and culture, responds to community needs beyond functionality. The solutions we will deliver are sustainable, as support the improved quality of wider natural environment (as explained above). Moreover, we aim that the solutions are inclusive, encouraging a dialogue across cultures, disciplines, genders and ages. This will support implementation of the EU initiative New European Bauhaus – beautiful, sustainable, together. Climate change adaptation and mitigation LIFE heritageHOME will also contribute to the transformation of the EU into a climate neutral and -resilient society, by supporting the implementation of the EU's climate policy and preparing the EU for the climate action challenges in the coming years and decades. Demonstrating that improvement of energy performance is possible also in the most challenging buildings – heritage homes, will have wider effect in accelerating renovations in the residential sector. More specifically the project will have effect in: • Climate change adaptation: technical renovation solutions developed within the LIFE heritageHOME project will consider the projected climate change and propose measures how the renovation can improve future resilience to preserve the buildings in the future. An ongoing LIFE IP BUILDEST (see section 1.5) project is developing various computing parameters that need to be considered for renovations in changing climate (test reference years for indoor climate and energy modelling, for dimensioning of heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems and moisture reference year (MRY) for design durability and longevity of materials). As the current project will be well aligned with solutions developed by LIFE IP BUILDEST, then the new climatic baselines for evaluating performance capacity of solutions are also exploited for the LIFE heritageHOME solutions (T.3.2-T.3.3). This will support implementation of EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change . • Climate change mitigation: as project falls in the scope of LIFE Clean Energy Transition, then it has direct effect towards climate change mitigation priorities of EU. Project contributes directly towards implementing the EU Climate Law and supports the EC vision for Climate Neutral Union by 2050. Nature and Biodiversity Residential heritage buildings often provide habitats for different wildlife, namely for species accustomed to co-habit with humans in urban settings. While typically, these species are widespread and in conservation terms least concern (e.g. Erinaceus europaus, Motacilla alba, Turdus merula etc.), there are some endangered species for which conservation measures need to be implemented (e.g. house dwelling bat species). While the project does not directly target developing conservation measures for biodiversity, then awareness about the possibilities to compensate possible habitat loss during renovations or avoid unnecessary disturbance in vulnerable periods (breeding, hibernation etc) will be raised among homeowners. To do this biodiversity aspects need to be considered when developing the practical renovation solutions (T.3.2, T.3.2) and when disseminating the final solutions (T6.1). Owner awareness can be raised also via facilitated co-creation processes (T2.3), effects of which can be measured in testing the developed service (T.6.2). This will support implementing the EU Biodiversity Strategy as well as consider EU Habitat and Bird directive requirements. 1.8 Synergies and co-benefits with other EU policy areas Synergies and co-benefits with other EU policy areas 25 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B LIFE heritageHOME contributes to various cross-cutting goals that align also with the European Commission priorities for 2019-2024. Most specifically the project is targeted towards the EU Green Deal programme, for which the synergies are more broadly elaborated under sections 1.3 and 1.7). In terms of other priorities, the spillover effects are to be found in the following: A Europe fit for the digital age Digital technology is changing people’s lives. The EU’s digital strategy aims to make this transformation work for people and businesses, while helping to achieve its target of a climate-neutral Europe by 2050. LIFE heritageHOME will exploit a wide set of digital services that aim to facilitate energy renovations for homeowners. We’ll investigate the potential of digital renovation passports (T.5.1) and set up a digital web interface for the one-stop-shop for homeowners’ easy access to the guidance and information (T.5.2). The digital tools developed and tested (T.5.3) among homeowners will have wide replication potential across Europe to plan and facilitate the homeowners’ journey towards more energy efficient homes. More specifically this will support implementation of European data strategy and Digital skills Agenda. An economy that works for people Individuals and businesses in the EU can only thrive if the economy works for them. The EU’s unique social market economy allows economies to grow and to reduce poverty and inequality. As the private owners of heritage homes are expected to preserve the common heritage, they are left with the high cost of living due to high energy cost. Moreover, the solutions and incentives developed for homeowners residing in heritage buildings will create jobs and generate income for different small and medium-sized enterprises are the backbone of the EU’s economy. Within LIFE heritageHOME we’ll build the partnership among the enablers of renovations in heritage homes, meaning we’ll concert the efforts of state, heritage conservation community and construction sector for streamlined processes and optimized technical solutions (T.4.1-T.4.2). The project will also investigate, develop and blend various business models and financial incentives oriented towards accelerating energy renovations in heritage homes (T.4.3). Nudging concrete renovations will create jobs and income for various skilled professionals as well as raise their capabilities in the field (training events foreseen under T.4.2). More specifically this will support implementation of Skills Agenda for Europe and the initiative of A strong social Europe for just transitions. A stronger Europe in the world The European Commission champions multilateralism and a rules-based global order through a more active role and stronger voice for the EU in the world. LIFE heritageHOME consortium includes the national council of ICOMOS in Estonia, an active member of the international ICOMOS. The latter is the only global non-government organisation of this kind, which is dedicated to promoting the application of theory, methodology, and scientific techniques to the conservation of the architectural and archaeological heritage. Solutions developed in Estonia will be spread to ICOMOS councils facing similar challenges in energy renovations of heritage homes, where relevant supporting also the EU enlargement regions (see T.6.3). Promoting our European way of life A Europe that protects must also stand up for justice and for the EU’s core values. Among the latter is the European heritage - rich and diverse mosaic of cultural and creative expressions, an inheritance from previous generations of Europeans and a legacy for those to come. While policy in this area is primarily the responsibility of Member States, regional and local authorities, the EU is committed to safeguarding and enhancing Europe's cultural heritage through a number of policies and programmes. One of the most important features at EU level is the European Framework for Action on Cultural Heritage (2018), which reflects the common set-up for heritage-related activities at European level. LIFE heritageHOME is clearly targeting the areas of continued action within this framework, as aims towards: • more inclusive European heritage: by supporting participation and access for all. We aim that it must be possible to authentically use the historic residential buildings used as homes for generations without falling into energy poverty. We respond to this aim by co-creating the integrated renovation service together with the owners (T.2.3) and aim to pave a way for a streamlined owner-oriented journey instead of the current scattered and sometimes contradicting steps (T.4.1-T.4.3). • more sustainable European heritage: smart solutions and sustainable solutions must be achieved to support the green transition of built heritage. We respond to this by developing renovation solutions and validating them with interdisciplinary expert groups (T.3.1-T.3.3). 26 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B • more resilient European heritage: safeguarding endangered heritage. When thousands of heritage homes fall out of use in historic town centres due to high cost of living and poor indoor living environment, there are little to no chance in preserving these buildings and scenic old towns for the future. This goal is the overall focus for our project, as the integrated service as a whole is targeted towards long-term resilience of the residential heritage buildings. • more innovative European heritage: mobilising knowledge and research for the identified challenges. This goal is a cross cutting aim of the project – our efforts are co-created with both the owners as well as scientific community. We’ll build on the existing state of the art solutions and create new best practices. • a stronger global partnership: reinforcing international cooperation. We respond to this by nudging replication in EU, with a focus on neighbouring countries in the cold-climate region (T.6.3). 2. IMPACT 2.1 Ambition of the impacts Ambition of the impacts The LIFE heritageHOME is directly targeted towards private homeowners of ~7000 buildings protected as architectural monuments or located in heritage protection areas. The energy saving potential of these buildings differs depending on the heritage value (conservation status assessment) and is assessed to vary in between 20-30% (in architectural monuments and A category buildings in heritage conservation areas), 50% (for B category buildings) and 60% (for C category buildings (examples of apartment buildings in Figure 7 and of detached houses in Figure 8). Figure 7 Different apartment buildings protected as architectural monuments or located in heritage conservation areas in Estonia. The renovation of the heritage homes (net floor area - 2 593 000 m ), would trigger annual primary energy 2 savings ~347 GWh and thereby reduce annual emissions of GHG ~52000 tCO e. To achieve this, 2 approximate investments of ~2300 M euro (800-1000 eur/m ) are required, which does not only improve 2 the living environment for the homeowners and support the national ambition in reaching climate neutrality, but also rejuvenate the historic town centres and promote heritage living. Figure 8 Different detached houses protected as architectural monuments or located in heritage conservation areas in Estonia. While LIFE heritageHOME will not contribute to concrete renovations of any of the buildings, we’ll develop and set up an integrated renovation service that would remove the bureaucratic hurdles and technical barriers as well as streamline the workflow among the participants. 27 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Table 2 Character of buildings in the scope of the project Estimate for avg. energy Buildings in the scope Number of saving Net floor Current energy Primary energy of the project buildings potential area performance savings (GWh) Architectural monuments ~1700 30% 705000 61,1 A category buildings 261 30% 133 000 Level E 11,5 ~250 kWh/m2*a B category buildings 2665 50% 1043000 150,8 C category buildings 2491 60% 712 000 123,5 The expected impacts of the project: • Integrated Home Renovation Services implemented, operational and tested at the end of the action, although upscale may happen after project completion. LIFE heritageHOME will develop, design and implement an integrated service for energy renovations of heritage homes with a digital interface (T.5.2), which integrates the various policy initiatives, incentives, agrees the procedures across authorities to clarify the customer journey (T.4.1- T.4.2), integrates end-user-oriented tools within the service (T.3.1-T3.3, T.5.1). We expect that the solution provided by the project will empower owners to be sustainable after the end of the project. LIFE heritageHOME will clarify and systematize all relevant information related what is needed to implement energy renovation tasks in heritage buildings, ie: 1) what are the preparatory studies that are required; 2) what are the restrictions, where to get relevant assistance; 3) what renovation solutions are feasible and impactful for improving energy performance and what are the renovation solutions not- acceptable for certain heritage building types; 4) what can be done by owners themselves and where the professionals are required; 5) various support related to procuring and contracting the construction companies/craftsmen; 6) guidance on incentives and various assistance in organizing practical renovations and what to control during the process (list not complete). More specific scope is to be developed during the task T.4.1, which will set its specific objectives from the project KPI as well as the green transition scenarios of Estonian built heritage to be developed in T2.1. The service will be shared by Ministries of Culture (KuM) and Climate (current KliM), in between which the responsibilities are shared and agreed during the project. As a concept the KliM is responsible for the services guiding individual homeowners to the purposeful renovations whereas KUM is responsible for knowledge-based support for heritage specifics. • Investments in sustainable energy triggered by the project (cumulative, in million Euro, during the action (pilot phase) and within the first 5 years of operation of the services By increasing support and streamlining procedures we expect to encourage more homeowners to renovate, the private investments constitute a minimum of >50% of the total investments needed for the energy renovation. When estimated across all the buildings in the scope of the project, we are aiming to raise ~850 M euro of private investments into clean energy transition during the years following the project. The assumption here is that facilitation system assists homeowners to make their renovation decisions (also when initiated due to other reasons) towards improving energy performance. We foresee that after the project renovation rate of heritage (and historic) buildings for which the solutions are fitting will significantly increase. The 850 M responds to the investment needs to energy renovations of the approximate 7000 residential heritage buildings, while setting the long term ambition we believe that within 5 years of operation of the services the system will facilitate renovations of >200 buildings/year and thus engage ~121 M eur. • Strong and trustworthy partnerships with local actors (e.g. SMEs, architects, engineers, ESCOs, financial institutions, energy agencies, NGOs). Prerequisites for a strong and trustworthy partnerships with local actors are created by the existing relations and joint cooperation projects of the partners and the cooperation plateau of the partners, which will be further developed within the framework of LIFE heritageHOME project. The project consists of two 28 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B ministries (KLIM and COM), whose administrative area includes the focus group of heritage homes. The National Heritage Board and ICOMS ensure that the protection of the historical cultural heritage is ensured during the renovation of the heritage homes. TalTech and EKA have demonstrated good cooperation so far in the form of joint research projects, educational and training programs and the exchange of lecturers. The interest in cooperation by local actors has been proven in the form of letters of support. • Implementation of economically viable business models, ultimately running without the need for public subsidies to cover running costs. The components of the service itself are developed in a manner that do not require significant additional funding but are viable within the existing administrative units and partnerships. To achieve this the reinvented service needs to be well institutionalized into the routine procedures and capabilities of the existing officials and consultants need to be increased. The viability of the central service lays in the fact that the heritage home specialities will be well integrated to the generic services maintained by the state as such. • Availability of adequate financing offers to support investment in home energy performance improvement. LIFE heritageHOME will develop business models for financing service gaps (T.4.3). The project aims to create market conditions to engage additional investments to the sector of renovation of heritage homes. Various grant schemes are already available at the market (KredEx incentives), however the entry requirements are often not obtainable for heritage homes and processes do not consider heritage home specialities. The restoration subsidies paid by MKA typically do not aim towards energy performance, however, do not exempt it as a positive side effect of the solution. By more efficient blending of the existing incentives as well as development of the new business models we aim to find additional financial incentives for the renovations of at least 200 heritage homes per year. • Increased awareness and trust of end-users through clear accountability, quality assurance and dedicated consumer protection mechanisms. End-users will be engaged from the start of the project into different co-creation processes (T.2.3), expert panels (T.2.1), end-user oriented events (T.6.2). End-user interactions in different stages of service design serve the needed assurance for the quality and feasibility of the developed tools. • Data and guidance made publicly available in order to facilitate replication of the approach by other market actors. Evidence that the value of the services offered is recognised by the market. We’ll aim for replication of the service both nationally as well as beyond Estonia (see elaborated in section 2.4 of the proposal). Indirectly the solutions developed in LIFE heritageHOME will contribute to improved service flow of all historic homes (~18% of Estonian private housing stock). The technical solutions developed for the renovation heritage buildings are replicable for neighbouring countries with similar climatic conditions and construction heritage. The service design has transfer potential across Europe and beyond, to support this we aim to disseminate the solutions among the ICOMOS national councils’ network. Technical renovation solutions (WP3) will be freely available for non-professional decision makers and end-users as well for professional c onstruction companies, architects, engineers, urban planners, financers, etc. 2.2 Credibility of the impacts Credibility of the impacts The overall challenge of energy renovation of heritage homes is described in sections 1.1 and 2.1. Information on the characteristics of the buildings selected into the scope of the project is assessed based on the statistics of Heritage Board. Average emission factors, average renovation prices (etc) are derived from the Estonian Long-term Renovation Strategy (2021). More specific information, with details about the building typology as well as their energy performance will be gathered and analysed within the project. The assumptions on the key project indicators are explained in the table below. 29 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Table 3 Assumptions of LIFE heritageHOME KPI LIFE heritageHOME KPI End of 5-y Assumptions project after Primary Energy Savings in 1 10 During the project we engage the direct test users GWh/year triggered by the (10-15 buildings), who pilot the integrated service. In project 5 years after the project the number has increased tenfold. We assess that the homes entering the renovation process are in current performance class F (250 MWh/m2a) and the saving depending on the value class is in range 20-60%. Final Energy Savings in 1,2 12 See above. We estimate that the total savings are GWh/year triggered by the achieved by 4/5 (saving on electricity & heating) project and 1/5 for integrating renewables. Renewable Energy 0,2 2 See above. generation in GWh/year triggered by the project Reduction of greenhouse 128 1200 See above. gas emissions in tons of As emission factor we take the national statistics on CO2 equivalent per year emission factor of 576 kg / 1kWh (expected to (tCO2eq/year) reduce) Cumulative investments in 1 10 See above. The average net floor area is 400 m2, sustainable energy and the projected cost for renovation is 800 eur/ m2. triggered by the project Among the renovations started with the service (million eur) design 1/3 complete it by the end of project. Number of legislation, 10 12 10-12 different level legislative documents will be policies or strategies affected (e.g. charter of policy coordination, created/adapted [to include requirements for consultants, templates for sustainable energy issues] investigations, agreed procedures, special clauses at any governance levels in incentives). due to the project Number of products (goods 1 1 One integrated service interlinking various or services), processes and necessary tools developed within the project (e.g. methods launched into the digital renovation passport, 50 technical renovation market by the project solutions etc) and aligned to it from external sources. Please enter the number of 5 50 Out of the 15 test cases, 1/3 will complete by the end real life implementation of the project. The number will increase tenfold after sites carried out by the 5 years. project Number of market 100 200 25 heritage experts, 20 energy auditors, 55 stakeholders trained with professionals on other fields (designers, architects, increased skills and engineers). Number will double after 5 years of the competencies on energy project. issues due to the project Number of stakeholders 30 000 100 We aim to reach the owners of all 6000 residential reached through media and 000 heritage buildings, additionally the outreach is events during the project targeted towards owners of historic houses. Number of jobs created in 5 15 Project staff (5 FTE) involved in the challenge. FTE New energy consultants for heritage buildings (5 FTE). The latter is projected to double in 5 years. Number of partnerships 10 20 Strong and trustworthy partnerships with local formed actors (e.g. SMEs, architects, engineers, ESCOs, financial institutions, energy agencies, NGO) is formed by the end of project. The partnerships continue to form after the project and is projected to double in 5 years 2.3 Sustainability of project results 30 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Sustainability of project results How will the project impact be ensured and sustained? The project is initiated by the state policy makers of heritage protection and housing renovation. Accordingly, the project topic – energy renovations of heritage buildings has been identified as the key focus by the political level governance of the participating authorities. Having roots in this innovative and forward-looking approach, this project helps the operational staff to solve the practicalities for how this should be done. Fulfilling the national’ vision to move towards carbon neutrality, this project builds long-term energy renovation solutions for buildings currently being exempted from the current energy policy measures. The integrated service is developed by following horizontal principles that ensure the long-term sustainability. • Service needs to be integrated into strategic aims: when aligning policies and designing the service (T.4.1) the policy work needs to be foreseen to both develop national goals that will be included to the Long term renovation strategy (responsibility of KLIM) and the Strategy of Heritage Board (responsibility of MKA and KuM). The understanding what needs to be done to improve the energy performance of heritage buildings is achieved from the long-term scenarios developed under T.2.1. • Operational: For the service itself, we develop a roadmap of Policy recommendations for integrated renovation service of heritage home energy renovations (T.4.1). Such a roadmap will outline the necessary steps needed to implement the service, both in terms of service set-up, but also institutionalization in the routines of the enablers. Operational step-by-step plan helps the different actors (participating in the LIFE heritageHOME as beneficiaries and the external stakeholders engaged to the project) to implement the concerted efforts. • Integrated: The whole project has integrated nature – the aim is to combine existing services, tools and develop need interlinked tools for a challenge specific cause. The solutions build on existing services and networks allowing faster learning pace. When we have established the sufficient baselines with adequate information, clear strategic goals, and operational contexts, we expect to integrate all this in the daily routines of authorities. To adapt the project interventions to the general settings and to allow cross-fertilization across initiatives within the project and beyond its direct scope, we implement the continuous sensemaking and learning activities (T.1.2). • Inclusive: In order to gain public support to the developed service we exploit the co-creation methods and public outreach. We engage random sample owners’ assembly (T.2.3), we engage wide range of experts to consult the service design (T.2.1) and we plan the thorough testing of the service (T.6.2). As a result, the solutions developed are expected to respond the end-user needs and thereby guarantee the wide uptake of the service. • Cost-optimal: When renovation measures and designing restoration interventions, we aim for cost- optimality. Also, the operation of the service is planned as self-sustaining, depending on the contributions from the enablers, with little extra cost. Which parts of the project should be continued or maintained? The integrated renovation service needs to be continued / systematically updated until the energy renovation goals of heritage homes and climate neutrality goals of the county are achieved: • Most critical is to continue to keep the digital one-stop-shop adequate and up-to date: a collaboration scheme is agreed within the project how the different actors contribute and upgrade information to achieve this. The sustainability the digital one stop shop falls into responsibility of KLIM. • As the quality of the integrated service provided in the form of digital one-stop-shop depends from its components, various additional solutions need to be kept up to date: o Technical renovation solutions: a revision process will be agreed in the process. Market adaptations are expected to take place, fitness checks of the solutions based on these will need to be carried out regularly (minimally once in 10 years), this will be a responsibility of MKA. o Policy incentives for supporting renovations: the project will propose business models that can be exploited to raise funding to support the renovations of heritage homes. Preparing, implementing and sustaining the models will depend on different actors. This will be coordinated by KuM. 31 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B o Continuous training programmes: for professionals. Regular training is required to engage new experts as well as provide novel concepts for already trained experts. This will be a responsibility of MKA. o Coordinated procedures: after agreeing the procedures within the project a routine needs to be set in place to keep the policies and procedures aligned. 2.4 Exploitation of project results Exploitation of project results utilisation in further research The project results will also be multiplied and used in further scientific research. The outcomes of monitoring will include scientific articles based on the collected data and recorded changes, as well as opinion pieces with “best practices” ideas and recommendations. Based on the innovation seeking workshop in T.2.1 follow-up projects are initiated. The research consortium will utilize the project results by: • Defending several master’s and at least one PhD thesis from this project results, possibly co- supervised with researchers from different universities of the consortium. • Publishing research papers (>3) and introducing the project to international research audiences (>5 events). utilisation in developing, creating, and providing services for renovating heritage homes The streamlined renovation of heritage home renovations encourages construction companies to target the services towards this market segment. While the heritage homes are a niche then the historic homes are already a significant share of the renovation market (~18%). Improved understanding on the technical renovation solutions and concerted permitting procedures, topped with policy incentives will raise market activity thus creating jobs and generating incomes. Active collaboration via direct consultation of solutions (T.3.2-T.3.3; T.5.1) and engagement in expert panels (T.2.1) is foreseen with commercial market participants to deliver the needed market uptake of the service components. utilisation in developing, creating, and providing services conventional buildings LIFE heritageHOME services is developed in synergies with large LIFE IP BUILDEST and the learnings of heritage specifics will be integrated to the solutions developed for the conventional residential buildings. As KLIM (responsible for LIFE IP BUILDEST) implementation, is a beneficiary also of current project, the interlinkages are already integrated to the project concept. 2.5 Catalytic potential: Replication and upscaling Catalytic potential: Replication and upscaling LIFE heritageHOME has catalytic potential in Estonia as well as beyond its borders. Firstly, the solutions developed with the project for the heritage home owners (usually private non-professional decision makers), but the whole process and some technical solutions are also applicable to ordinary homes. In the scope of the project we plan to raise a broader discussion in the society how to avoid energy poverty in heritage homes with the aim to increase market demand and create policy incentives. The latter is 32 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B expected to activate the market (construction companies, professionals – designers, architects, engineers) and add value for the economy. REPLICATION POTENTIAL 18% of Estonian living space consists of buildings erected before 1945 (Statistics Estonia Webpage). Not all these are protected, however have milieu value. In case the owner of such buildings values his home and wants to preserve its architectural value, the technical solutions and guidelines developed for architectural monuments in LIFE heritageHOME can also be implemented and applied for the buildings of milieu (urban- environmentally valuable) areas as well as other historic buildings Figure 9 Replication potential outside of the heritage conservation areas. The technical solutions of the project can also be applied for the historic buildings in Estonian neighbouring countries (Baltic states and Scandinavia) and cold climate regions. Service design is applicable also in other states (digital one-stop-shop and network of consultants). To achieve the international replication, we exploit the Europe and World-wide via ICOMOS network. The network has 107 national committees, allowing a broad outreach platform. Additionally, the solutions are introduced to heritage authorities via direct thematic workshops, these are planned with the governance authorities and state and local agencies responsible for the energy renovations of heritage homes in the Nordic-Baltic region. Dissemination the solutions is also planned in more passive form, via presenting the best practice developed in various expert meetings, thematic conferences and introducing the solutions in thematic publications. More specifics on the replication potential of the project is elaborated below in the table 4. Table 4 Replication potential of project outcomes Replication challenge Target group Project efforts Market uptake of project solutions by 20 000 homeowners Market launch campaign (T.6.2). the target group (EE) The project pilots of ~7000 heritage Active dissemination of the various tools, however the market uptake buildings solutions to enablers (T3.1- will require specific efforts. T.3.3, T.4.2, T.6.1). Synergies with LIFE IP BUILDEST Value oriented renovation of historic 18% of Estonian Disseminating the solutions to homes (EE) Uptake of solutions by owners housing stock, enablers (T.4.2). Broader of historic homes currently not protected. ~60 000 buildings 33 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B awareness on the solutions (T.6.1) Institutionalization of the service Stakeholders: public Co-creation process (T.2.1, components (EE) Uptake of solutions by authorities (local, T4.1) and active collaboration for different actors not engaged as partners of national) multibenefitial integration of the the consortium services (T.4.1-T.4.2, T.5.1). Replication of technical solutions for National housing Disseminating the solutions heritage buildings and historic stock built before (T.6.3): Engineering and buildings in cold climate region (FI, SE, 1945: FI (12%); SE architecture professionals NO, LV, LT etc) (19%); LV (22%); LT community. Heritage (22%); NO (). community. Replication of service design Collaborations of Disseminating the project results (international, with focus to EU) for heritage heritage authorities in (T.6.1, T.6.3) home energy renovation facilitation: MS Authorities & professionals ICOMOS network (107 global members) 50 000 privately- As an external partner the Homeowners owned historic project will actively work with houses across Estonian union of manor Europe formed in owners, which is a member of European Historic European umbrella of owners Houses aisbl unions. We have agreed to disseminate the solutions in their events and networks (LoS). T.6.3 CATALYTIC POTENTIAL The renovation of buildings in the scope of this project expects the engagement of various market participants. In addition to self-build homeowners, also consultants, designers, architects, engineers, construction companies and construction material producers. We expect that the clearer service, increased demand and agreed and feasible solutions and procedures and novel incentives (new business models and efficient blending of existing grants) attract the private entrepreneur’s interest and supporting the skilled practitioners to move from new building construction sector to renovation and from non- residential sector to residential sector (apartment buildings and detached houses). We estimate that >30% of medium sized construction companies (with annual net sales 3,2-13 M eur) and >60% of small sized construction companies (with annual net sales <3,2 M eur) in Estonia formed as members of association of construction companies will target their services and raise their competences in the scope. To achieve this, we’ll actively collaborate with the Estonian Association of Construction Entrepreneurs and its members. This will be done by synchronization of activities with LIFE IP BUILDEST project. When the renovation of private houses starts to become more active, consultants and designers also have an interest in being more active in this sector, as a more permanent flow of work is guaranteed. During the project, the best practice to date is collected and a catalogue of typical renovation solutions (1D building envelope structures and 2D joints/details/connections) will created. This increases confidence and reduces the need for massive preliminary building survey as well complexity of the whole process. All in all, a more reliable starting point reduces the entrepreneur's risks and therefore also lowers the cost. 3. IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Work plan Work plan 34 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B The intervention logic of LIFE heritageHOME responds to the key recommendations of ‘European Heritage Green Paper’ outlined for the policymakers and operators that are needed to support deep energy renovations of built heritage. The project consists of 6 interconnected work-packages (Figure 9). Within the LIFE heritageHOME the necessary solutions will be prepared and adjusted for the integrated service, the capacity of key enablers supporting the heritage home energy renovations will be raised and a client- facing digital interface will be designed for easy access to information on the different steps owner needs to take on the journey. The project will engage owners in designing the solutions and reach out to scientific and professional communities for exploitation of the best available practices to develop the integrated set of services needed to overcome the barriers hindering energy renovation of heritage homes. More specifically the project will: • WP 2- Prepare the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings. This will be done by engagement of expert panels and empowerment of owners via facilitated heritage assembly. The work- package feeds as input to the work-packages WP3, WP4 and WP5. • WP 3 - Investigate standardized solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings. The project will analyse existing practices, develop feasible solutions and propose the no regret combinations and sequences of renovation works in heritage homes. The technical solutions agreed in this work-package will be exploited as validated solutions for policy measures and financial incentives and these will be packaged both in the digital solutions (WP5 and for broader dissemination published in WP6). • WP 4 - Build partnerships for integrated heritage home renovation service, whereas the solutions developed will be client-facing and aimed to respond to various needs of homeowners with different entry level capabilities and knowledge. The service design carried out here will be institutionalized in the routine procedures among the authorities engaged to the consortium as well as partners, among whom several have indicated interest to do so in the Letters of Support attached to the proposal. Within project the key output will be the digital one-stop shop (WP5) into which the service design will feed into. • WP 5 - Set up a digital one-stop-shop for the owners of heritage homes. The interface will for example include information on required procedures, guidance on contracting the services and information on feasible solutions. Moreover, the heritageHOME project will pilot a heritage home renovation passport tool allowing rapid assessment of energy performance of buildings based on registry data. • WP 6 - Amplifying the effect of best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication . LIFE heritageHOME solutions will not be relevant only for heritage homeowners in Estonia, but replicable also to other countries in Europe. The project will branch out to heritage authorities in Nordic-Baltic region (cold climate) and to the national councils of ICOMOS to introduce both the technical solutions for renovations as well as the service design of the digital one-stop-shop streamlining the customer journey towards improved energy performance of heritage homes. 35 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 10 Project workplan Figures and schemes describing the details of the work-packages and tasks: 36 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 11 Sensemaking logic Figure 12 Preliminary Scenarios for Green Transition of Estonian heritage buildings 37 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 13 Key enablers for integrated service of energy renovation of heritage homes Figure 14 Concept for the digital one-stop-shop service Figure 15 Prototype of the EHITUSGIID (left), web interface for restoration guidance of architectural monuments (right) 38 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 39  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 3.3 Stakeholder engagement Stakeholders engagement The most relevant stakeholders concerning the development of the integrated energy-renovation service are engaged as project beneficiaries. The project consortium is co-operation oriented and has good experiences with working with expert networks expected to be engaged via direct consultations and expert panels and outreach to synergistic think-tanks. The key stakeholders are: Stakeholder Description Mobilisation Owners’ The owners of heritage homes in Estonia have Engagement in expert panels. Associations until now not formed into formal associations. Direct consultation of feasibility There’s a Manor owners union (LoS) and of project solutions, participation Central homeowners union (LoS) that have in sensemaking activities. interest on the matter. Also, the union of Introducing project results in Estonian Apartment Building Associations has regular events of the professional the topic in its priorities (LoS). clusters. Professional Specific technical experiences, e.g. Engagement in expert panels. clusters and Association of Architects (LoS); Association of Direct consultation of renovation agencies Civil Engineers (LoS); Association of solutions. Introducing project Construction Material Producers; Society of results in regular events of the Heating and Ventilation Engineers; Union of professional clusters. Roofers and Facade Makers; Association of Architectural and Consulting Engineering Companies etc. Centre of Sustainable Renovation (LoS). Estonian Heritage Estonian Heritage Assembly - Interdisciplinary Engagement in expert panels. Conservation expert panel under coordination of KuM, Direct consultation on renovation Community Estonian Heritage Society (LoS) service and policy design. Construction Market know-how on corporate and residential Engagement in expert panels. companies real-estate market, renovation interest etc. Direct consultation of renovation Association of Estonian Construction solutions. Introducing project Entrepreneurs, engaged to LIFE IP BUILDEST results in regular events of (engaged by synchronization of activities). construction sector Estonian Business KredEx (LoS) unit of EIS housing department / Engagement in expert panels. and Innovation regional development centres. Direct consultation on renovation Agency (EIS) KredEx is subordinated by KLIM engaged to service design. the project as beneficiary. KredEx is also a Services of KredEx will be partner of LIFE IP BUILDEST project (engaged engaged to the digital one stop by synchronization of activities). shop! Municipality 79 local municipality governments represented Engagement in expert panels. Governments by Estonian Association of Cities and Direct consultation on renovation Municipalities. See LoS from Võru Municipality service design. Introducing actively targeting the challenge of project results in regular events of neighbourhood level renovation of the historic construction sector. town centre (partially a conservation area). Municipality officials are invited to project training events. Consumer protec- Expertise on market regulation and technical Engagement in expert panels. tion and technical requirements in the construction sector. Direct consultation on renovation regulatory authority service design. Introducing 40  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B project results in regular events of construction sector. 3.4 Impact monitoring and reporting Impact monitoring, evaluation and reporting strategy Project internal monitoring & sensemaking Within the Sensemaking activities (T.1.2) we plan to set up a wholistic evaluation and learning system as a first step of the task, which allows the project manager constantly monitor the project progress and report timely to CINEA. The comprehensive monitoring of internal project progress allows to apply timely response to any variances (force majeure, unforeseen circumstances, potential for complimentary efforts etc). The internal monitoring will include: • overall monitoring of the progress and achieved results in relation to the project time schedule and schedule of deliverables by the coordinator. • Monitoring of the results achieved by the individual participants in terms of quality of the work delivered in relation to their tasks, involvement of necessary key actors (outside the consortium) and target groups. • Devising a contingency plan and alternative approaches in case of deviations to the work programme or performance indicators. • The results of the internal project monitoring are to be disseminated in progress and screening meetings, and applied for the overall coordination tasks (T1.1). • A steering group will validate the internal monitoring of the project. Project impact monitoring LIFE heritageHOME KPI Baselines / evaluation methods Primary Energy Savings in GWh/year MKA document registry, building registry: initiated triggered by the project renovations, energy performance before/after. Final Energy Savings in GWh/year triggered MKA document registry, building registry: initiated by the project renovations, energy performance before/after.1,5 Renewable Energy generation in GWh/year MKA document registry, building registry: initiated triggered by the project renovations, energy performance before/after. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in MKA document registry, building registry: initiated tons of CO2 equivalent per year renovations, energy performance before/after. (tCO2eq/year) Cumulative investments in sustainable MKA document registry, building registry: initiated energy triggered by the project (million eur) renovations, energy performance before/after. Market surveys. Number of legislation, policies or strategies Administrative tracking of policy work carried out by: created/adapted [to include sustainable KuM, KLIM, MKA (and beyond) energy issues] at any governance levels due to the project Number of products (goods or services), Monitoring and evaluation will be foreseen for the processes and methods launched into the service design. More specific tasks will be followed to market by the project assess the quality and market uptake of the service. Please enter the number of real life Project tracking / documentation: both quality & implementation sites carried out by the quantity of real-life implementations is assessed. project Specific monitoring scheme to be agreed in the beginning of the project. 41  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Number of market stakeholders trained with Project tracking / documentation: besides tracking the increased skills and competencies on energy number of experts trained, also the quality of training issues due to the project is assessed. Specific monitoring scheme to be agreed in the beginning of the project. Number of stakeholders reached through Media monitoring is foreseen. media and events during the project Please enter the number of jobs created in Project tracking / documentation FTE Project reporting Reporting project progress to CINEA will be done as agreed in the grant agreement. Continuous reporting: We will continuously report on the progress of the action (e.g. deliverables, milestones, outputs/outcomes, critical risks, indicators, etc; if any), in the Portal Continuous Reporting tool and in accordance with the timing and conditions it sets out (as agreed with the granting authority). Standardised deliverables (e.g. progress reports not linked to payments, reports on cumulative expenditure, special reports, etc; if any) are submitted using the templates published on the portal. Periodic reporting: Technical reports and financial statements, in addition, the beneficiaries must provide reports to request payments, in accordance with the schedule and modalities agreed in the Grant Agreement. 3.5 Communication, dissemination and visibility Communication, dissemination and visibility of funding At the beginning of the project, a plan for dissemination and communication of the projects’ results will be developed, which will be updated throughout the project. This document will lay the ground for dissemination and communication actions. Dissemination activities will provide key information about the project results and findings as widely as possible. Dissemination plan includes partner specific tasks and aims for supporting the attraction of different target groups at different levels. Target group Size of the target group Means of outreach Estonian homeowners and >20 000 homeowners Dissemination owners’ heritage assembly residents of heritage buildings programme and its results (T.2.3) >100 000 residents Campaign to introduce the service (T.6.2) General project visibility (T.1.2), more specifically the demo solutions and renovation atlas (T.6.1) Professionals enabling the >500 professionals Experts panel (T.2.1), Training events service: Energy auditors, (T.4.2). Direct consultation for developing designers, architects, engineers. the renovation solutions technical reports (T.3.1-T3.3), disseminating the outputs via the public networks of the professional clusters. International Heritage Authorities Nordic-Baltic region (6 Networking for replication of solutions. countries, a’ 20 people) Joint workshops, experience exchange visits (T.6.3). Disseminating legacy report (T.6.1). International Scientific Cold-climate region Networking for replication of solutions. Community heritage renovations; Joint workshops, experience exchange visits (T.6.3). Publishing project results in peer reviewed journals. 42  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Preservation of architectural monuments; > 1000 researchers General public >100 000 climate & General project visibility (T.1.2), heritage conscious individuals MEANS OF COMMUNICATIONS Activities to disseminate the project results, to facilitate their future use and to collect feedback from our target groups are as follows: A project website with relevant information available in Estonian and English will be our main online tool to deliver project visibility. It will contain all project products: reports, newsletters, press releases, articles, and other material, such as project training materials, policy recommendations formed from service design, events calendar, etc. The page will be built into the KuM existing web as a separate sub-sheet, links to partner pages will be established. Social media networks will be used to involve our target groups and stakeholders in the discussion and to ensure they learn about the project and its results and spread them. Different types of networks are planned in order to reach a maximum number of users. Already existing accounts (e.g. LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook) of the partners will be used to encourage the target groups to learn more about the project and exchange opinions, guaranteeing a lively community even after the end of the project. Following groups will be exploited: MKA Facebook ~7800 followers; KuM Facebook ~9000 followers; KLIM Facebook ~5500 followers; TalTech Facebook ~28 000 followers; EKA Facebook ~3400 followers. ICOMOS Estonia Facebook ~600 followers. National and EU level events: Participation at >22 thematic conferences and workshops including events with a regional scope and at EU and neighbouring countries level (at least 5 presentations in other countries or on general EU level. A list of target events will be established from the beginning of the project and be part of the communication plan. Organisation of various roundtables and related working sessions and development workshops, a kick-off and a final seminar. Trainings and webinars for the target groups: different thematic professional publications will allow targeting the aimed target groups and stakeholders: In order to reach the widest possible audience, press releases will be sent out and articles proposed for various media channels; partners will be asked to submit a list of media channels, which will form the basis of a comprehensive database of media contacts. The publications will be uploaded on the website but also shared via different social media channels. Visibility of the LIFE funding: All project results and documents to be published will be produced in a uniform visual identity (following LIFE communication toolkit) in order to achieve a coherent and recognizable external presentation of the project. Media representatives contributing to the project will receive clear information indicating the LIFE support of the European Union. In addition, the banner with the LIFE logo of the EU at the event locations will emphasize the participation and its contribution to the project 4. RESOURCES 4.1 Consortium set-up Consortium cooperation and division of roles (if applicable) 43  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B The Project coordinator - Estonian Ministry of Culture (KuM) is responsible for national culture policy. Among other KuM is also responsible for the coordination of the whole heritage conservation field in Estonia. In LIFE heritageHOME KuM is leading of Work Package 1: Project management and coordination and Work Package 6: Amplifying the effect of best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication. In addition it is participating to: building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1); preparing the heritage home renovation service (WP 4, T4.1); build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2); fitness check of renovation business models for owners of heritage homes (WP 4, T4.3). Key agency sustaining the service in the future: Estonian National Heritage Board (MKA) operates in the administrative area of the Ministry of Culture. Estonian National Heritage Board is responsible of the preservation and development of the most valuable part of Estonian cultural heritage. In LIFE heritageHOME MKA is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 4: Building the partnership for integrated heritage home renovation service. In addition KLIM is participating to: contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1); sensemaking, evaluation, and learning (WP 1, T1.2); building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1); examination of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.2); co-creation with owners’ heritage assembly for private owners (WP 2, T2.3); analysis of existing best and worst practices applied in energy improvement of historic homes (WP 3, T3.1); development of technical renovation concepts for different historic building envelopes (WP 3, T3.2); investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings (WP 3, T3.3); setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service (WP 5, T5.2); highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions (WP 6, T6.1); Launching integrated renovation service for heritage homes (WP 6, T6.2); nudging replication of integrated renovation service of heritage homes in EU (WP6, T6.3). KLIM is the government authority responsible for the full implementation of the Estonian Long-term Renovation Strategy (LTRS) and linking it to the overall Estonian housing, energy, and climate policies. KLIM is the coordinator of LIFE IP BUILDEST – Pursuing Estonian national climate ambition through smart and resilient renovation. In LIFE heritageHOME KLIM is responsible for leading of Work Package 5: Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage homeowners. Also the KLIM is participating to: contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1); building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1); examine of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.2); build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2); pilot heritage home renovation passports (WP 5, T5.1); networking for replication of technical renovation solutions in cold-climate region (WP 6, T6.3). Several key stakeholders (like KredEx) fall in the KLIM jurisdiction. KLIM intermediates the subordinated agencies to contribute to the project. Tallinn University of Technology (TalTech) is the only university of technology in Estonia and the flagship of Estonian engineering and technology education. The University’s approximately 70,000 alumni have shaped the economic landscape of present-day Estonia. The project partner is Nearly Zero Energy Building (nZEB) Research Group from Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture and the FinEst Twins - FinEst Centre for Smart Cities. In LIFE heritageHOME TalTech is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 3: Standardization of solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings. TalTech is also participating to: contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1); building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.2); examine of exploitation potential of the input- outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.3); build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2); pilot heritage home renovation passports (WP 5, T5.1); networking for replication of technical renovation solutions in cold-climate region (WP 6, T6.3). Estonian Academy of Arts (EKA) is the only public university in Estonia providing higher education in fine arts, design, architecture, media, visual studies, art history, and conservation. In LIFE heritageHOME EKA is responsible for: Leading of WP2: Mapping the Customer Journey of the heritage home energy renovations. EKA is participating to contractual management and coordination the project (WP1, T1.1); analysis of existing best and worst practices (WP3, T3.1); development of technical renovation concepts for different historic building envelopes (WP3, T3.2); Investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings (WP3, T3.3); preparing the heritage home renovation service (WP4, T4.1); building partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP4, T4.2); setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service (WP5, T5.2) and networking for replication of technical renovation solutions in cold-climate region (WP 6, T6.3). 44  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B ICOMOS Estonia (ICOMOS) is a national council formulated as NGO. The International Council of Monuments and Sites concentrates on standards of heritage conservation and enhancement. In LIFE heritageHOME ICOMOS is participating to: contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1); sensemaking, evaluation, and learning (WP 1, T1.2); project visibility. Communication and media activities (WP 1, T1.3); building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1); co- creation with owners’ heritage assembly for private owners (WP 2, T2.3); analysis of existing best and worst practices applied in energy improvement of historic homes (WP 3, T3.1); highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions (WP 6, T6.1); networking for replication of technical renovation solutions in cold-climate region (WP 6, T6.2); nudging replication of integrated renovation service of heritage homes in EU (WP6, T6.3). Project consortium is illustrated in Figure 16. Figure 16 Project consortium and roles 4.2 Project management Project management, quality assurance and monitoring of progress Project management and monitoring will be a continuous activity aiming at smooth implementation of all actions throughout the project lifetime and leading to excellent results. Development and implementation of management structures and decision-making mechanisms consists of the following sub-actions: The overall coordination of the project as well as administrational, financial, and contractual management will be the responsibility of coordinating beneficiary. However, the work-package coordination units are expected to be formed. At project start Coordinator will prepare consortium agreement according to LIFE requirements. On overall level, the project will be coordinated by Project Manager of PP1 KuM. With regard to financial management and reporting, Project Manager will be supported by part time Financial Manager of KuM. Project Manager will be responsible for the overall co-ordinating and time planning of the Project, overall co-ordination of joint activities, arrangement of Project meetings, information exchange, communication with the Contracting Authority, preparation of reports, support of Project Partners in preparation of Partner reports, planning and monitoring the use of Project budget, preparation of payment requests to the Contracting Authority (CA), etc. All partners will be involved in administration, accounting and reporting of their activities and costs. All Partners appoint local Partner Co-ordinators, who are responsible for implementation of activities of relevant Partner and for communication with Project Manager of PP1 KuM. Partner Co-ordinators are responsible for arrangement of competitive procedures needed for project implementation and for preparing Partner reports for auditing. 45  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Financial management. The partners are spending budget according to the overall detailed budget. The financial management structure will be set-up by PM, KuM financial department will oversee overall financial administration and payments of pre-financing instalments to Project Partners. Each partner will have its own accountant performing the partner’s reporting. The partners will follow national requirements for procurement depending on their legal status and volume of contracts. Partners are also encouraged to implement green procurement rules. The LIFE expenditure reporting system and schedule will be explained and supervised by the project management team regularly; the financial reporting will be harmonised and implemented continuously by all partners to avoid delays in payments. Partner interaction and decision making For everyday management of Project, the Project Team (PT) will be formed. The task of the PT is to monitor Project's activities, make decisions on the time schedule and other key aspects of Project implementation, and to evaluate the results. The members of PT will include Project Manager (KuM) and Partner Co- ordinators. PT will have monthly meetings. Day-to-day communication will be maintained through standard methods such as email, phone, electronic conferencing tools and in-person meetings. The Project manager employed by Coordinator will seek to implement an “open door” policy where partners are welcome and encouraged to seek answers and guidance immediately, instead of waiting until the next planned meeting. The PM will be in contact with all partners throughout the project to ensure progress is made according to the plan and to address uncertainties. A password-protected project digital space will be created to store all documents pertaining to the project, including meeting agendas and minutes. Independent steering of the project. For independent monitoring of Project implementation and progress made, the Project Steering Group (SG) will be created. The task of the SG is to accept the proposals made by the Project team, to monitor Project's activities and to evaluate the results. The members of SG will be the head’s of all Partner organisations and representatives of associates and main stakeholders (in total ca 20 permanent members, additional experts-specialists can be invited, depending on the nature of agenda items). Annual meetings for the steering group are foreseen. Furthermore, the Project Manager will act as the link between the project consortium and the Contracting Authority, ensuring that the Contracting Authority is informed about project progress and that the Project Officer is consulted if problems occur. In particular, the PM will attend a kick-off meeting with the Contracting Authority representatives. The PM will monitor the project to identify potential conflicts related to activities and the partners’ contractual obligations in order to swiftly address them. Conflicts will be dealt with as they arise. To facilitate smooth implementation of the project, the project management toolset will be developed in the beginning of the project, the main goal for that is to prepare the project management team with easy-to- understand and easy-to-follow instructions for project implementation. A project management and progress monitoring system will be developed for the consortium of beneficiaries, and a documentation is prepared and introduced to the project network. The project management documentation will consist of templates, forms and guidelines that will be based on the LIFE Grant Agreement and its annexes. The toolset is presented in an easy-to-understand format and communicated via internal (recorded) webinars explaining the grant management procedures, so these will be available for all the beneficiaries at any times. The project consortium will analyse and decide whether an open source project progress monitoring system (i.e. OpenProject Teams etc) will be applied or a separate local database is set up internally. No cost is expected to be assigned to purchasing licences for project management software though, all needed toolsets will be prepared and applied internally. Project management guidelines developed under the task will cover different topics agreed within the consortium (e.g. intellectual property issues when combining complementary projects, green procurement guidelines for project purchases, agreements for reducing project carbon footprint etc) and these will be made available as separate subsections under project management wiki/members-only section of the web that is expected to be set up for the beneficiaries. It is expected that there are topics that need to be covered as soon as the project starts and there will be new ones that will be developed as issues arise in the consortium during project implementation. 4.3 Green management Green management 46  LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B The European Commission and several European countries have developed guidance in matters of green procurement, in the form of national GPP criteria. In Estonia local approach apply. Ministry of Environment of Estonia, has developed Estonian Green Procurement principles and these have been in different levels been adopted by all of the Estonian beneficiaries. These principles will be implemented in project procurement principles. Tendering for the project will be organized via the Estonian e-Procurement environment E-Procurement (state-owned software, which is mandatory for projects financed from public or the EU funds) is for finding subcontractors to acquire equipment, services, or works. The system includes GPP evaluation criteria, which will be applied. Additionally, to the implementation of national principles, the green principles of tenders, the technical specifications of the procurement procedures and evaluation templates developed by the EU Horizon 2020 funded project GreenS will be considered as far as possible as well as further advances in green procurements in the targeted field. The GreenS project was designed to focus the attention of public authorities on Green Public Procurement. The project Management Team will where relevant transfer the learning from to LIFE heritageHOME, eg in terms of preparing training materials, indicators, e-tools and procedures of evaluation created by this project. Project will apply GPP for different levels of the project: 1. Criteria related to the ability of the tenderer and requirements to the products and services purchased in the frame of the project. Criteria how the measures foreseen in the project are implemented (choosing the resource efficient alternatives for management works). The Green Procurement rules will be used in case of purchasing new equipment or consumables. During service contracts, there will be specific criteria in the tender documents (as used equipment in the field must be technically correct, methods used during works are considering local environmental conditions, the costs of products and building materials throughout their entire life cycle is considered, etc.). Considering the whole life cycle, it should also enable assessing the ‘rational use of natural resources. 2. Developing the technical renovation solutions (T.3.2-T.3.3) and publishing these in the frame of heritage home renovation atlas (T.6.1). We will develop a framework and via dissemination tools provide instructions to public audiences about how to apply green management or home renovation procurement. To renovation a building, it is possible to include several green contract criteria: energy performance of buildings, electricity from renewable energy sources, low-emission products. Renovation technical specifications will consider environmental impacts throughout the life-cycle (LCA). In terms of Green Management, all state authorities as well as academies engaged to the project have defined the green management objective in some levels. State authorities have assessed the carbon footprint of national digitalization programmes (relevant also for KuM, KLIM), currently a programme is led by Stockholm Environmental Institute Estonia and Ministry of Environment to assess the carbon footprint of Estonian ministries, etc.. Different initiatives like these result by governance changes being adopted to the routines. EKA has approved Environmental Policy for Academy of Arts, which provides a framework for green management in the university. TalTech is the first university in Estonia that has assigned Green Transition vice rector and also has launched various green management initiatives across campus as well as over curricula. 47 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 5. MEMBERS OF THE CONSORTIUM 1- Ministry of Culture Legal name (short name): Ministry of Culture - KuM DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT The Estonian Ministry of Culture (KuM) is responsible for national culture, sport and heritage conservation, it promotes arts, and coordinates the state’s media policy, audiovisual policy, and the implementation of the integration strategy. National cultural policy is based on the constitutional aim of ensuring the preservation of the Estonian nation, language and culture in perpetuity. To achieve this aim, the culture policy needs to find harmony between the preservation and continuation of culture, on the one hand, and the innovativeness and openness of culture, on the other hand. This is achieved by the following tasks of the ministry: • The ministry forms the principles of financing culture and sport, cooperates with the Cultural Endowment of Estonia and other institutions that support culture and sport. • It is responsible for the coordination of the whole heritage conservation field in Estonia. • It gives national awards and grants for culture and sport. • It supports the cultural activities of minorities, kindred nations and expatriate Estonians. • It handles the integration policy and the implementation of the integration strategy in cooperation with other ministries. • It prepares draft legislation in its area of government and checks that drafts are in compliance with the constitution and other legislation. • It supports the cultural activities of minorities, kindred nations and expatriate Estonians. • It handles the integration policy and the implementation of the integration strategy in cooperation with other ministries. • It prepares draft legislation in its area of government and checks that drafts are in compliance with the constitution and other legislation. In LIFE heritageHOME KuM is responsible for overall coordination of the project, as well as: Leading of Work Package 1: Project management and coordination and Work Package 6: Amplifying the effect of best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication Participating to: − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1) − preparing the heritage home renovation service (WP 4, T4.1) − build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2) − fitness check of renovation business models for owners of heritage homes (WP 4, T4.3) KEY STAFF Reesi Sild, policy adviser on cultural heritage protection, MSc Estonian national heritage policy development and implementation with stress on heritage protection and conservation (museums), networking, and cooperation with national and local policy actors to protect Estonian tangible heritage. Viivian Jõemets, research and development policy adviser, PhD Viivian Jõemets is responsible for the ministerial R&D projects and their coordination with ministries, museums, local authorities, and non-governmental sector. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES Implementing the action plan for digitalization of cultural heritage 2018-2023: KuM has carried out a large-scale programme with the aim to digitalize at least 1/3 of the information stored in the museums, archives, and other registries for fast accessibility of information. This has included also the digitalization of various materials concerning built heritage. The programme has been partly financed by the Financial Programme for EU Structural Funds in Estonia 2014-2021. Pilot renovation grant program for heritage buildings titled "Local development and reduction of poverty”. The grant programme was piloted using the funds EAA & Norwegian Grants. The open call 48 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B for applications regarded the restoration of buildings located in heritage conservation areas in Haapsalu, Kuressaare, Lihula, Paide, Parnu, Rakvere, Viljandi, Valga and Võru and giving them a public purpose in line with the needs of the local community. As the grant aimed to revive heritage conservation areas, unused buildings with great impact on the surrounding space will take precedence. A function attracting a large number of new users was also a requirement. Within the pilot grant programme KuM, MKA with the help of State Service Centre handed out ~3 M euros for the restoration of 14 buildings. 2 – Estonian National Heritage Board Legal name (short name): Estonian National Heritage Board - MKA DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT Estonian National Heritage Board operates in the administrative area of the Ministry of Culture. Estonian National Heritage Board is responsible of the preservation and development of the most valuable part of Estonian cultural heritage. The mission of MKA is to organize the work of heritage protection and to conduct national supervision of monuments and heritage conservation areas. Estonian National Heritage Board also implements museum policy and development of this field. The aim is also to maintain the register of cultural monuments and the information system of museums. MKA reviews applications for the export of cultural values and issues certificates of competence. MKA advises the persons who own or live in an architectural monument of in a building located in a heritage conservation area on issues of maintenance, repair, construction, conservation and restoration of a historic building, gives recommendations and instructions and, if necessary, issues maintenance plans. In the field of museums, MKA, coordinates the national collection policy of museums, provides guidelines for the development of museum collection principles, and advises on issues related to museum operations. In LIFE heritageHOME MKA is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 4: Building the partnership for integrated heritage home renovation service Participating to: − contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1) − sensemaking, evaluation, and learning (WP 1, T1.2) − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1) − examination of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.2) − co-creation with owners’ heritage assembly for private owners (WP 2, T2.3) − analysis of existing best and worst practices applied in energy improvement of historic homes (WP 3, T3.1) − development of technical renovation concepts for different historic building envelopes (WP 3, T3.2) − investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings (WP 3, T3.3) − setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service (WP 5, T5.2) − highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions (WP 6, T6.1) − launching integrated renovation service for heritage homes (WP 6, T6.2) − networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Üllar Alev, M, engineer and adviser of Saare county, PhD Expertise lays in technical restauration and renovation solutions of heritage buildings. Prior to work in MKA worked as researcher in TalTech, with main research fields on Renovation and Energy 49 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Performance Improvement of Estonian Wooden Rural Houses. Long practical experiences in consulting renovation and restoration projects for heritage buildings and monuments. Laura Ingerpuu, F, adviser on built heritage/coordinator, MSc Expertise lays in policy and governance of built heritage. Is a PhD candidate in Estonian Academy of Arts, with main research fields on protection of Socialist Architecture. Long practical experiences in policy making and service design of heritage protection areas and monuments. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES Management planning of Estonian heritage conservation areas: Estonian National Heritage Board has commenced a process of compiling new regulations for Estonian heritage conservation areas. There are 11 urban heritage conservation areas and one landscape heritage conservation area in Estonia. The urban heritage conservation areas include mostly historic city and town centres and surrounding environment which cover more than 10 000 buildings, of which about 5000 are private properties. In the framework of drafting the new regulations the buildings of the heritage conservation areas will be divided into categories based on their heritage value. EAA & Norwegian Grants project Historic Town Centres Revitalized Through Heritage-Based Local Development. The project supported development of new and sustainable uses of cultural heritage buildings in small towns across Estonia, through capacity-building for municipalities and cultural heritage professionals as well as cooperation with vocational schools, restoration centres, local governments and local communities. The project was mostly targeted towards raising awareness on rejuvenation of built heritage, in the framework of which the urgency of clarifying procedures and developing validated solutions for energy renovation measures became highlighted. Pilot renovation grant program for heritage buildings titled "Local development and reduction of poverty”. The grant programme was piloted using the funds EAA & Norwegian Grants. The open call for applications regarded the restoration of buildings located in heritage conservation areas in Haapsalu, Kuressaare, Lihula, Paide, Parnu, Rakvere, Viljandi, Valga and Voru and giving them a public purpose in line with the needs of the local community. As the grant aimed to revive heritage conservation areas, unused buildings with great impact on the surrounding space will take precedence. A function attracting a large number of new users was also a requirement. Within the pilot grant programme KuM, MKA with the help of State Service Centre handed out ~3 M euros for the restoration of 14 buildings. Support for the preservation of farm architecture. In order to support the preservation of Estonian traditional rural architecture and the uniqueness of the rural landscape, a support for the preservation of farm architecture has been created. To receive support for the farm house, it has to be residential building that is or has been part of a historic farm complex, i.e. a detached house, which has been built before 1940. The building does not have to be listed as and architectural monument. The application round supports activities that restore or replace the roof covering of a farm house and, if necessary, roof structure, using original materials, i.e. materials characteristic to region, building type and construction period. 3 – Ministry of Climate Legal name (short name): Ministry of Climate - KliM DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT The overall objective of the Ministry of Climate (KliM) is to develop a responsible attitude towards nature and preserve a clean and naturally diverse living environment for Estonian people. In that capacity, KliM is the competent authority responsible for developing and implementing policy pertaining to construction and housing, energy, transport, tourism, biodiversity, energy, mineral resources, circular economy, green reform. Hence, KliM is the public body responsible for the full implementation of the Estonian Long- term Renovation Strategy (LTRS) and linking it to the overall Estonian housing, energy, and climate policies. KliM is the coordinator of LIFE IP BUILDEST – Pursuing Estonian national climate ambition through smart and resilient renovation. 50 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B In LIFE heritageHOME KliM is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 5: Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage homeowners Participating to: − contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1) − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1) − examine of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.2) − build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2) − pilot heritage home renovation passports (WP 5, T5.1) − networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Anni Martin, F, head of housing policy, PhD Experienced architect and urban planner. She has served as a head of architetural heritage management National Heritage Board. In KliM acting as a project coordinator for LIFE IP BUILDEST project. Ingrid Aasoja-Zverev, F, analyst of building registry department, MSc Experienced achitect with a demonstrated history of working in the architecture & planning industry. In KliM contributing to digitalisation of built environment services in e-ehitus platvorm (e-construction platform). PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES LIFE IP BUILDEST LIFE20 IPC/EE/000010, “Pursuing Estonian National Climate Ambition through Smart and Resilient Renovation“. The project will raise capacity, increase experiences, and develop the necessary toolset for improving energy performance and reducing carbon emissions of Estonian building stock in the required rate and depth set in LTRS. LIFE IP BUILDEST will also provide a national framework and starter mechanism for carrying out the EU Renovation Wave Initiative on a national level. Sectoral capacity building foreseen in the LIFE IP project will help adoption of the initiative effectively by avoiding negative consequences (possible market failures and negative environmental impacts), establish a national framework for fast adoption of the regulations and financing measures, and improve cross-sectoral mainstreaming of the renovation mechanisms. To achieve this strategic goal, the IP will tackle five sub-targets: Develop, test and demonstrate tools for decarbonising Estonian existing building stock; Establish climate risk evaluation criteria for deep renovation; Apply resource efficiency and circularity principles to renovation; Advance digital technologies for renovation; Increase capacity of relevant target groups and increase demand for renovation. https://kliimaministeerium.ee/en/research-and-development-program-life-ip-buildest-starter-building- renovation-marathon E-Ehitus development programme, Estonian LTRS pinpoints the need to develop various digital tools for improving data access both for the building owners and public policymakers. Due to this, as well as the long-term strategy of the construction sector “Long view to Construction”, significant funds from national programme for Recovery and Resilience Funds have been allocated for reinventing the national building registry. A 3D digital twin for the buildings covering the whole country is being developed, as well as a end-user oriented interface for guidance on construction matters (ehitusgiid). The digital building logbook and various components of it are developed on an ongoing basis. DG Reform TSI project, Support to renovation wave, technical support for optimal M&V, reporting and calculation system including methodologies of energy efficiency measures, legal framework Operating grants and subsidies programme for deep renovation of appartment buildings and detached houses via Estonian Business and Innovation Agency (KredEx). KredEx is a foundation set up and partly financed by the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications in 2001 with the aim of providing financial solutions based on the best practices in the world. See further information on https://kredex.ee/en/we-improve-living-conditions/overview. These incentives are: • KredEx renovation grants for renovation of apartment buildings • KredEx reconstruction grant for small residences • KredEx Housing Loan Guarantee; 51 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B • KredEx Industrial renovation grant; • KredEx support for home renovation for large families; 4 – Tallinn University of Technology Legal name (short name): Tallinn University of Technology - TalTech DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT Tallinn University of Technology (TalTech) is the only university of technology in Estonia and the flagship of Estonian engineering and technology education. The University’s approximately 70,000 alumni have shaped the economic landscape of present-day Estonia. TalTech is to become one of the leading technological universities in the Baltic Sea region. TalTech is a university, which by relying on academic competencies and professional management, responds actively to the needs of the rapidly developing society and is involved in tackling the challenges of the digital era. Cooperation between the university, enterprises and the public sector contributes significantly to knowledge and welfare in the society. TalTech has close to 11 000 students (from 94 different countries) and close to 2000 employees (from 50 different countries). The mission of TalTech is to be a promoter of science, technology and innovation and a leading provider of engineering and economic education in Estonia. TalTech has the high-level competence of testing laboratories by which we can help to solve different development problems and generate new ideas. In addition, we have a very good cooperation with other Estonian and world leading universities and research institutions. TalTech campus is home to more than 200 high-tech companies. The research infrastructure can be further applied in the research and development of enterprises and the public sector and in designing innovative solutions. The university has substantially upgraded its research infrastructure in recent years, and TalTech’s infrastructure is in excellent state. A total of 70 laboratories are in the TalTech departments. The project partner is Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture and the FinEst Twins - FinEst Centre for Smart Cities. The Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture has contributed to the development of Estonian energy performance calculation framework and methodology, to the preparation of technical definitions and system boundaries requirements of energy performance of buildings. The group has long-term experience in scientific and applied research in building physics, renovation of buildings, energy performance, renovation, BIM, and indoor climate related areas. The team is active in international committees, collaborations, task forces (IEA Annex 41, 55, 61, 68, CIB W40 Heat and Moisture Transfer in Buildings, W080 Prediction of Service Life of Building Materials and Components, INTERREG IV A (HELTH, SMC), H2020 (MoreConnect, NetUbiep, NERO, DRIVE0, oPEN Lab, EBENTO) and standardisation such as development of EPBD 1st and 2nd generation standards (TC 371, TC 156 and TC 228), Tempus/Erasmus+ (Mapree, CIMCEB), BUILD UP Skills EE, Buildest II. The FinEst Twins - FinEst Centre for Smart Cities aims to build a smart-city Center of Excellence (CoE) based in Estonia capable of mobilising all leading actors and stakeholders in Estonia and establish a solid long-term partnership with their Helsinki region counterparts, capitalising on the macro region’s scientific knowledge, innovativeness and entrepreneurship. Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture and FINEST Twins collaborate in working out renovation strategy tool – RESTO. In LIFE heritageHOME TalTech is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 3: Standardization of solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings. Participating to: − contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1) − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.2) − examine of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions − analysis of existing best practices (WP 3, T3.1) 52 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B − development of single technical renovation measures for different historic building envelopes and service systems; drawing out 1D building envelope solutions (WP 3, T3.2) − investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings (WP 3, T3.3) − build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2) − pilot heritage home renovation passports (WP 5, T5.1) − networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP 6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Targo Kalamees, M, professor of building physics, PhD at TalTech since 2009. Research fields: building envelope structures; renovation of buildings; hygrothermal behaviour of buildings structures (computer simulations, laboratory experiments, field studies); boundary conditions for hygrothermal simulations and experiments; building energy consumption and healthy building design; indoor climate and indoor air quality of residential-, office-, and historic buildings. He has published 145 articles in scientific peer rewired journals with 2451 citations and his h-index is 27 according to Scopus. In addition, he has several contributions to international scientific conferences. Endrik Arumägi (M), PhD, Senior researcher in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2009. Senior researcher at TTÜ. Research fields: energy performance of buildings, building service systems, building physics. Teaching: building physics, building service systems, building energy performance. He has published 23 articles in scientific peer rewired journals with 334citations and his h-index is 9 according to Scopus. In addition, he has several contributions to international scientific conferences. Ergo Pikas, (M), PhD, Professor of Digital Construction in the Building Lifecycle Research Group since 2012 At TalTech since 2012. Ergo defended his joint doctoral dissertation in 2019 on engineering design and design management topics at the Aalto University in Finland and the Tallinn University of Technology in Estonia. Ergo has several years of industrial experience working from different construction organizations and roles. He has nine years of research experience and has worked in various academic positions in several countries, including Israel, Estonia, Finland, Denmark, USA, and UK. He has published 41 articles in scientific peer rewired journals with 859 citations and his h-index is 14 according to Scopus. In addition, he has several contributions to international scientific conferences. Kadri-Ann Kertsmik (F), PhD canditate, Researcher in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2021. Research experience in field of architecture and life cycle assessment and sustainability, low carbon renovation solutions. Teaching and training: architecture, LCA. Anti Hamburg (M), PhD, Researcher/lecturer in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2018. Research experience in field of building service systems, energy performance, renovation, Indoor climate. Teaching: HVAC systems, +energy buildings, renovation. He has published 8 articles in scientific peer rewired (ISI) and his h-index is 5 according to Scopus. In additions, he has several contributions to local and international scientific conferences and seminars. Siim Lomp MSc, Researcher, Civil engineer in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2022. Research fields: building survey, renovation solutions, building physics, load bearing structures. Anni Oviir, (F), MSc, Researcher, Building LCA Expert Research fields: EPD creation or verification, building product carbon footprint assessment, LCA & LCC for green building certifications, building carbon foot-printing, Education & training programs. Elisa Iliste (F), MSc, Researcher, Research assistant in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2022. 53 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Research fields: building typology. Einari Kisel (M), PhD, Head of Partnerships and Strategy in Smart City Center of Excellence at TalTech. Experienced Manager with a demonstrated history of working in the electricity sector, leading energy policy-making in the government and managing international networks. Skilled in Business Planning, Energy Policy and International Relations. Strong professional with a PhD degree (focused in Energy Policy) in addition to MBA and MTech degrees from TalTech. In parallel he is also a Member of Supervisory Boards of Eesti Energia AS, Estonian state-owned energy utility, and of Elektrilevi OÜ, distribution system operator owned by Eesti Energia AS. From 2002 until 2012 he was engaged in the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications of Estonia firstly as the Director of Energy Department and since 2008 as the Undersecretary of State for Energy. In these duties he was responsible for all energy policy affairs of the state: he led number of state committees and was engaged in Supervisory Boards of several state-owned companies and institutions. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES LIFE IP BUILDEST LIFE20 IPC/EE/000010, “Pursuing Estonian National Climate Ambition through Smart and Resilient Renovation“. The project will raise capacity, increase experiences, and develop the necessary toolset for improving energy performance and reducing carbon emissions of Estonian building stock in the required rate and depth set in LTRS. LIFE IP BUILDEST will also provide a national framework and starter mechanism for carrying out the EU Renovation Wave Initiative on a national level. Sectoral capacity building foreseen in the LIFE IP project will help adoption of the initiative effectively by avoiding negative consequences (possible market failures and negative environmental impacts), establish a national framework for fast adoption of the regulations and financing measures, and improve cross-sectoral mainstreaming of the renovation mechanisms. To achieve this strategic goal, the IP will tackle five sub-targets: Develop, test and demonstrate tools for decarbonising Estonian existing building stock; Establish climate risk evaluation criteria for deep renovation; Apply resource efficiency and circularity principles to renovation; Advance digital technologies for renovation; Increase capacity of relevant target groups and increase demand for renovation. oPEN LAB - Open innovation living labs for Positive Energy Neighbourhoods. The aim of the oPEN Lab is to identify replicable, commercially viable solution packages enabling the achievement of positive energy neighbourhoods within existing urban contexts that are seamlessly integrated into the local energy system as an active micro-energy hub, and to test these technologies and package as an integrated solution at neighbourhood scale. Focus is on demonstrating innovations in an integrated approach combining sustainable design tailored to the local context, seamless industrial renovation workflows, renewable energy generation combined with energy storage systems, urban service facilities and smart operation, life cycle thinking and circularity, and this across the whole value chain, targeting the whole life cycle of the building and its neighbourhood, in view of scaling up and wide replication. FINEST TWINS: Establishment of Smart City Center of Excellence". The FINEST Twins project will build a multidisciplinary smart-city Center of Excellence that will match the leading smart city research centres globally and focus on all five key domains of clean and sustainable smart city development: mobility, energy and built environment glued together by governance and urban analytics & data management (research streams). The FINEST Twins will have a globally unique focus on developing user-driven clean and sustainable smart city solutions that are “cross-border-by-default” in the context of emerging twin city between Tallinn and Helsinki. DRVE0 - Driving decarbonization of the EU building stock by enhancing a consumer centred and locally based circular renovation process. DRIVE0 concept is based on developing circular deep renovation solutions and supporting consumer cantered business models for 7 specific study and demonstration cases as real environments. The selected cases are already in preparation and each of these cases have a specific local driver for the need of a holistic and circular deep renovation, which is translated in ‘case specific challenges and tasks’ and case specific key performance indicators. ZEBE - Zero energy and resource efficient smart buildings and districts. ZEBE Center of Excellence in Research (CER) contributes to energy and resource efficiency improvement in buildings and districts. ZEBE CER proposal contributes to Estonian Smart Specialization growth area of More Efficient Use of Resources, Smart and more efficient construction of buildings. On European level ZEBE CER proposal contributes to European objective of 20% primary energy savings in 2020 that is one of the five headline 54 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B targets of the Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Research is focused to zero energy, embodied energy and recourse efficiency, and renewable energy topics. 5 – Estonian Academy of Arts Legal name (short name): Estonian Academy of Arts - EKA DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT Estonian Academy of Arts is the only public university in Estonia providing higher education in fine arts, design, architecture, media, visual studies, art history, and conservation. In LIFE heritageHOME EKA is responsible for: - Leading of WP2: Mapping the Customer Journey of the heritage home energy renovations Participating to: - contractual management and coordination the project (WP1, T1.1) - analysis of existing best practices (WP3, T3.1) - development of technical renovation concepts for different historic building envelopes (WP3, T3.2) - investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings, drawing out 2D architectural solutions for building envelope connections and visualizing building’s architectural outlook (WP3, T3.3) - preparing the heritage home renovation service (WP4, T4.1) - building partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP4, T4.2) - setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service (WP5, T5.2) - networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Kateriin Ambrozevits, F, conservator of architecture and project coordinator, MA Research fields: Preservation and restoration of art works; Coordinates and participates in implementation of LIFE IP BUILDEST project in EKA. Anneli Randla, F, Head of Department, Associate Professor, Senior Researcher in Cultural Heritage and Conservation, PhD Research fields: Preservation and restoration of art works; Art history. Member of various international expert panels for heritage experts, like ICOMOS CIF, Member of EAHN (European Architectural History Network), Council member of the Institute of Theology of the Estonian Evangelical Lutheran Church, Member of ICOMOS-Estonia, Member of the Estonian Society of Art Historians and Curators etc. Maris Mändel, F, conservator of architecture, Senior Researcher, PhD Research fields: Estonian 20th Century Construction History; Architectural Conservation. Has broad practical experience from consulting renovation/restauration projects for heritage buildings, is one of the main lecturers of the advanced training curricula for heritage experts in EKA. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES LIFE IP BUILDEST LIFE20 IPC/EE/000010, “Pursuing Estonian National Climate Ambition through Smart and Resilient Renovation“. The project will raise capacity, increase experiences, and develop the necessary toolset for improving energy performance and reducing carbon emissions of Estonian building stock in the required rate and depth set in LTRS. LIFE IP BUILDEST will also provide a national framework and starter mechanism for carrying out the EU Renovation Wave Initiative on a national 55 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B level. Sectoral capacity building foreseen in the LIFE IP project will help adoption of the initiative effectively by avoiding negative consequences (possible market failures and negative environmental impacts), establish a national framework for fast adoption of the regulations and financing measures, and improve cross-sectoral mainstreaming of the renovation mechanisms. To achieve this strategic goal, the IP will tackle five sub-targets: Develop, test and demonstrate tools for decarbonising Estonian existing building stock; Establish climate risk evaluation criteria for deep renovation; Apply resource efficiency and circularity principles to renovation; Advance digital technologies for renovation; Increase capacity of relevant target groups and increase demand for renovation. Advanced training curricula for heritage and restoration experts. EKA for architects, engineers, public officials. Organized since 1995-… https://www.artun.ee/erialad/muinsuskaitse-ja- konserveerimine/taiendkoolitus/; LIFE Nature WOODMEADOWLIFE, LIFE20 NAT/EE/000074, The Estonian-Latvian joint LIFE project "Restoring and promoting a long-term sustainable management of Fennoscandian wooded meadows in Estonia and Latvia" focuses on the restoration of wooded meadows in Estonia and Latvia, creation of sustainable solutions for maintenance and on raising public awareness of the natural and cultural heritage of wooded meadows and their protection and management. Within this EKA is responsible for investigating the interactions of built and natural heritage in seminatural communities and preparing the UNESCO designation process for including the boreal wooded meadows into world natural heritage list (currently in the tentative list). Various research projects on Estonian built heritage (financed by Estonian Ministry of Culture, The State Chancellery, Social FUnd etc), like: • Upgrading the web portal for manorhouses, ongoing • The studies of the Estonian 20th-century built environment, 01.09.2015–01.09.2020 • Management of state-owned buildings of cultural heritage value. Analysis of existing situation and development of operating principles, 19.12.2014–15.12.2015 • "Protection of privately owned cutural heritage", 17.10.2013–31.03.2014 • The analysis and mapping of the 20th century valuable architecture in Estonia, 01.01.2010– 05.11.2012 6 – ICOMOS Estonia Legal name (short name): ICOMOS Estonia - ICOMOS DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT International Council of Monuments and Sites concentrates on standards of heritage conservation and enhancement. ICOMOS’s work on climate change and culture heritage includes: • Supporting the development of tools to assess vulnerability to and impacts of climate change on archaeological resources, collections and objects, historic buildings & structures, cultural landscapes, associated & traditional communities and intangible cultural heritage. • Developing new policies and methodologies for the management and conservation of heritage in the face of climate change. • Enhancing the connections between cultural heritage and climate science. • Scaling out cultural heritage-based solutions to climate change mitigation and adaptation and further elaborating the role of arts, culture and heritage in development that is both sustainable and climate-resilient, including strengthening efforts to eradicate poverty and reduce inequalities. • Ensuring consideration of cultural heritage in global climate policy and action as part of the broader global #ClimateHeritage movement. In LIFE heritageHOME ICOMOS is participating to: − contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1) − sensemaking, evaluation, and learning (WP 1, T1.2) − project visibility. Communication and media activities (WP 1, T1.3) − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1) 56 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B − co-creation with owners’ heritage assembly for private owners (WP 2, T2.3) − analysis of existing best and worst practices applied in energy improvement of historic homes (WP 3, T3.1) − highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions (WP 6, T6.1) − networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Ave Paulus, F, ICOMOS Estonia, president, coordinator, MSc PhD candidate in University of Tartu, with the research focus on The Discourse of the Rights-Based Approach in Cultural Heritage Protection. Member of UNESCO panel of experts on Climate change and World Heritage Committee. ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues, ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Water and Heritage etc. Broad experiences in heritage protection in Estonian national parks [LINK to CV] Elo Lutsepp, F, ICOMOS Estonia, member of the board, MSc PhD candidate in University of Tartu, with the research focus on Establishment of new settlements as one possible solution to the social problems of the Republic of Estonia in the 1930s. Member of ICOMOS CIAV. Broad experiences in coordinating the training programme for homeowners via the network of Rural Architecture Centre of Estonian Open Air Museum. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES ICOMOS Estonia has been involved in developing following relevant policy recommendations, like: 1. ICOMOS Heritage, Climate Justice and Equity Guidance (2022). Link 2. Corporate authors (2022). European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, Strengthening cultural heritage resilience for climate change : where the European Green Deal meets cultural heritage. Publications Office of the European Union. DOI: 10.2766/44688. 3. European Cultural Heritage Green Paper “Putting Europe’s shared heritage at the heart of the European Green Deal”. Europa Nostra, ICOMOS 4. ICOMOS Declaration on Cultural Heritage and the Climate Emergency 2021. Available in: English, French. 5. ICOMOS Climate Change Working Group Contribution UN Special Report on Cultural Rights and Climate Change 2020 Available in: English. 6. Future of our Pasts: Engaging Cultural Heritage in Climate Action 2019 Available in: English, French. 7. UNESCO World Heritage Impact Assessment Guidance 2022, LINK 8. European Quality Principles for EU-funded Interventions with potential impact upon Cultural Heritage - Revised edition November 2020. Manual. ICOMOS International, Paris, 72p. ISBN 978-2-918086-36-9. 9. UNESCO Decision 44 COM 7C concerning Climate Change and World Heritage, forthcoming 2023 ICOMOS Estonia has participated as co-organiser of various events engaging the science- based heritage community on the matter of climate proofing heritage homes: • First Online ICOMOS Scientific Symposium 2021: Living Heritage and Climate Change • GA General Assembly and Scientific Symposium 2023 – co-chair of the theme “Heritage for Climate” • ICOMOS Nordic-Baltic workshop and conferences “Coastal Communities, Heritage and Climate” 2022 • ICOMOS Rights-Based Approaches Heritage Thursdays dedicated to people-centred approaches, incl “Coastal Heritage and Climate Change” 2021. 57 Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Detailed Budget Table LIFE heritageHOME Staff effort allocation Participant Number/Short Name WP1 WP2 WP3 WP4 WP5 WP6 Total 1. KuM 23.4 5.8 0 7.2 0 10.8 47.2 2. MKA 3.6 4.8 9 18 2.4 3.6 41.4 3. KliM 2 2.4 0 3.6 18 1.8 27.8 4. TalTech 2 5 28.8 2.5 11.6 0.5 50.4 5. EKA 2 18.2 16.5 7.2 1.2 0.5 45.6 6. ICOMOS 3 0 0 0 0 7 10 Total person-months 36 36.2 54.3 38.5 33.2 24.2 222.4 Personnel costs A1. Employees Subtotal (or equivalent); A.4 SME owners personnel costs A.5 Volunteers A2. Natural and natural without Number of person (Unit costs) Average monthly persons under person (sole volunteers Total Personnel Country months (staff effort must be the salary rate direct contract trader) (A1+A2+A3+A4) - costs per beneficiary) same as in part and A3. beneficiaries must be the A section 3 Seconded (Unit costs in €) same as in part A Persons (costs) section 3 1. KuM EE 47.20 3,612.61 € 170,515.00 € 0€ 170,515.00 € 0€ 170,515.00 € 2. MKA EE 41.40 3,450.00 € 142,830.00 € 0€ 142,830.00 € 0€ 142,830.00 € 3. KliM EE 27.80 4,128.00 € 114,758.40 € 0€ 114,758.40 € 0€ 114,758.40 € 4. TalTech EE 50.40 4,638.65 € 233,787.80 € 0€ 233,787.80 € 0€ 233,787.80 € 5. EKA EE 45.60 3,397.82 € 154,940.40 € 0€ 154,940.40 € 0€ 154,940.40 € 6. ICOMOS EE 10.00 2,943.60 € 29,436.00 € 0€ 29,436.00 € 0€ 29,436.00 € Total 0 846,268 € 0€ 846,268 € 0€ 846,268 € Subcontracting Justification Participant Number/Short Name Subcontract Description Cost (€) WP (Why is subcontracting necessary?) Professional service design facilitation is needed as top-up for the Facilitation of Service and Interaction Design for the 1. KuM 30,000 € 4 service content provided by the consortium and inputs provided heritage home renovation service (T4.1) by the end-users. The facilitator is expected to support the process with competences of Design Thinking (double diamond framework) and assist the consortium in improving the end-user oriented service by the novel digital one-stop-shop interface The project will analyse the fitness of business model and Financial expertise for the business models (100 days x 2. MKA 25,000 € 4 financial incentives. Consortium can analyse the policy feasiblity, 250 eur) (T4.3) however the fitness to the market conditions needs to be analysed by professional finance experts.  Full development of Digital Renovation Passport is the responsibility of Ministry of Climate (KliM). However, to secure a system with adequate up-to-date data presented for the homeowners, data inputs from heritage authorities need to be Setup of the front-end/back-end from MKA web for the corrected and back-end solutions need to be established to allow 2. MKA 50,000 € 5 adequate interlinkages with legacy systems. Professional web digital Integrated Renovation Service interface (T5.2) interface development is not within the competences of the consortium, which is due the front-end interface for the digital one stop shop is subcontracted. The Interface will allow integration of MKM digital solutions (ehitusgiid, EHR, renovation passport etc) with the information in heritage registry as well as provide front end for the official webpage in MKA allowing visitors to access the digital integrated service also from there. Publishing cost for energy renovation atlas (editing, A publishing team (~3 experts: editor, designers, project language proofing, design and infographics - 40 000 eur). manager) is engaged for ~20 days with an average daily fee of Production cost of demo solution videos (10 x 6000 eur). 100,000 € 250 eur), publishing rights of ~50 photos with average fee of 200 2. MKA 6 (T6.1) eur, printing cost of 15000 eur; Production cost of demo solution videos (10 x 6000 eur). Development of the web interface for technical guidance for Professional web interface development is not within the heritage homes under Ehitusgiid. The digital technical competences of the consortiumc, which is why the development guidance in the form of web interface is planned as smart team needs to be outsourced. KliM is already developing a digital renovation passport, assisting homeowners in planning, renovation passports for detached houses (and small apartment designing and implementing renovations. (T5.2) buildings) with external complementary funds. heritageHOME will integrate the specifics of heritage buildings into the generic tool. Regarding the cost estimation the experience of KliM IT developments for similar tools have been that an adequate 3. KliM 53,529 € 5 development team can be outsourced with an average cost of 10 000 eur/per month. The specifics of heritage to be integrated into the generic tool are estimated to an effort of 5 months. The exact terms of reference for the subcontracted service it to be developed based on the service design process in WP4 and piloted renovation passports developed in WP5. Heritage assembly coordination: facilitation service for the Professional facilitation and coordination of engagement 5. EKA 30,000 € 2 citizen assembly (T2.3) of heritage owners via minipublics format is not within the competences of the consortium. Total estimated costs 288,529 € If subcontracting for the entire project goes beyond 30% of the total eligible costs, give N/A specific reasons. Other direct costs 1 - KuM Cost (€) Justification National travel: Local travel to working meeting - 1 person/1 day/return trip/EUR 60 eur (car fuel reimbursement, EUR 0,3 eur / km x Travel & subsistence 1,800 € 200 km), 30 trips International travel of project staff and invited experts - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, Travel & subsistence 15,000 € accommodation EUR 400 /2 days/1 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 15 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € N/A International thematic experts heritage & energy renovations (~3 experts, 1-2 day assignments related to project events). International Other goods, works and services 3,000 € experts are engaged as speakers at the events and consulting solutions developed for Estonia (related to WP2)  Logos and stylebook for web (4000 eur). Media cost (printed media, advertisments, mediamonitoring - 10 000 eur). Legacy report Other goods, works and services 39,000 € publishing cost (editing, language proofing, design and infographics - 25 000 eur) Seminars (room rent EUR 1000/1 day meeting/ 30 persons, catering coffee breaks EUR 600/1 day meeting/ 30 persons, equipment Other goods, works and services 5,400 € rent EUR 200/1 day meeting, in total EUR 1800/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 1800 x 3 meetings Coordination & steering panel meetings (room rent EUR 100/1 day meeting/ 10 persons, catering coffee breaks EUR 150/1 day Other goods, works and services 4,500 € meeting/ 20 persons, equipment rent EUR 50/1 day meeting, in total EUR 300/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 300 x 15 meetings Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 68,700 € 2 - MKA Cost (€) Justification National travel: Local travel to working meeting - 1 person/1 day/return trip/EUR 60 eur (car fuel reimbursement, EUR 0,3 eur / km x Travel & subsistence 7,800 € 200 km), 130 Trips International travel of project staff and invited experts - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, Travel & subsistence 6,000 € accommodation EUR 400 /2 days/1 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 6 trips Equipment (incl. Infrastructure) - € N/A External consultancies engaged to the training events (~10 experts, 4 days, a' 250 eur): The training programme to be piloted for the Other goods, works and services 10,000 € enablers of the renovation service will need to include competences not covered by consortium. Meeting costs for training programme for heritage officials: (room rent EUR 300/3 day programme/ 30 persons, 50 eur / night - 15 Other goods, works and services 3,600 € people, 2 nights - 1500 eur, catering 20 eur/ day per person - 30 persons, in total EUR 3600/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 3600 Meeting costs for training programme for energy autiters: (room rent EUR 300/1 day meeting/ 30 persons, catering coffee breaks EUR Other goods, works and services 6,000 € 200/1 day meeting/ 30 persons, in total EUR 500/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 500 x 12 meetings Other goods, works and services 7,500 € Service testing will cover various direct costs related to the testing period in which the test users are engaged (oranizing meetings, study trips, logistics, etc). 33,000 € Service launch campaing (11 events, a' 3000 eur). The specifics of the service launch campaign is to be determined during the project, various events in different regions of Estonia will be held to introduce the service and its components. 1-2 events will be held indoors as Other goods, works and services a introduction seminar. The other events are conducted in the form of a tour, encompassing various types of buildings that face the challenge of achieving energy efficiency, such as the main buildings of valuable estates with exquisite interiors, simpler estate utility buildings, rural architecture, heritage area apartment buildings, etc. During the tour, different options and already implemented solutions are introduced. Other goods, works and services 16,000 € Training materials (digital and physical training materials, models and devices, 2 sets a' 8000 eur). energy savings audit for the test buildings (T5.1). For the buildings participating in the testing, an energy audit is compiled, taking into account the constraints arising from the value of the buildings, and proposing suitable energy efficiency packages accordingly. The Other goods, works and services 22,500 € energy audit is part of the essential preliminary data that need to be determined for the buildings involved in the project, this is also relevant among buildings that have already undregone a renovation to evaluate the outcome compared to the result they were aiming to achieve (15 buildings, a' 1500 eur) Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 112,400 € 3 - KliM Cost (€) Justification International travel - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, accommodation EUR 400 /2 days/1 Travel & subsistence 6,000 € person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 6 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € N/A Other goods, works and services - € N/A Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 6,000 € 4 - TalTech Cost (€) Justification National travel: Local travel to working meeting - 1 person/1 day/return trip/EUR 60 eur (car fuel reimbursement, EUR 0,3 eur / km x Travel & subsistence 4,200 € 220 km) 70 trips International travel to working meeting - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, accommodation Travel & subsistence 6,000 € EUR 400 /2 days/1 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 6 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € N/A Other goods, works and services 5,000 € Publishing fees (1-2 articles), participation fees for thematic conferences and events (1-2 events). Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 15,200 € 5 - EKA Cost (€) Justification National travel: Local travel to working meeting - 1 person/1 day/return trip/EUR 60 eur (car fuel reimbursement, EUR 0,3 eur / km x Travel & subsistence 6,000 € 200 km) 100 Trips International travel to working meeting - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, accommodation Travel & subsistence 6,000 € EUR 400 /2 days/1 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 6 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € N/A Other goods, works and services 5,000 € Publishing fees (1-2 articles), participation fees for thematic conferences and events (1-2 events). Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 17,000 € 6 - ICOMOS Cost (€) Justification International travel to working meeting - 2 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 2000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 2 person, accommodation Travel & subsistence 18,000 € EUR 400 /2 days/2 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 2 person) x 9 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € Other goods, works and services 5,056 € Media cost (printed publications to introduce the project at international events)  EU/Nordic seminar: (room rent EUR 1500/2 day meeting/ 30 persons, facilitation 1500 EUR, catering and coffee breaks EUR 2000/2 Other goods, works and services 20,000 € day meeting/ 30 persons, translation service 1000, equipment rent 1000, broadcasting and dissemination material 2000 eur, transport 1000 eur in total EUR 10000/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 10000 x 2 meetings Financial support to third parties - € Land purchase - € Total 43,056 € Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 EUROPEAN CLIMATE, INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT EXECUTIVE AGENCY (CINEA) CINEA.D – Natural resources, climate, sustainable blue economy and clean energy D.1 – LIFE Energy + LIFE Climate GRANT AGREEMENT Project 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME PREAMBLE This Agreement (‘the Agreement’) is between the following parties: on the one part, the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and on the other part, 1. ‘the coordinator’: KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM), PIC 994060075, established in SUUR-KARJA TN 23, TALLINN 15076, Estonia, and the following other beneficiaries, if they sign their ‘accession form’ (see Annex 3 and Article 40): 2. MUINSUSKAITSEAMET (MKA), PIC 951666710, established in PIKK 2 HARJU COUNTY, TALLINN 10123, Estonia, 3. KLIIMAMINISTEERIUM (KLIM), PIC 941609750, established in SUUR-AMEERIKA 1, TALLINN 10122, Estonia, 4. TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL (TalTech), PIC 999842536, established in EHITAJATE TEE 5, TALLINN 19086, Estonia, 5. EESTI KUNSTIAKADEEMIA (EKA), PIC 955368327, established in POHJA PST 7, TALLINN 10412, Estonia, 6. MITTETULUNDUSUHING EESTI ICOMOS (ICOMOS), PIC 884437465, established in PIKK TN 46, TALLINN 10133, Estonia, Unless otherwise specified, references to ‘beneficiary’ or ‘beneficiaries’ include the coordinator and affiliated entities (if any). If only one beneficiary signs the grant agreement (‘mono-beneficiary grant’), all provisions referring 1 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 to the ‘coordinator’ or the ‘beneficiaries’ will be considered — mutatis mutandis — as referring to the beneficiary. The parties referred to above have agreed to enter into the Agreement. By signing the Agreement and the accession forms, the beneficiaries accept the grant and agree to implement the action under their own responsibility and in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. The Agreement is composed of: Preamble Terms and Conditions (including Data Sheet) Annex 1 Description of the action1 Annex 2 Estimated budget for the action Annex 2a Additional information on unit costs and contributions (if applicable) Annex 3 Accession forms (if applicable)2 Annex 3a Declaration on joint and several liability of affiliated entities (if applicable)3 Annex 4 Model for the financial statements Annex 5 Specific rules (if applicable) 1 Template published on Portal Reference Documents. 2 Template published on Portal Reference Documents. 3 Template published on Portal Reference Documents. 2 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 TERMS AND CONDITIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS GRANT AGREEMENT.................................................................................................................................................... 1 PREAMBLE........................................................................................................................................................................1 TERMS AND CONDITIONS...........................................................................................................................................3 DATASHEET...................................................................................................................................................................... 8 CHAPTER 1 GENERAL..............................................................................................................................................13 ARTICLE 1 — SUBJECT OF THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................... 13 ARTICLE 2 — DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................13 CHAPTER 2 ACTION................................................................................................................................................. 14 ARTICLE 3 — ACTION................................................................................................................................. 14 ARTICLE 4 — DURATION AND STARTING DATE...................................................................................14 CHAPTER 3 GRANT...................................................................................................................................................14 ARTICLE 5 — GRANT...................................................................................................................................14 5.1 Form of grant......................................................................................................................................14 5.2 Maximum grant amount..................................................................................................................... 15 5.3 Funding rate........................................................................................................................................15 5.4 Estimated budget, budget categories and forms of funding.............................................................. 15 5.5 Budget flexibility................................................................................................................................15 ARTICLE 6 — ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE COSTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS......................................16 6.1 General eligibility conditions............................................................................................................. 16 6.2 Specific eligibility conditions for each budget category................................................................... 17 6.3 Ineligible costs and contributions...................................................................................................... 22 6.4 Consequences of non-compliance...................................................................................................... 23 CHAPTER 4 GRANT IMPLEMENTATION............................................................................................................ 23 SECTION 1 CONSORTIUM: BENEFICIARIES, AFFILIATED ENTITIES AND OTHER PARTICIPANTS........................................................................................................................................ 23 ARTICLE 7 — BENEFICIARIES................................................................................................................... 23 ARTICLE 8 — AFFILIATED ENTITIES....................................................................................................... 25 ARTICLE 9 — OTHER PARTICIPANTS INVOLVED IN THE ACTION................................................... 26 9.1 Associated partners.............................................................................................................................26 9.2 Third parties giving in-kind contributions to the action.................................................................... 26 9.3 Subcontractors.....................................................................................................................................26 3 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 9.4 Recipients of financial support to third parties..................................................................................26 ARTICLE 10 — PARTICIPANTS WITH SPECIAL STATUS....................................................................... 26 10.1 Non-EU participants......................................................................................................................... 26 10.2 Participants which are international organisations...........................................................................27 10.3 Pillar-assessed participants............................................................................................................... 27 SECTION 2 RULES FOR CARRYING OUT THE ACTION...........................................................................30 ARTICLE 11 — PROPER IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ACTION............................................................ 30 11.1 Obligation to properly implement the action................................................................................... 30 11.2 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 30 ARTICLE 12 — CONFLICT OF INTERESTS.............................................................................................. 30 12.1 Conflict of interests.......................................................................................................................... 30 12.2 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 30 ARTICLE 13 — CONFIDENTIALITY AND SECURITY............................................................................ 30 13.1 Sensitive information........................................................................................................................30 13.2 Classified information...................................................................................................................... 31 13.3 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 31 ARTICLE 14 — ETHICS AND VALUES...................................................................................................... 32 14.1 Ethics.................................................................................................................................................32 14.2 Values................................................................................................................................................ 32 14.3 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 32 ARTICLE 15 — DATA PROTECTION.......................................................................................................... 32 15.1 Data processing by the granting authority....................................................................................... 32 15.2 Data processing by the beneficiaries............................................................................................... 32 15.3 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 33 ARTICLE 16 — INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) — BACKGROUND AND RESULTS — ACCESS RIGHTS AND RIGHTS OF USE................................................................................ 33 16.1 Background and access rights to background..................................................................................33 16.2 Ownership of results.........................................................................................................................33 16.3 Rights of use of the granting authority on materials, documents and information received for policy, information, communication, dissemination and publicity purposes...................................34 16.4 Specific rules on IPR, results and background................................................................................ 35 16.5 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 35 ARTICLE 17 — COMMUNICATION, DISSEMINATION AND VISIBILITY............................................ 35 17.1 Communication — Dissemination — Promoting the action........................................................... 35 17.2 Visibility — European flag and funding statement......................................................................... 35 17.3 Quality of information — Disclaimer..............................................................................................36 4 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 17.4 Specific communication, dissemination and visibility rules............................................................36 17.5 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 36 ARTICLE 18 — SPECIFIC RULES FOR CARRYING OUT THE ACTION............................................... 36 18.1 Specific rules for carrying out the action........................................................................................ 36 18.2 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 36 SECTION 3 GRANT ADMINISTRATION......................................................................................................... 37 ARTICLE 19 — GENERAL INFORMATION OBLIGATIONS.................................................................... 37 19.1 Information requests......................................................................................................................... 37 19.2 Participant Register data updates..................................................................................................... 37 19.3 Information about events and circumstances which impact the action............................................37 19.4 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 37 ARTICLE 20 — RECORD-KEEPING............................................................................................................ 38 20.1 Keeping records and supporting documents.................................................................................... 38 20.2 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 39 ARTICLE 21 — REPORTING........................................................................................................................ 39 21.1 Continuous reporting........................................................................................................................ 39 21.2 Periodic reporting: Technical reports and financial statements....................................................... 39 21.3 Currency for financial statements and conversion into euros..........................................................40 21.4 Reporting language...........................................................................................................................40 21.5 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 40 ARTICLE 22 — PAYMENTS AND RECOVERIES — CALCULATION OF AMOUNTS DUE................. 41 22.1 Payments and payment arrangements.............................................................................................. 41 22.2 Recoveries.........................................................................................................................................41 22.3 Amounts due.....................................................................................................................................41 22.4 Enforced recovery.............................................................................................................................46 22.5 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 47 ARTICLE 23 — GUARANTEES....................................................................................................................47 23.1 Prefinancing guarantee..................................................................................................................... 47 23.2 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 48 ARTICLE 24 — CERTIFICATES................................................................................................................... 48 24.1 Operational verification report (OVR).............................................................................................48 24.2 Certificate on the financial statements (CFS).................................................................................. 48 24.3 Certificate on the compliance of usual cost accounting practices (CoMUC).................................. 49 24.4 Systems and process audit (SPA).....................................................................................................49 24.5 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 49 5 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 ARTICLE 25 — CHECKS, REVIEWS, AUDITS AND INVESTIGATIONS — EXTENSION OF FINDINGS..................................................................................................................................... 49 25.1 Granting authority checks, reviews and audits................................................................................ 49 25.2 European Commission checks, reviews and audits in grants of other granting authorities..............51 25.3 Access to records for assessing simplified forms of funding.......................................................... 51 25.4 OLAF, EPPO and ECA audits and investigations........................................................................... 51 25.5 Consequences of checks, reviews, audits and investigations — Extension of results of reviews, audits or investigations.................................................................................................................... 51 25.6 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 53 ARTICLE 26 — IMPACT EVALUATIONS................................................................................................... 53 26.1 Impact evaluation............................................................................................................................. 53 26.2 Consequences of non-compliance.................................................................................................... 53 CHAPTER 5 CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE.................................................................................. 53 SECTION 1 REJECTIONS AND GRANT REDUCTION.................................................................................53 ARTICLE 27 — REJECTION OF COSTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS...........................................................53 27.1 Conditions......................................................................................................................................... 53 27.2 Procedure.......................................................................................................................................... 53 27.3 Effects............................................................................................................................................... 54 ARTICLE 28 — GRANT REDUCTION........................................................................................................ 54 28.1 Conditions......................................................................................................................................... 54 28.2 Procedure.......................................................................................................................................... 54 28.3 Effects............................................................................................................................................... 54 SECTION 2 SUSPENSION AND TERMINATION............................................................................................55 ARTICLE 29 — PAYMENT DEADLINE SUSPENSION............................................................................. 55 29.1 Conditions......................................................................................................................................... 55 29.2 Procedure.......................................................................................................................................... 55 ARTICLE 30 — PAYMENT SUSPENSION...................................................................................................55 30.1 Conditions......................................................................................................................................... 55 30.2 Procedure.......................................................................................................................................... 56 ARTICLE 31 — GRANT AGREEMENT SUSPENSION..............................................................................56 31.1 Consortium-requested GA suspension............................................................................................. 56 31.2 EU-initiated GA suspension.............................................................................................................57 ARTICLE 32 — GRANT AGREEMENT OR BENEFICIARY TERMINATION......................................... 58 32.1 Consortium-requested GA termination............................................................................................ 58 32.2 Consortium-requested beneficiary termination................................................................................ 59 32.3 EU-initiated GA or beneficiary termination.................................................................................... 60 6 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 SECTION 3 OTHER CONSEQUENCES: DAMAGES AND ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS............... 63 ARTICLE 33 — DAMAGES...........................................................................................................................63 33.1 Liability of the granting authority....................................................................................................64 33.2 Liability of the beneficiaries............................................................................................................ 64 ARTICLE 34 — ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS AND OTHER MEASURES....................................... 64 SECTION 4 FORCE MAJEURE.......................................................................................................................... 64 ARTICLE 35 — FORCE MAJEURE.............................................................................................................. 64 CHAPTER 6 FINAL PROVISIONS...........................................................................................................................65 ARTICLE 36 — COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE PARTIES...............................................................65 36.1 Forms and means of communication — Electronic management................................................... 65 36.2 Date of communication.................................................................................................................... 65 36.3 Addresses for communication.......................................................................................................... 65 ARTICLE 37 — INTERPRETATION OF THE AGREEMENT.....................................................................66 ARTICLE 38 — CALCULATION OF PERIODS AND DEADLINES..........................................................66 ARTICLE 39 — AMENDMENTS.................................................................................................................. 66 39.1 Conditions......................................................................................................................................... 66 39.2 Procedure.......................................................................................................................................... 66 ARTICLE 40 — ACCESSION AND ADDITION OF NEW BENEFICIARIES........................................... 67 40.1 Accession of the beneficiaries mentioned in the Preamble............................................................. 67 40.2 Addition of new beneficiaries.......................................................................................................... 67 ARTICLE 41 — TRANSFER OF THE AGREEMENT................................................................................. 67 ARTICLE 42 — ASSIGNMENTS OF CLAIMS FOR PAYMENT AGAINST THE GRANTING AUTHORITY.................................................................................................................................68 ARTICLE 43 — APPLICABLE LAW AND SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES.............................................. 68 43.1 Applicable law..................................................................................................................................68 43.2 Dispute settlement............................................................................................................................ 68 ARTICLE 44 — ENTRY INTO FORCE.........................................................................................................68 7 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 DATA SHEET 1. General data Project summary: Project summary The primary goal of the LIFE heritageHOME project, known as "Integrated Renovation Services for Heritage Homes of Estonia” is to pioneer a comprehensive renovation service that guides owners of historic homes in Estonia through the process of enhancing their properties' energy efficiency. LIFE heritageHOME builds upon the principles and guidance laid out in the 'European Heritage Green Paper’ and engages a range of national policy makers, heritage operators, researchers and representatives of civil society to facilitate the uptake of these principles in Estonian context. The solutions developed and tested will set up a model on how to facilitate energy- efficient renovations within historical building contexts and equip it with necessary toolbox. Moreover, the project places a strong emphasis on involving homeowners in co-creating solutions and collaborating with scientific and professional communities to harness best practices tailored for heritage homes. The ultimate aim is to assemble an integrated set of services that effectively surmounts the obstacles impeding energy-efficient renovations for heritage properties. The project's scope includes the development and customization of necessary solutions for the integrated service, boosting the capabilities of key facilitators who support energy renovations for heritage homes, and creating a user-friendly digital platform. This platform will serve as a client-facing interface, making it effortless for property owners to access essential information and navigate the various steps required throughout their renovation journey. Crucially, the solutions devised within LIFE heritageHOME are not solely applicable to heritage homeowners in Estonia; they are designed to be replicable in other European countries. The project aims to extend its reach to heritage authorities in the Nordic-Baltic region, particularly in cold climates, and engage with the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) National Committees. By doing so, it will introduce both the technical renovation solutions and the service design of a digital one-stop-shop, simplifying the customer journey toward achieving improved energy efficiency in heritage homes. Keywords: – heritage buildings, renovation service, energy performance, digital solutions Project number: 101120831 Project name: Integrated renovation services for heritage homes of Estonia Project acronym: LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME Call: LIFE-2022-CET Topic: LIFE-2022-CET-HOMERENO Type of action: LIFE Project Grants Granting authority: European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency Grant managed through EU Funding & Tenders Portal: Yes (eGrants) Project starting date: fixed date: 1 November 2023 Project end date: 31 October 2026 Project duration: 36 months Consortium agreement: Yes 2. Participants List of participants: Total Max grant N° Role Short name Legal name Ctry PIC eligible costs amount (BEN and AE) 1 COO KUM KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM EE 994060075 288 060.05 273 657.05 2 BEN MKA MUINSUSKAITSEAMET EE 951666710 460 346.10 437 328.80 3 BEN KLIM KLIIMAMINISTEERIUM EE 941609750 186 487.52 177 163.14 8 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Total Max grant N° Role Short name Legal name Ctry PIC eligible costs amount (BEN and AE) 4 BEN TalTech TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL EE 999842536 266 416.95 253 096.10 5 BEN EKA EESTI KUNSTIAKADEEMIA EE 955368327 216 076.23 205 272.42 6 BEN ICOMOS MITTETULUNDUSUHING EESTI ICOMOS EE 884437465 77 566.44 73 688.12 Total 1 494 953.29 1 420 205.63 Coordinator: – KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) 3. Grant Maximum grant amount, total estimated eligible costs and contributions and funding rate: Total eligible costs Funding rate Maximum grant amount Maximum grant amount (BEN and AE) (%) (Annex 2) (award decision) 1 494 953.29 95 1 420 205.63 1 420 205.63 Grant form: Budget-based Grant mode: Action grant Budget categories/activity types: - A. Personnel costs - A.1 Employees, A.2 Natural persons under direct contract, A.3 Seconded persons - A.4 SME owners and natural person beneficiaries - A.5 Volunteers - B. Subcontracting costs - C. Purchase costs - C.1 Travel and subsistence - C.2 Equipment - C.3 Other goods, works and services - D. Other cost categories - D.1 Financial support to third parties - D.2 Land purchase - E. Indirect costs Cost eligibility options: - Standard supplementary payments - Limitation for subcontracting - Travel and subsistence: - Travel: Actual costs - Accommodation: Actual costs - Subsistence: Actual costs - Equipment: depreciation only 9 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - Costs for providing financial support to third parties (actual cost; max amount for each recipient: EUR 0.00) - Indirect cost flat-rate: 7% of the eligible direct costs (categories A-D, except volunteers costs and exempted specific cost categories, if any) - VAT: Yes - Other ineligible costs Budget flexibility: Yes (no flexibility cap) 4. Reporting, payments and recoveries 4.1 Continuous reporting (art 21) Deliverables: see Funding & Tenders Portal Continuous Reporting tool 4.2 Periodic reporting and payments Reporting and payment schedule (art 21, 22): Reporting Payments Deadline Reporting periods Type Deadline Type (time to pay) RP No Month from Month to 30 days from entry into force/ financial guarantee Initial prefinancing (if required) – whichever is the latest 1 1 17 Additional 60 days after end Additional 60 days from prefinancing report of reporting period prefinancing receiving additional prefinancing report/ financial guarantee (if required) – whichever is the latest 2 18 36 Periodic report 60 days after end Final payment 90 days from of reporting period receiving periodic report Prefinancing payments and guarantees: Prefinancing payment Prefinancing guarantee Guarantee Type Amount Division per participant amount Prefinancing 1 (initial) 426 061.69 n/a 1 - KUM n/a 2 - MKA n/a 3 - KLIM n/a 4 - TalTech n/a 5 - EKA n/a 6 - ICOMOS n/a Prefinancing 2 (additional) 710 102.82 n/a 1 - KUM n/a 2 - MKA n/a 3 - KLIM n/a 10 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Prefinancing payment Prefinancing guarantee Guarantee Type Amount Division per participant amount 4 - TalTech n/a 5 - EKA n/a 6 - ICOMOS n/a Reporting and payment modalities (art 21, 22): Mutual Insurance Mechanism (MIM): No Restrictions on distribution of initial prefinancing: The prefinancing may be distributed only if the minimum number of beneficiaries set out in the call condititions (if any) have acceded to the Agreement and only to beneficiaries that have acceded. Interim payment ceiling (if any): 90% of the maximum grant amount No-profit rule: No Late payment interest: ECB + 3.5% Bank account for payments: EE221010220027690221 Conversion into euros: Double conversion Reporting language: Language of the Agreement 4.3 Certificates (art 24): Certificates on the financial statements (CFS): Conditions: Schedule: interim/final payment, if threshold is reached Standard threshold (beneficiary-level): - financial statement: requested EU contribution to costs ≥ EUR 500 000.00 4.4 Recoveries (art 22) First-line liability for recoveries: Beneficiary termination: Beneficiary concerned Final payment: Coordinator After final payment: Beneficiary concerned Joint and several liability for enforced recoveries (in case of non-payment): Limited joint and several liability of other beneficiaries — up to the maximum grant amount of the beneficiary Joint and several liability of affiliated entities — n/a 5. Consequences of non-compliance, applicable law & dispute settlement forum 11 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Applicable law (art 43): Standard applicable law regime: EU law + law of Belgium Dispute settlement forum (art 43): Standard dispute settlement forum: EU beneficiaries: EU General Court + EU Court of Justice (on appeal) Non-EU beneficiaries: Courts of Brussels, Belgium (unless an international agreement provides for the enforceability of EU court judgements) 6. Other Specific rules (Annex 5): Yes Standard time-limits after project end: Confidentiality (for X years after final payment): 5 Record-keeping (for X years after final payment): 5 (or 3 for grants of not more than EUR 60 000) Reviews (up to X years after final payment): 5 (or 3 for grants of not more than EUR 60 000) Audits (up to X years after final payment): 5 (or 3 for grants of not more than EUR 60 000) Extension of findings from other grants to this grant (no later than X years after final payment): 5 (or 3 for grants of not more than EUR 60 000) Impact evaluation (up to X years after final payment): 5 (or 3 for grants of not more than EUR 60 000) 12 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 CHAPTER 1 GENERAL ARTICLE 1 — SUBJECT OF THE AGREEMENT This Agreement sets out the rights and obligations and terms and conditions applicable to the grant awarded for the implementation of the action set out in Chapter 2. ARTICLE 2 — DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this Agreement, the following definitions apply: Actions — The project which is being funded in the context of this Agreement. Grant — The grant awarded in the context of this Agreement. EU grants — Grants awarded by EU institutions, bodies, offices or agencies (including EU executive agencies, EU regulatory agencies, EDA, joint undertakings, etc.). Participants — Entities participating in the action as beneficiaries, affiliated entities, associated partners, third parties giving in-kind contributions, subcontractors or recipients of financial support to third parties. Beneficiaries (BEN) — The signatories of this Agreement (either directly or through an accession form). Affiliated entities (AE) — Entities affiliated to a beneficiary within the meaning of Article 187 of EU Financial Regulation 2018/10464 which participate in the action with similar rights and obligations as the beneficiaries (obligation to implement action tasks and right to charge costs and claim contributions). Associated partners (AP) — Entities which participate in the action, but without the right to charge costs or claim contributions. Purchases — Contracts for goods, works or services needed to carry out the action (e.g. equipment, consumables and supplies) but which are not part of the action tasks (see Annex 1). Subcontracting — Contracts for goods, works or services that are part of the action tasks (see Annex 1). In-kind contributions — In-kind contributions within the meaning of Article 2(36) of EU Financial 4 For the definition, see Article 187 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (‘EU Financial Regulation’) (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1): “affiliated entities [are]: (a) entities that form a sole beneficiary [(i.e. where an entity is formed of several entities that satisfy the criteria for being awarded a grant, including where the entity is specifically established for the purpose of implementing an action to be financed by a grant)]; (b) entities that satisfy the eligibility criteria and that do not fall within one of the situations referred to in Article 136(1) and 141(1) and that have a link with the beneficiary, in particular a legal or capital link, which is neither limited to the action nor established for the sole purpose of its implementation”. 13 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Regulation 2018/1046, i.e. non-financial resources made available free of charge by third parties. Fraud — Fraud within the meaning of Article 3 of EU Directive 2017/13715 and Article 1 of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests, drawn up by the Council Act of 26 July 19956, as well as any other wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain. Irregularities — Any type of breach (regulatory or contractual) which could impact the EU financial interests, including irregularities within the meaning of Article 1(2) of EU Regulation 2988/957. Grave professional misconduct — Any type of unacceptable or improper behaviour in exercising one’s profession, especially by employees, including grave professional misconduct within the meaning of Article 136(1)(c) of EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046. Applicable EU, international and national law — Any legal acts or other (binding or non-binding) rules and guidance in the area concerned. Portal — EU Funding & Tenders Portal; electronic portal and exchange system managed by the European Commission and used by itself and other EU institutions, bodies, offices or agencies for the management of their funding programmes (grants, procurements, prizes, etc.). CHAPTER 2 ACTION ARTICLE 3 — ACTION The grant is awarded for the action 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘action’), as described in Annex 1. ARTICLE 4 — DURATION AND STARTING DATE The duration and the starting date of the action are set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 1). CHAPTER 3 GRANT ARTICLE 5 — GRANT 5.1 Form of grant 5 Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law (OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 29). 6 OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 48. 7 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (OJ L 312, 23.12.1995, p. 1). 14 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 The grant is an action grant8 which takes the form of a budget-based mixed actual cost grant (i.e. a grant based on actual costs incurred, but which may also include other forms of funding, such as unit costs or contributions, flat-rate costs or contributions, lump sum costs or contributions or financing not linked to costs). 5.2 Maximum grant amount The maximum grant amount is set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 3) and in the estimated budget (Annex 2). 5.3 Funding rate The funding rate for costs is 95% of the action’s eligible costs. Contributions are not subject to any funding rate. 5.4 Estimated budget, budget categories and forms of funding The estimated budget for the action is set out in Annex 2. It contains the estimated eligible costs and contributions for the action, broken down by participant and budget category. Annex 2 also shows the types of costs and contributions (forms of funding)9 to be used for each budget category. If unit costs or contributions are used, the details on the calculation will be explained in Annex 2a. 5.5 Budget flexibility The budget breakdown may be adjusted — without an amendment (see Article 39) — by transfers (between participants and budget categories), as long as this does not imply any substantive or important change to the description of the action in Annex 1. However: - changes to the budget category for volunteers (if used) always require an amendment - changes to budget categories with lump sums costs or contributions (if used; including financing not linked to costs) always require an amendment - changes to budget categories with higher funding rates or budget ceilings (if used) always require an amendment - addition of amounts for subcontracts not provided for in Annex 1 either require an amendment or simplified approval in accordance with Article 6.2 8 For the definition, see Article 180(2)(a) EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046: ‘action grant’ means an EU grant to finance “an action intended to help achieve a Union policy objective”. 9 See Article 125 EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046. 15 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - other changes require an amendment or simplified approval, if specifically provided for in Article 6.2 - flexibility caps: not applicable. ARTICLE 6 — ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE COSTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS In order to be eligible, costs and contributions must meet the eligibility conditions set out in this Article. 6.1 General eligibility conditions The general eligibility conditions are the following: (a) for actual costs: (i) they must be actually incurred by the beneficiary (ii) they must be incurred in the period set out in Article 4 (with the exception of costs relating to the submission of the final periodic report, which may be incurred afterwards; see Article 21) (iii) they must be declared under one of the budget categories set out in Article 6.2 and Annex 2 (iv) they must be incurred in connection with the action as described in Annex 1 and necessary for its implementation (v) they must be identifiable and verifiable, in particular recorded in the beneficiary’s accounts in accordance with the accounting standards applicable in the country where the beneficiary is established and with the beneficiary’s usual cost accounting practices (vi) they must comply with the applicable national law on taxes, labour and social security and (vii) they must be reasonable, justified and must comply with the principle of sound financial management, in particular regarding economy and efficiency (b) for unit costs or contributions (if any): (i) they must be declared under one of the budget categories set out in Article 6.2 and Annex 2 (ii) the units must: - be actually used or produced by the beneficiary in the period set out in Article 4 (with the exception of units relating to the submission of the final periodic report, which may be used or produced afterwards; see Article 21) - be necessary for the implementation of the action and (iii) the number of units must be identifiable and verifiable, in particular supported by records and documentation (see Article 20) 16 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 (c) for flat-rate costs or contributions (if any): (i) they must be declared under one of the budget categories set out in Article 6.2 and Annex 2 (ii) the costs or contributions to which the flat-rate is applied must: - be eligible - relate to the period set out in Article 4 (with the exception of costs or contributions relating to the submission of the final periodic report, which may be incurred afterwards; see Article 21) (d) for lump sum costs or contributions (if any): (i) they must be declared under one of the budget categories set out in Article 6.2 and Annex 2 (ii) the work must be properly implemented by the beneficiary in accordance with Annex 1 (iii) the deliverables/outputs must be achieved in the period set out in Article 4 (with the exception of deliverables/outputs relating to the submission of the final periodic report, which may be achieved afterwards; see Article 21) (e) for unit, flat-rate or lump sum costs or contributions according to usual cost accounting practices (if any): (i) they must fulfil the general eligibility conditions for the type of cost concerned (ii) the cost accounting practices must be applied in a consistent manner, based on objective criteria, regardless of the source of funding (f) for financing not linked to costs (if any): the results must be achieved or the conditions must be fulfilled as described in Annex 1. In addition, for direct cost categories (e.g. personnel, travel & subsistence, subcontracting and other direct costs) only costs that are directly linked to the action implementation and can therefore be attributed to it directly are eligible. They must not include any indirect costs (i.e. costs that are only indirectly linked to the action, e.g. via cost drivers). 6.2 Specific eligibility conditions for each budget category For each budget category, the specific eligibility conditions are as follows: Direct costs A. Personnel costs A.1 Costs for employees (or equivalent) are eligible as personnel costs if they fulfil the general eligibility conditions and are related to personnel working for the beneficiary under an employment contract (or equivalent appointing act) and assigned to the action. They must be limited to salaries, social security contributions, taxes and other costs linked to the 17 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 remuneration, if they arise from national law or the employment contract (or equivalent appointing act) and be calculated on the basis of the costs actually incurred, in accordance with the following method: {daily rate for the person multiplied by number of day-equivalents worked on the action (rounded up or down to the nearest half-day)}. The daily rate must be calculated as: {annual personnel costs for the person divided by 215}. The number of day-equivalents declared for a person must be identifiable and verifiable (see Article 20). The total number of day-equivalents declared in EU grants, for a person for a year, cannot be higher than 215. The personnel costs may also include supplementary payments for personnel assigned to the action (including payments on the basis of supplementary contracts regardless of their nature), if: - it is part of the beneficiary’s usual remuneration practices and is paid in a consistent manner whenever the same kind of work or expertise is required - the criteria used to calculate the supplementary payments are objective and generally applied by the beneficiary, regardless of the source of funding used. A.2 and A.3 Costs for natural persons working under a direct contract other than an employment contract and costs for seconded persons by a third party against payment are also eligible as personnel costs, if they are assigned to the action, fulfil the general eligibility conditions and: (a) work under conditions similar to those of an employee (in particular regarding the way the work is organised, the tasks that are performed and the premises where they are performed) and (b) the result of the work belongs to the beneficiary (unless agreed otherwise). They must be calculated on the basis of a rate which corresponds to the costs actually incurred for the direct contract or secondment and must not be significantly different from those for personnel performing similar tasks under an employment contract with the beneficiary. A.4 The work of SME owners for the action (i.e. owners of beneficiaries that are small and medium- sized enterprises10 not receiving a salary) or natural person beneficiaries (i.e. beneficiaries that are 10 For the definition, see Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC: micro, small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) are enterprises - engaged in an economic activity, irrespective of their legal form (including, in particular, self- employed persons and family businesses engaged in craft or other activities, and partnerships or associations regularly engaged in an economic activity) and 18 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 natural persons not receiving a salary) may be declared as personnel costs, if they fulfil the general eligibility conditions and are calculated as unit costs in accordance with the method set out in Annex 2a. A.5 The work of volunteers for the action (i.e. persons who freely work for an organisation, on a non-compulsory basis and without being paid) may be declared as personnel costs, if and as declared eligible in the call conditions, if they fulfil the general eligibility conditions and are calculated as unit costs in accordance with the method set out in Annex 2a. They: - may not exceed the maximum amount for volunteers for the action (which corresponds to 50% of the total (ineligible and eligible) project costs and contributions estimated in the proposal) - may not exceed the maximum amount for volunteers for each beneficiary set out in Annex 2 - may not make the maximum EU contribution to costs higher than the total eligible costs without volunteers. If also indirect costs for volunteers are declared eligible in the call conditions, the amount of indirect costs may be added to the volunteers costs category in Annex 2, at the flat-rate set out in Point E. B. Subcontracting costs Subcontracting costs for the action (including related duties, taxes and charges, such as non- deductible or non-refundable value added tax (VAT)) are eligible, if they are calculated on the basis of the costs actually incurred, fulfil the general eligibility conditions and are awarded using the beneficiary’s usual purchasing practices — provided these ensure subcontracts with best value for money (or if appropriate the lowest price) and that there is no conflict of interests (see Article 12). Beneficiaries that are ‘contracting authorities/entities’ within the meaning of the EU Directives on public procurement must also comply with the applicable national law on public procurement. Subcontracting may cover only a limited part of the action. The tasks to be subcontracted and the estimated cost for each subcontract must be set out in Annex 1 and the total estimated costs of subcontracting per beneficiary must be set out in Annex 2 (or may be approved ex post in the periodic report, if the use of subcontracting does not entail changes to the Agreement which would call into question the decision awarding the grant or breach the principle of equal treatment of applicants; ‘simplified approval procedure’). C. Purchase costs Purchase costs for the action (including related duties, taxes and charges, such as non-deductible or non-refundable value added tax (VAT)) are eligible if they fulfil the general eligibility conditions and are bought using the beneficiary’s usual purchasing practices — provided these ensure purchases with - employing fewer than 250 persons (expressed in ‘annual working units’ as defined in Article 5 of the Recommendation) and which have an annual turnover not exceeding EUR 50 million, and/or an annual balance sheet total not exceeding EUR 43 million. 19 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 best value for money (or if appropriate the lowest price) and that there is no conflict of interests (see Article 12). Beneficiaries that are ‘contracting authorities/entities’ within the meaning of the EU Directives on public procurement must also comply with the applicable national law on public procurement. C.1 Travel and subsistence Purchases for travel, accommodation and subsistence must be calculated as follows: - travel: on the basis of the costs actually incurred and in line with the beneficiary’s usual practices on travel - accommodation: on the basis of the costs actually incurred and in line with the beneficiary’s usual practices on travel - subsistence: on the basis of the costs actually incurred and in line with the beneficiary’s usual practices on travel . C.2 Equipment Purchases of equipment, infrastructure or other assets used for the action must be declared as depreciation costs, calculated on the basis of the costs actually incurred and written off in accordance with international accounting standards and the beneficiary’s usual accounting practices. Only the portion of the costs that corresponds to the rate of actual use for the action during the action duration can be taken into account. Costs for renting or leasing equipment, infrastructure or other assets are also eligible, if they do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, infrastructure or assets and do not include any financing fees. C.3 Other goods, works and services Purchases of other goods, works and services must be calculated on the basis of the costs actually incurred. Such goods, works and services include, for instance, consumables and supplies, promotion, dissemination, protection of results, translations, publications, certificates and financial guarantees, if required under the Agreement. D. Other cost categories D.1 Financial support to third parties Costs for providing financial support to third parties (in the form of grants, prizes or similar forms of support; if any) are eligible, if and as declared eligible in the call conditions, if they fulfil the general eligibility conditions, are calculated on the basis of the costs actually incurred and the support is implemented in accordance with the conditions set out in Annex 1. These conditions must ensure objective and transparent selection procedures and include at least the following: 20 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 (a) for grants (or similar): (i) the maximum amount of financial support for each third party (‘recipient’); this amount may not exceed the amount set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 3) or otherwise agreed with the granting authority (ii) the criteria for calculating the exact amount of the financial support (iii) the different types of activity that qualify for financial support, on the basis of a closed list (iv) the persons or categories of persons that will be supported and (v) the criteria and procedures for giving financial support (b) for prizes (or similar): (i) the eligibility and award criteria (ii) the amount of the prize and (iii) the payment arrangements. D.2 Land purchase Costs for land purchase from private entities (or long-term lease of land or one-off compensations for land use rights) are eligible, if and as declared eligible in the call conditions, if they fulfil the general eligibility conditions, are calculated on the basis of the costs actually incurred and: (a) the purchase will contribute to improving, maintaining and restoring the integrity of the Natura 2000 network set up pursuant to Article 3 of Directive 92/43/EEC, including through improving connectivity by the creation of corridors, stepping stones, or other elements of green infrastructure (b) land purchase is the only or most cost-effective way of achieving the desired conservation outcome (c) the land purchased is reserved in the long term for uses consistent with the specific objectives of the LIFE Programme (d) the Member State concerned ensures, by way of transfer or otherwise, the long-term assignment of such land to nature conservation purposes and the beneficiary documents this by ensuring that: (i) the entry into the land register includes a condition that the land will be assigned definitively to nature conservation (ii) or, if there is no land register or such a condition is not possible under national law, that such a condition is either included in the land sale contract or guaranteed by equivalent means (e) for land purchases by private entity beneficiaries: the beneficiaries ensure the long-term conservation by ensuring that: 21 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 (i) the entry into the land register includes a condition that, in case of their dissolution or incapacity to manage the land according to nature conservation requirements, the property will be transferred to an entity primarily active in the field of nature protection (ii) or, if there is no land register or such a condition is not possible under national law, that such a condition is either included in the land sale contract or guaranteed by equivalent means (f) for purchases of partial rights: the entry into the land register duly reflects the long-term nature conservation objectives and the requirements set out in this Article (g) for land purchased to be exchanged at a later date for another parcel on which the action will be undertaken: the exchange is carried out before the end of the action and the land exchanged complies with the requirements set out in this Article (h) for long-term leases: the lease is of at least 20 years and includes provisions and commitments that ensure the achievement of its objectives in terms of habitat and species protection. This cost will not be taken into account for the indirect cost flat-rate. Indirect costs E. Indirect costs Indirect costs will be reimbursed at the flat-rate of 7% of the eligible direct costs (categories A-D, except volunteers costs and exempted specific cost categories, if any). Contributions Not applicable 6.3 Ineligible costs and contributions The following costs or contributions are ineligible: (a) costs or contributions that do not comply with the conditions set out above (Article 6.1 and 6.2), in particular: (i) costs related to return on capital and dividends paid by a beneficiary (ii) debt and debt service charges (iii) provisions for future losses or debts (iv) interest owed (v) currency exchange losses (vi) bank costs charged by the beneficiary’s bank for transfers from the granting authority (vii) excessive or reckless expenditure 22 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 (viii) deductible or refundable VAT (including VAT paid by public bodies acting as public authority) (ix) costs incurred or contributions for activities implemented during grant agreement suspension (see Article 31) (x) in-kind contributions by third parties (b) costs or contributions declared under other EU grants (or grants awarded by an EU Member State, non-EU country or other body implementing the EU budget), except for the following cases: (i) Synergy actions: not applicable (ii) if the action grant is combined with an operating grant11 running during the same period and the beneficiary can demonstrate that the operating grant does not cover any (direct or indirect) costs of the action grant (c) costs or contributions for staff of a national (or regional/local) administration, for activities that are part of the administration’s normal activities (i.e. not undertaken only because of the grant) (d) costs or contributions (especially travel and subsistence) for staff or representatives of EU institutions, bodies or agencies (e) other : (i) country restrictions for eligible costs: not applicable (ii) costs or contributions declared specifically ineligible in the call conditions. 6.4 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary declares costs or contributions that are ineligible, they will be rejected (see Article 27). This may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. CHAPTER 4 GRANT IMPLEMENTATION SECTION 1 CONSORTIUM: BENEFICIARIES, AFFILIATED ENTITIES AND OTHER PARTICIPANTS ARTICLE 7 — BENEFICIARIES The beneficiaries, as signatories of the Agreement, are fully responsible towards the granting authority for implementing it and for complying with all its obligations. 11 For the definition, see Article 180(2)(b) of EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046: ‘operating grant’ means an EU grant to finance “the functioning of a body which has an objective forming part of and supporting an EU policy”. 23 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 They must implement the Agreement to their best abilities, in good faith and in accordance with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. They must have the appropriate resources to implement the action and implement the action under their own responsibility and in accordance with Article 11. If they rely on affiliated entities or other participants (see Articles 8 and 9), they retain sole responsibility towards the granting authority and the other beneficiaries. They are jointly responsible for the technical implementation of the action. If one of the beneficiaries fails to implement their part of the action, the other beneficiaries must ensure that this part is implemented by someone else (without being entitled to an increase of the maximum grant amount and subject to an amendment; see Article 39). The financial responsibility of each beneficiary in case of recoveries is governed by Article 22. The beneficiaries (and their action) must remain eligible under the EU programme funding the grant for the entire duration of the action. Costs and contributions will be eligible only as long as the beneficiary and the action are eligible. The internal roles and responsibilities of the beneficiaries are divided as follows: (a) Each beneficiary must: (i) keep information stored in the Portal Participant Register up to date (see Article 19) (ii) inform the granting authority (and the other beneficiaries) immediately of any events or circumstances likely to affect significantly or delay the implementation of the action (see Article 19) (iii) submit to the coordinator in good time: - the prefinancing guarantees (if required; see Article 23) - the financial statements and certificates on the financial statements (CFS) (if required; see Articles 21 and 24.2 and Data Sheet, Point 4.3) - the contribution to the deliverables and technical reports (see Article 21) - any other documents or information required by the granting authority under the Agreement (iv) submit via the Portal data and information related to the participation of their affiliated entities. (b) The coordinator must: (i) monitor that the action is implemented properly (see Article 11) (ii) act as the intermediary for all communications between the consortium and the granting authority, unless the Agreement or granting authority specifies otherwise, and in particular: - submit the prefinancing guarantees to the granting authority (if any) 24 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - request and review any documents or information required and verify their quality and completeness before passing them on to the granting authority - submit the deliverables and reports to the granting authority - inform the granting authority about the payments made to the other beneficiaries (report on the distribution of payments; if required, see Articles 22 and 32) (iii) distribute the payments received from the granting authority to the other beneficiaries without unjustified delay (see Article 22). The coordinator may not delegate or subcontract the above-mentioned tasks to any other beneficiary or third party (including affiliated entities). However, coordinators which are public bodies may delegate the tasks set out in Point (b)(ii) last indent and (iii) above to entities with ‘authorisation to administer’ which they have created or which are controlled by or affiliated to them. In this case, the coordinator retains sole responsibility for the payments and for compliance with the obligations under the Agreement. Moreover, coordinators which are ‘sole beneficiaries’12 (or similar, such as European research infrastructure consortia (ERICs)) may delegate the tasks set out in Point (b)(i) to (iii) above to one of their members. The coordinator retains sole responsibility for compliance with the obligations under the Agreement. The beneficiaries must have internal arrangements regarding their operation and co-ordination, to ensure that the action is implemented properly. If required by the granting authority (see Data Sheet, Point 1), these arrangements must be set out in a written consortium agreement between the beneficiaries, covering for instance: - the internal organisation of the consortium - the management of access to the Portal - different distribution keys for the payments and financial responsibilities in case of recoveries (if any) - additional rules on rights and obligations related to background and results (see Article 16) - settlement of internal disputes - liability, indemnification and confidentiality arrangements between the beneficiaries. The internal arrangements must not contain any provision contrary to this Agreement. ARTICLE 8 — AFFILIATED ENTITIES Not applicable 12 For the definition, see Article 187(2) EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046: “Where several entities satisfy the criteria for being awarded a grant and together form one entity, that entity may be treated as the sole beneficiary, including where it is specifically established for the purpose of implementing the action financed by the grant.” 25 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 ARTICLE 9 — OTHER PARTICIPANTS INVOLVED IN THE ACTION 9.1 Associated partners Not applicable 9.2 Third parties giving in-kind contributions to the action Other third parties may give in-kind contributions to the action (i.e. personnel, equipment, other goods, works and services, etc. which are free-of-charge), if necessary for the implementation. Third parties giving in-kind contributions do not implement any action tasks. They may not charge costs or contributions to the action and the costs for the in-kind contributions are not eligible. The third parties and their in-kind contributions should be set out in Annex 1. 9.3 Subcontractors Subcontractors may participate in the action, if necessary for the implementation. Subcontractors must implement their action tasks in accordance with Article 11. The costs for the subcontracted tasks (invoiced price from the subcontractor) are eligible and may be charged by the beneficiaries, under the conditions set out in Article 6. The costs will be included in Annex 2 as part of the beneficiaries’ costs. The beneficiaries must ensure that their contractual obligations under Articles 11 (proper implementation), 12 (conflict of interest), 13 (confidentiality and security), 14 (ethics), 17.2 (visibility), 18 (specific rules for carrying out action), 19 (information) and 20 (record-keeping) also apply to the subcontractors. The beneficiaries must ensure that the bodies mentioned in Article 25 (e.g. granting authority, OLAF, Court of Auditors (ECA), etc.) can exercise their rights also towards the subcontractors. 9.4 Recipients of financial support to third parties If the action includes providing financial support to third parties (e.g. grants, prizes or similar forms of support), the beneficiaries must ensure that their contractual obligations under Articles 12 (conflict of interest), 13 (confidentiality and security), 14 (ethics), 17.2 (visibility), 18 (specific rules for carrying out action), 19 (information) and 20 (record-keeping)also apply to the third parties receiving the support (recipients). The beneficiaries must also ensure that the bodies mentioned in Article 25 (e.g. granting authority, OLAF, Court of Auditors (ECA), etc.) can exercise their rights also towards the recipients. ARTICLE 10 — PARTICIPANTS WITH SPECIAL STATUS 10.1 Non-EU participants Participants which are established in a non-EU country (if any) undertake to comply with their obligations under the Agreement and: - to respect general principles (including fundamental rights, values and ethical principles, 26 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 environmental and labour standards, rules on classified information, intellectual property rights, visibility of funding and protection of personal data) - for the submission of certificates under Article 24: to use qualified external auditors which are independent and comply with comparable standards as those set out in EU Directive 2006/43/EC13 - for the controls under Article 25: to allow for checks, reviews, audits and investigations (including on-the-spot checks, visits and inspections) by the bodies mentioned in that Article (e.g. granting authority, OLAF, Court of Auditors (ECA), etc.). Special rules on dispute settlement apply (see Data Sheet, Point 5). 10.2 Participants which are international organisations Participants which are international organisations (IOs; if any) undertake to comply with their obligations under the Agreement and: - to respect general principles (including fundamental rights, values and ethical principles, environmental and labour standards, rules on classified information, intellectual property rights, visibility of funding and protection of personal data) - for the submission of certificates under Article 24: to use either independent public officers or external auditors which comply with comparable standards as those set out in EU Directive 2006/43/EC - for the controls under Article 25: to allow for the checks, reviews, audits and investigations by the bodies mentioned in that Article, taking into account the specific agreements concluded by them and the EU (if any). For such participants, nothing in the Agreement will be interpreted as a waiver of their privileges or immunities, as accorded by their constituent documents or international law. Special rules on applicable law and dispute settlement apply (see Article 43 and Data Sheet, Point 5). 10.3 Pillar-assessed participants Pillar-assessed participants (if any) may rely on their own systems, rules and procedures, in so far as they have been positively assessed and do not call into question the decision awarding the grant or breach the principle of equal treatment of applicants or beneficiaries. ‘Pillar-assessment’ means a review by the European Commission on the systems, rules and procedures which participants use for managing EU grants (in particular internal control system, accounting system, external audits, financing of third parties, rules on recovery and exclusion, information on recipients and protection of personal data; see Article 154 EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046). Participants with a positive pillar assessment may rely on their own systems, rules and procedures, in particular for: 13 Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts or similar national regulations (OJ L 157, 9.6.2006, p. 87). 27 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - record-keeping (Article 20): may be done in accordance with internal standards, rules and procedures - currency conversion for financial statements (Article 21): may be done in accordance with usual accounting practices - guarantees (Article 23): for public law bodies, prefinancing guarantees are not needed - certificates (Article 24): - certificates on the financial statements (CFS): may be provided by their regular internal or external auditors and in accordance with their internal financial regulations and procedures - certificates on usual accounting practices (CoMUC): are not needed if those practices are covered by an ex-ante assessment and use the following specific rules, for: - recoveries (Article 22): in case of financial support to third parties, there will be no recovery if the participant has done everything possible to retrieve the undue amounts from the third party receiving the support (including legal proceedings) and non-recovery is not due to an error or negligence on its part - checks, reviews, audits and investigations by the EU (Article 25): will be conducted taking into account the rules and procedures specifically agreed between them and the framework agreement (if any) - impact evaluation (Article 26): will be conducted in accordance with the participant’s internal rules and procedures and the framework agreement (if any) - grant agreement suspension (Article 31): certain costs incurred during grant suspension are eligible (notably, minimum costs necessary for a possible resumption of the action and costs relating to contracts which were entered into before the pre-information letter was received and which could not reasonably be suspended, reallocated or terminated on legal grounds) - grant agreement termination (Article 32): the final grant amount and final payment will be calculated taking into account also costs relating to contracts due for execution only after termination takes effect, if the contract was entered into before the pre-information letter was received and could not reasonably be terminated on legal grounds - liability for damages (Article 33.2): the granting authority must be compensated for damage it sustains as a result of the implementation of the action or because the action was not implemented in full compliance with the Agreement only if the damage is due to an infringement of the participant’s internal rules and procedures or due to a violation of third parties’ rights by the participant or one of its employees or individual for whom the employees are responsible. Participants whose pillar assessment covers procurement and granting procedures may also do purchases, subcontracting and financial support to third parties (Article 6.2) in accordance with their internal rules and procedures for purchases, subcontracting and financial support. 28 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Participants whose pillar assessment covers data protection rules may rely on their internal standards, rules and procedures for data protection (Article 15). The participants may however not rely on provisions which would breach the principle of equal treatment of applicants or beneficiaries or call into question the decision awarding the grant, such as in particular: - eligibility (Article 6) - consortium roles and set-up (Articles 7-9) - security and ethics (Articles 13, 14) - IPR (including background and results, access rights and rights of use), communication, dissemination and visibility (Articles 16 and 17) - information obligation (Article 19) - payment, reporting and amendments (Articles 21, 22 and 39) - rejections, reductions, suspensions and terminations (Articles 27, 28, 29-32) If the pillar assessment was subject to remedial measures, reliance on the internal systems, rules and procedures is subject to compliance with those remedial measures. Participants whose assessment has not yet been updated to cover (the new rules on) data protection may rely on their internal systems, rules and procedures, provided that they ensure that personal data is: - processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject - collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes - adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are processed - accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date - kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the data is processed and - processed in a manner that ensures appropriate security of the personal data. Participants must inform the coordinator without delay of any changes to the systems, rules and procedures that were part of the pillar assessment. The coordinator must immediately inform the granting authority. Pillar-assessed participants that have also concluded a framework agreement with the EU, may moreover — under the same conditions as those above (i.e. not call into question the decision awarding the grant or breach the principle of equal treatment of applicants or beneficiaries) — rely on the provisions set out in that framework agreement. 29 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 SECTION 2 RULES FOR CARRYING OUT THE ACTION ARTICLE 11 — PROPER IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ACTION 11.1 Obligation to properly implement the action The beneficiaries must implement the action as described in Annex 1 and in compliance with the provisions of the Agreement, the call conditions and all legal obligations under applicable EU, international and national law. 11.2 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 12 — CONFLICT OF INTERESTS 12.1 Conflict of interests The beneficiaries must take all measures to prevent any situation where the impartial and objective implementation of the Agreement could be compromised for reasons involving family, emotional life, political or national affinity, economic interest or any other direct or indirect interest (‘conflict of interests’). They must formally notify the granting authority without delay of any situation constituting or likely to lead to a conflict of interests and immediately take all the necessary steps to rectify this situation. The granting authority may verify that the measures taken are appropriate and may require additional measures to be taken by a specified deadline. 12.2 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28) and the grant or the beneficiary may be terminated (see Article 32). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 13 — CONFIDENTIALITY AND SECURITY 13.1 Sensitive information The parties must keep confidential any data, documents or other material (in any form) that is identified as sensitive in writing (‘sensitive information’) — during the implementation of the action and for at least until the time-limit set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 6). If a beneficiary requests, the granting authority may agree to keep such information confidential for a longer period. 30 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Unless otherwise agreed between the parties, they may use sensitive information only to implement the Agreement. The beneficiaries may disclose sensitive information to their personnel or other participants involved in the action only if they: (a) need to know it in order to implement the Agreement and (b) are bound by an obligation of confidentiality. The granting authority may disclose sensitive information to its staff and to other EU institutions and bodies. It may moreover disclose sensitive information to third parties, if: (a) this is necessary to implement the Agreement or safeguard the EU financial interests and (b) the recipients of the information are bound by an obligation of confidentiality. The confidentiality obligations no longer apply if: (a) the disclosing party agrees to release the other party (b) the information becomes publicly available, without breaching any confidentiality obligation (c) the disclosure of the sensitive information is required by EU, international or national law. Specific confidentiality rules (if any) are set out in Annex 5. 13.2 Classified information The parties must handle classified information in accordance with the applicable EU, international or national law on classified information (in particular, Decision 2015/44414 and its implementing rules). Deliverables which contain classified information must be submitted according to special procedures agreed with the granting authority. Action tasks involving classified information may be subcontracted only after explicit approval (in writing) from the granting authority. Classified information may not be disclosed to any third party (including participants involved in the action implementation) without prior explicit written approval from the granting authority. Specific security rules (if any) are set out in Annex 5. 13.3 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). 14 Commission Decision 2015/444/EC, Euratom of 13 March 2015 on the security rules for protecting EU classified information (OJ L 72, 17.3.2015, p. 53). 31 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 14 — ETHICS AND VALUES 14.1 Ethics The action must be carried out in line with the highest ethical standards and the applicable EU, international and national law on ethical principles. Specific ethics rules (if any) are set out in Annex 5. 14.2 Values The beneficiaries must commit to and ensure the respect of basic EU values (such as respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights, including the rights of minorities). Specific rules on values (if any) are set out in Annex 5. 14.3 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 15 — DATA PROTECTION 15.1 Data processing by the granting authority Any personal data under the Agreement will be processed under the responsibility of the data controller of the granting authority in accordance with and for the purposes set out in the Portal Privacy Statement. For grants where the granting authority is the European Commission, an EU regulatory or executive agency, joint undertaking or other EU body, the processing will be subject to Regulation 2018/172515. 15.2 Data processing by the beneficiaries The beneficiaries must process personal data under the Agreement in compliance with the applicable EU, international and national law on data protection (in particular, Regulation 2016/67916). They must ensure that personal data is: 15 Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39). 16 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (‘GDPR’) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 32 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subjects - collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes - adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are processed - accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date - kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the data is processed and - processed in a manner that ensures appropriate security of the data. The beneficiaries may grant their personnel access to personal data only if it is strictly necessary for implementing, managing and monitoring the Agreement. The beneficiaries must ensure that the personnel is under a confidentiality obligation. The beneficiaries must inform the persons whose data are transferred to the granting authority and provide them with the Portal Privacy Statement. 15.3 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 16 — INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) — BACKGROUND AND RESULTS —ACCESS RIGHTS AND RIGHTS OF USE 16.1 Background and access rights to background The beneficiaries must give each other and the other participants access to the background identified as needed for implementing the action, subject to any specific rules in Annex 5. ‘Background’ means any data, know-how or information — whatever its form or nature (tangible or intangible), including any rights such as intellectual property rights — that is: (a) held by the beneficiaries before they acceded to the Agreement and (b) needed to implement the action or exploit the results. If background is subject to rights of a third party, the beneficiary concerned must ensure that it is able to comply with its obligations under the Agreement. 16.2 Ownership of results The granting authority does not obtain ownership of the results produced under the action. ‘Results’ means any tangible or intangible effect of the action, such as data, know-how or information, 33 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 whatever its form or nature, whether or not it can be protected, as well as any rights attached to it, including intellectual property rights. 16.3 Rights of use of the granting authority on materials, documents and information received for policy, information, communication, dissemination and publicity purposes The granting authority has the right to use non-sensitive information relating to the action and materials and documents received from the beneficiaries (notably summaries for publication, deliverables, as well as any other material, such as pictures or audio-visual material, in paper or electronic form) for policy, information, communication, dissemination and publicity purposes — during the action or afterwards. The right to use the beneficiaries’ materials, documents and information is granted in the form of a royalty-free, non-exclusive and irrevocable licence, which includes the following rights: (a) use for its own purposes (in particular, making them available to persons working for the granting authority or any other EU service (including institutions, bodies, offices, agencies, etc.) or EU Member State institution or body; copying or reproducing them in whole or in part, in unlimited numbers; and communication through press information services) (b) distribution to the public (in particular, publication as hard copies and in electronic or digital format, publication on the internet, as a downloadable or non-downloadable file, broadcasting by any channel, public display or presentation, communicating through press information services, or inclusion in widely accessible databases or indexes) (c) editing or redrafting (including shortening, summarising, inserting other elements (e.g. meta-data, legends, other graphic, visual, audio or text elements), extracting parts (e.g. audio or video files), dividing into parts, use in a compilation) (d) translation (e) storage in paper, electronic or other form (f) archiving, in line with applicable document-management rules (g) the right to authorise third parties to act on its behalf or sub-license to third parties the modes of use set out in Points (b), (c), (d) and (f), if needed for the information, communication and publicity activity of the granting authority (h) processing, analysing, aggregating the materials, documents and information received and producing derivative works. The rights of use are granted for the whole duration of the industrial or intellectual property rights concerned. If materials or documents are subject to moral rights or third party rights (including intellectual property rights or rights of natural persons on their image and voice), the beneficiaries must ensure that they comply with their obligations under this Agreement (in particular, by obtaining the necessary licences and authorisations from the rights holders concerned). Where applicable, the granting authority will insert the following information: 34 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 “© – [year] – [name of the copyright owner]. All rights reserved. Licensed to the [name of granting authority] under conditions.” 16.4 Specific rules on IPR, results and background Specific rules regarding intellectual property rights, results and background (if any) are set out in Annex 5. 16.5 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such a breach may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 17 — COMMUNICATION, DISSEMINATION AND VISIBILITY 17.1 Communication — Dissemination — Promoting the action Unless otherwise agreed with the granting authority, the beneficiaries must promote the action and its results by providing targeted information to multiple audiences (including the media and the public), in accordance with Annex 1 and in a strategic, coherent and effective manner. Before engaging in a communication or dissemination activity expected to have a major media impact, the beneficiaries must inform the granting authority. 17.2 Visibility — European flag and funding statement Unless otherwise agreed with the granting authority, communication activities of the beneficiaries related to the action (including media relations, conferences, seminars, information material, such as brochures, leaflets, posters, presentations, etc., in electronic form, via traditional or social media, etc.), dissemination activities and any infrastructure, equipment, vehicles, supplies or major result funded by the grant must acknowledge EU support and display the European flag (emblem) and funding statement (translated into local languages, where appropriate): 35 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 The emblem must remain distinct and separate and cannot be modified by adding other visual marks, brands or text. Apart from the emblem, no other visual identity or logo may be used to highlight the EU support. When displayed in association with other logos (e.g. of beneficiaries or sponsors), the emblem must be displayed at least as prominently and visibly as the other logos. For the purposes of their obligations under this Article, the beneficiaries may use the emblem without first obtaining approval from the granting authority. This does not, however, give them the right to exclusive use. Moreover, they may not appropriate the emblem or any similar trademark or logo, either by registration or by any other means. 17.3 Quality of information — Disclaimer Any communication or dissemination activity related to the action must use factually accurate information. Moreover, it must indicate the following disclaimer (translated into local languages where appropriate): “Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or [name of the granting authority]. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.” 17.4 Specific communication, dissemination and visibility rules Specific communication, dissemination and visibility rules (if any) are set out in Annex 5. 17.5 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 18 — SPECIFIC RULES FOR CARRYING OUT THE ACTION 18.1 Specific rules for carrying out the action Specific rules for implementing the action (if any) are set out in Annex 5. 18.2 Consequences of non-compliance 36 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such a breach may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. SECTION 3 GRANT ADMINISTRATION ARTICLE 19 — GENERAL INFORMATION OBLIGATIONS 19.1 Information requests The beneficiaries must provide — during the action or afterwards and in accordance with Article 7 — any information requested in order to verify eligibility of the costs or contributions declared, proper implementation of the action and compliance with the other obligations under the Agreement. The information provided must be accurate, precise and complete and in the format requested, including electronic format. 19.2 Participant Register data updates The beneficiaries must keep — at all times, during the action or afterwards — their information stored in the Portal Participant Register up to date, in particular, their name, address, legal representatives, legal form and organisation type. 19.3 Information about events and circumstances which impact the action The beneficiaries must immediately inform the granting authority (and the other beneficiaries) of any of the following: (a) events which are likely to affect or delay the implementation of the action or affect the EU’s financial interests, in particular: (i) changes in their legal, financial, technical, organisational or ownership situation (including changes linked to one of the exclusion grounds listed in the declaration of honour signed before grant signature) (ii) linked action information: not applicable (b) circumstances affecting: (i) the decision to award the grant or (ii) compliance with requirements under the Agreement. 19.4 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. 37 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 ARTICLE 20 — RECORD-KEEPING 20.1 Keeping records and supporting documents The beneficiaries must — at least until the time-limit set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 6) — keep records and other supporting documents to prove the proper implementation of the action in line with the accepted standards in the respective field (if any). In addition, the beneficiaries must — for the same period — keep the following to justify the amounts declared: (a) for actual costs: adequate records and supporting documents to prove the costs declared (such as contracts, subcontracts, invoices and accounting records); in addition, the beneficiaries’ usual accounting and internal control procedures must enable direct reconciliation between the amounts declared, the amounts recorded in their accounts and the amounts stated in the supporting documents (b) for flat-rate costs and contributions (if any): adequate records and supporting documents to prove the eligibility of the costs or contributions to which the flat-rate is applied (c) for the following simplified costs and contributions: the beneficiaries do not need to keep specific records on the actual costs incurred, but must keep: (i) for unit costs and contributions (if any): adequate records and supporting documents to prove the number of units declared (ii) for lump sum costs and contributions (if any): adequate records and supporting documents to prove proper implementation of the work as described in Annex 1 (iii) for financing not linked to costs (if any): adequate records and supporting documents to prove the achievement of the results or the fulfilment of the conditions as described in Annex 1 (d) for unit, flat-rate and lump sum costs and contributions according to usual cost accounting practices (if any): the beneficiaries must keep any adequate records and supporting documents to prove that their cost accounting practices have been applied in a consistent manner, based on objective criteria, regardless of the source of funding, and that they comply with the eligibility conditions set out in Articles 6.1 and 6.2. Moreover, the following is needed for specific budget categories: (e) for personnel costs: time worked for the beneficiary under the action must be supported by declarations signed monthly by the person and their supervisor, unless another reliable time-record system is in place; the granting authority may accept alternative evidence supporting the time worked for the action declared, if it considers that it offers an adequate level of assurance (f) additional record-keeping rules: not applicable The records and supporting documents must be made available upon request (see Article 19) or in the context of checks, reviews, audits or investigations (see Article 25). 38 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 If there are on-going checks, reviews, audits, investigations, litigation or other pursuits of claims under the Agreement (including the extension of findings; see Article 25), the beneficiaries must keep these records and other supporting documentation until the end of these procedures. The beneficiaries must keep the original documents. Digital and digitalised documents are considered originals if they are authorised by the applicable national law. The granting authority may accept non-original documents if they offer a comparable level of assurance. 20.2 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, costs or contributions insufficiently substantiated will be ineligible (see Article 6) and will be rejected (see Article 27), and the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 21 — REPORTING 21.1 Continuous reporting The beneficiaries must continuously report on the progress of the action (e.g. deliverables, milestones, outputs/outcomes, critical risks, indicators, etc; if any), in the Portal Continuous Reporting tool and in accordance with the timing and conditions it sets out (as agreed with the granting authority). Standardised deliverables (e.g. progress reports not linked to payments, reports on cumulative expenditure, special reports, etc; if any) must be submitted using the templates published on the Portal. 21.2 Periodic reporting: Technical reports and financial statements In addition, the beneficiaries must provide reports to request payments, in accordance with the schedule and modalities set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 4.2): - for additional prefinancings (if any): an additional prefinancing report - for interim payments (if any) and the final payment: a periodic report. The prefinancing and periodic reports include a technical and financial part. The technical part includes an overview of the action implementation. It must be prepared using the template available in the Portal Periodic Reporting tool. The financial part of the additional prefinancing report includes a statement on the use of the previous prefinancing payment. The financial part of the periodic report includes: - the financial statements (individual and consolidated; for all beneficiaries/affiliated entities) - the explanation on the use of resources (or detailed cost reporting table, if required) 39 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - the certificates on the financial statements (CFS) (if required; see Article 24.2 and Data Sheet, Point 4.3). The financial statements must detail the eligible costs and contributions for each budget category and, for the final payment, also the revenues for the action (see Articles 6 and 22). All eligible costs and contributions incurred should be declared, even if they exceed the amounts indicated in the estimated budget (see Annex 2). Amounts that are not declared in the individual financial statements will not be taken into account by the granting authority. By signing the financial statements (directly in the Portal Periodic Reporting tool), the beneficiaries confirm that: - the information provided is complete, reliable and true - the costs and contributions declared are eligible (see Article 6) - the costs and contributions can be substantiated by adequate records and supporting documents (see Article 20) that will be produced upon request (see Article 19) or in the context of checks, reviews, audits and investigations (see Article 25) - for the final periodic report: all the revenues have been declared (if required; see Article 22). Beneficiaries will have to submit also the financial statements of their affiliated entities (if any). In case of recoveries (see Article 22), beneficiaries will be held responsible also for the financial statements of their affiliated entities. 21.3 Currency for financial statements and conversion into euros The financial statements must be drafted in euro. Beneficiaries with general accounts established in a currency other than the euro must convert the costs recorded in their accounts into euro, at the average of the daily exchange rates published in the C series of the Official Journal of the European Union (ECB website), calculated over the corresponding reporting period. If no daily euro exchange rate is published in the Official Journal for the currency in question, they must be converted at the average of the monthly accounting exchange rates published on the European Commission website (InforEuro), calculated over the corresponding reporting period. Beneficiaries with general accounts in euro must convert costs incurred in another currency into euro according to their usual accounting practices. 21.4 Reporting language The reporting must be in the language of the Agreement, unless otherwise agreed with the granting authority (see Data Sheet, Point 4.2). 21.5 Consequences of non-compliance If a report submitted does not comply with this Article, the granting authority may suspend the payment deadline (see Article 29) and apply other measures described in Chapter 5. 40 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 If the coordinator breaches its reporting obligations, the granting authority may terminate the grant or the coordinator’s participation (see Article 32) or apply other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 22 — PAYMENTS AND RECOVERIES — CALCULATION OF AMOUNTS DUE 22.1 Payments and payment arrangements Payments will be made in accordance with the schedule and modalities set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 4.2). They will be made in euro to the bank account indicated by the coordinator (see Data Sheet, Point 4.2) and must be distributed without unjustified delay (restrictions may apply to distribution of the initial prefinancing payment; see Data Sheet, Point 4.2). Payments to this bank account will discharge the granting authority from its payment obligation. The cost of payment transfers will be borne as follows: - the granting authority bears the cost of transfers charged by its bank - the beneficiary bears the cost of transfers charged by its bank - the party causing a repetition of a transfer bears all costs of the repeated transfer. Payments by the granting authority will be considered to have been carried out on the date when they are debited to its account. 22.2 Recoveries Recoveries will be made, if — at beneficiary termination, final payment or afterwards — it turns out that the granting authority has paid too much and needs to recover the amounts undue. The general liability regime for recoveries (first-line liability) is as follows: At final payment, the coordinator will be fully liable for recoveries, even if it has not been the final recipient of the undue amounts. At beneficiary termination or after final payment, recoveries will be made directly against the beneficiaries concerned. Beneficiaries will be fully liable for repaying the debts of their affiliated entities. In case of enforced recoveries (see Article 22.4): - the beneficiaries will be jointly and severally liable for repaying debts of another beneficiary under the Agreement (including late-payment interest), if required by the granting authority (see Data Sheet, Point 4.4) - affiliated entities will be held liable for repaying debts of their beneficiaries under the Agreement (including late-payment interest), if required by the granting authority (see Data Sheet, Point 4.4). 22.3 Amounts due 41 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 22.3.1 Prefinancing payments The aim of the prefinancing is to provide the beneficiaries with a float. It remains the property of the EU until the final payment. For initial prefinancings (if any), the amount due, schedule and modalities are set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 4.2). For additional prefinancings (if any), the amount due, schedule and modalities are also set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 4.2). However, if the statement on the use of the previous prefinancing payment shows that less than 70% was used, the amount set out in the Data Sheet will be reduced by the difference between the 70% threshold and the amount used. Prefinancing payments (or parts of them) may be offset (without the beneficiaries’ consent) against amounts owed by a beneficiary to the granting authority — up to the amount due to that beneficiary. For grants where the granting authority is the European Commission or an EU executive agency, offsetting may also be done against amounts owed to other Commission services or executive agencies. Payments will not be made if the payment deadline or payments are suspended (see Articles 29 and 30). 22.3.2 Amount due at beneficiary termination — Recovery In case of beneficiary termination, the granting authority will determine the provisional amount due for the beneficiary concerned. Payments (if any) will be made with the next interim or final payment. The amount due will be calculated in the following step: Step 1 — Calculation of the total accepted EU contribution Step 1 — Calculation of the total accepted EU contribution The granting authority will first calculate the ‘accepted EU contribution’ for the beneficiary for all reporting periods, by calculating the ‘maximum EU contribution to costs’ (applying the funding rate to the accepted costs of the beneficiary), taking into account requests for a lower contribution to costs and CFS threshold cappings (if any; see Article 24.5) and adding the contributions (accepted unit, flat-rate or lump sum contributions and financing not linked to costs, if any). After that, the granting authority will take into account grant reductions (if any). The resulting amount is the ‘total accepted EU contribution’ for the beneficiary. The balance is then calculated by deducting the payments received (if any; see report on the distribution of payments in Article 32), from the total accepted EU contribution: {total accepted EU contribution for the beneficiary minus {prefinancing and interim payments received (if any)}}. 42 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 If the balance is positive, the amount will be included in the next interim or final payment to the consortium. If the balance is negative, it will be recovered in accordance with the following procedure: The granting authority will send a pre-information letter to the beneficiary concerned: - formally notifying the intention to recover, the amount due, the amount to be recovered and the reasons why and - requesting observations within 30 days of receiving notification. If no observations are submitted (or the granting authority decides to pursue recovery despite the observations it has received), it will confirm the amount to be recovered and ask this amount to be paid to the coordinator (confirmation letter). The amounts will later on also be taken into account for the next interim or final payment. 22.3.3 Interim payments Interim payments reimburse the eligible costs and contributions claimed for the implementation of the action during the reporting periods (if any). Interim payments (if any) will be made in accordance with the schedule and modalities set out the Data Sheet (see Point 4.2). Payment is subject to the approval of the periodic report. Its approval does not imply recognition of compliance, authenticity, completeness or correctness of its content. The interim payment will be calculated by the granting authority in the following steps: Step 1 — Calculation of the total accepted EU contribution Step 2 — Limit to the interim payment ceiling Step 1 — Calculation of the total accepted EU contribution The granting authority will calculate the ‘accepted EU contribution’ for the action for the reporting period, by first calculating the ‘maximum EU contribution to costs’ (applying the funding rate to the accepted costs of each beneficiary), taking into account requests for a lower contribution to costs, and CFS threshold cappings (if any; see Article 24.5) and adding the contributions (accepted unit, flat-rate or lump sum contributions and financing not linked to costs, if any). After that, the granting authority will take into account grant reductions from beneficiary termination (if any). The resulting amount is the ‘total accepted EU contribution’. Step 2 — Limit to the interim payment ceiling The resulting amount is then capped to ensure that the total amount of prefinancing and interim payments (if any) does not exceed the interim payment ceiling set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 4.2). Interim payments (or parts of them) may be offset (without the beneficiaries’ consent) against amounts owed by a beneficiary to the granting authority — up to the amount due to that beneficiary. 43 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 For grants where the granting authority is the European Commission or an EU executive agency, offsetting may also be done against amounts owed to other Commission services or executive agencies. Payments will not be made if the payment deadline or payments are suspended (see Articles 29 and 30). 22.3.4 Final payment — Final grant amount — Revenues and Profit — Recovery The final payment (payment of the balance) reimburses the remaining part of the eligible costs and contributions claimed for the implementation of the action (if any). The final payment will be made in accordance with the schedule and modalities set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 4.2). Payment is subject to the approval of the final periodic report. Its approval does not imply recognition of compliance, authenticity, completeness or correctness of its content. The final grant amount for the action will be calculated in the following steps: Step 1 — Calculation of the total accepted EU contribution Step 2 — Limit to the maximum grant amount Step 3 — Reduction due to the no-profit rule Step 1 — Calculation of the total accepted EU contribution The granting authority will first calculate the ‘accepted EU contribution’ for the action for all reporting periods, by calculating the ‘maximum EU contribution to costs’ (applying the funding rate to the total accepted costs of each beneficiary), taking into account requests for a lower contribution to costs, CFS threshold cappings (if any; see Article 24.5) and adding the contributions (accepted unit, flat-rate or lump sum contributions and financing not linked to costs, if any). After that, the granting authority will take into account grant reductions (if any). The resulting amount is the ‘total accepted EU contribution’. Step 2 — Limit to the maximum grant amount If the resulting amount is higher than the maximum grant amount set out in Article 5.2, it will be limited to the latter. Step 3 — Reduction due to the no-profit rule If the no-profit rule is provided for in the Data Sheet (see Point 4.2), the grant must not produce a profit (i.e. surplus of the amount obtained following Step 2 plus the action’s revenues, over the eligible costs and contributions approved by the granting authority). ‘Revenue’ is all income generated by the action, during its duration (see Article 4), for beneficiaries that are profit legal entities. If there is a profit, it will be deducted in proportion to the final rate of reimbursement of the eligible 44 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 costs approved by the granting authority (as compared to the amount calculated following Steps 1 and 2 minus the contributions). The balance (final payment) is then calculated by deducting the total amount of prefinancing and interim payments already made (if any), from the final grant amount: {final grant amount minus {prefinancing and interim payments made (if any)}}. If the balance is positive, it will be paid to the coordinator. The final payment (or part of it) may be offset (without the beneficiaries’ consent) against amounts owed by a beneficiary to the granting authority — up to the amount due to that beneficiary. For grants where the granting authority is the European Commission or an EU executive agency, offsetting may also be done against amounts owed to other Commission services or executive agencies. Payments will not be made if the payment deadline or payments are suspended (see Articles 29 and 30). If the balance is negative, it will be recovered in accordance with the following procedure: The granting authority will send a pre-information letter to the coordinator: - formally notifying the intention to recover, the final grant amount, the amount to be recovered and the reasons why - requesting observations within 30 days of receiving notification. If no observations are submitted (or the granting authority decides to pursue recovery despite the observations it has received), it will confirm the amount to be recovered (confirmation letter), together with a debit note with the terms and date for payment. If payment is not made by the date specified in the debit note, the granting authority will enforce recovery in accordance with Article 22.4. 22.3.5 Audit implementation after final payment — Revised final grant amount — Recovery If — after the final payment (in particular, after checks, reviews, audits or investigations; see Article 25) — the granting authority rejects costs or contributions (see Article 27) or reduces the grant (see Article 28), it will calculate the revised final grant amount for the beneficiary concerned. The beneficiary revised final grant amount will be calculated in the following step: Step 1 — Calculation of the revised total accepted EU contribution Step 1 — Calculation of the revised total accepted EU contribution The granting authority will first calculate the ‘revised accepted EU contribution’ for the beneficiary, by calculating the ‘revised accepted costs’ and ‘revised accepted contributions’. 45 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 After that, it will take into account grant reductions (if any). The resulting ‘revised total accepted EU contribution’ is the beneficiary revised final grant amount. If the revised final grant amount is lower than the beneficiary’s final grant amount (i.e. its share in the final grant amount for the action), it will be recovered in accordance with the following procedure: The beneficiary final grant amount (i.e. share in the final grant amount for the action) is calculated as follows: {{total accepted EU contribution for the beneficiary divided by total accepted EU contribution for the action} multiplied by final grant amount for the action}. The granting authority will send a pre-information letter to the beneficiary concerned: - formally notifying the intention to recover, the amount to be recovered and the reasons why and - requesting observations within 30 days of receiving notification. If no observations are submitted (or the granting authority decides to pursue recovery despite the observations it has received), it will confirm the amount to be recovered (confirmation letter), together with a debit note with the terms and the date for payment. Recoveries against affiliated entities (if any) will be handled through their beneficiaries. If payment is not made by the date specified in the debit note, the granting authority will enforce recovery in accordance with Article 22.4. 22.4 Enforced recovery If payment is not made by the date specified in the debit note, the amount due will be recovered: (a) by offsetting the amount — without the coordinator or beneficiary’s consent — against any amounts owed to the coordinator or beneficiary by the granting authority. In exceptional circumstances, to safeguard the EU financial interests, the amount may be offset before the payment date specified in the debit note. For grants where the granting authority is the European Commission or an EU executive agency, debts may also be offset against amounts owed by other Commission services or executive agencies. (b) by drawing on the financial guarantee(s) (if any) (c) by holding other beneficiaries jointly and severally liable (if any; see Data Sheet, Point 4.4) (d) by holding affiliated entities jointly and severally liable (if any, see Data Sheet, Point 4.4) (e) by taking legal action (see Article 43) or, provided that the granting authority is the European 46 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Commission or an EU executive agency, by adopting an enforceable decision under Article 299 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) and Article 100(2) of EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046. The amount to be recovered will be increased by late-payment interest at the rate set out in Article 22.5, from the day following the payment date in the debit note, up to and including the date the full payment is received. Partial payments will be first credited against expenses, charges and late-payment interest and then against the principal. Bank charges incurred in the recovery process will be borne by the beneficiary, unless Directive 2015/236617 applies. For grants where the granting authority is an EU executive agency, enforced recovery by offsetting or enforceable decision will be done by the services of the European Commission (see also Article 43). 22.5 Consequences of non-compliance 22.5.1 If the granting authority does not pay within the payment deadlines (see above), the beneficiaries are entitled to late-payment interest at the rate applied by the European Central Bank (ECB) for its main refinancing operations in euros (‘reference rate’), plus the rate specified in the Data Sheet (Point 4.2). The reference rate is the rate in force on the first day of the month in which the payment deadline expires, as published in the C series of the Official Journal of the European Union. If the late-payment interest is lower than or equal to EUR 200, it will be paid to the coordinator only on request submitted within two months of receiving the late payment. Late-payment interest is not due if all beneficiaries are EU Member States (including regional and local government authorities or other public bodies acting on behalf of a Member State for the purpose of this Agreement). If payments or the payment deadline are suspended (see Articles 29 and 30), payment will not be considered as late. Late-payment interest covers the period running from the day following the due date for payment (see above), up to and including the date of payment. Late-payment interest is not considered for the purposes of calculating the final grant amount. 22.5.2 If the coordinator breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28) and the grant or the coordinator may be terminated (see Article 32). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 23 — GUARANTEES 23.1 Prefinancing guarantee 17 Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on payment services in the internal market, amending Directives 2002/65/EC, 2009/110/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, and repealing Directive 2007/64/EC (OJ L 337, 23.12.2015, p. 35). 47 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 If required by the granting authority (see Data Sheet, Point 4.2), the beneficiaries must provide (one or more) prefinancing guarantee(s) in accordance with the timing and the amounts set out in the Data Sheet. The coordinator must submit them to the granting authority in due time before the prefinancing they are linked to. The guarantees must be drawn up using the template published on the Portal and fulfil the following conditions: (a) be provided by a bank or approved financial institution established in the EU or — if requested by the coordinator and accepted by the granting authority — by a third party or a bank or financial institution established outside the EU offering equivalent security (b) the guarantor stands as first-call guarantor and does not require the granting authority to first have recourse against the principal debtor (i.e. the beneficiary concerned) and (c) remain explicitly in force until the final payment and, if the final payment takes the form of a recovery, until five months after the debit note is notified to a beneficiary. They will be released within the following month. 23.2 Consequences of non-compliance If the beneficiaries breach their obligation to provide the prefinancing guarantee, the prefinancing will not be paid. Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 24 — CERTIFICATES 24.1 Operational verification report (OVR) Not applicable 24.2 Certificate on the financial statements (CFS) If required by the granting authority (see Data Sheet, Point 4.3), the beneficiaries must provide certificates on their financial statements (CFS), in accordance with the schedule, threshold and conditions set out in the Data Sheet. The coordinator must submit them as part of the periodic report (see Article 21). The certificates must be drawn up using the template published on the Portal, cover the costs declared on the basis of actual costs and costs according to usual cost accounting practices (if any), and fulfil the following conditions: (a) be provided by a qualified approved external auditor which is independent and complies with Directive 2006/43/EC18 (or for public bodies: by a competent independent public officer) 18 Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts or similar national regulations (OJ L 157, 9.6.2006, p. 87). 48 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 (b) the verification must be carried out according to the highest professional standards to ensure that the financial statements comply with the provisions under the Agreement and that the costs declared are eligible. The certificates will not affect the granting authority's right to carry out its own checks, reviews or audits, nor preclude the European Court of Auditors (ECA), the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) or the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) from using their prerogatives for audits and investigations under the Agreement (see Article 25). If the costs (or a part of them) were already audited by the granting authority, these costs do not need to be covered by the certificate and will not be counted for calculating the threshold (if any). 24.3 Certificate on the compliance of usual cost accounting practices (CoMUC) Not applicable 24.4 Systems and process audit (SPA) Not applicable 24.5 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary does not submit a certificate on the financial statements (CFS) or the certificate is rejected, the accepted EU contribution to costs will be capped to reflect the CFS threshold. If a beneficiary breaches any of its other obligations under this Article, the granting authority may apply the measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 25 — CHECKS, REVIEWS, AUDITS AND INVESTIGATIONS — EXTENSION OF FINDINGS 25.1 Granting authority checks, reviews and audits 25.1.1 Internal checks The granting authority may — during the action or afterwards — check the proper implementation of the action and compliance with the obligations under the Agreement, including assessing costs and contributions, deliverables and reports. 25.1.2 Project reviews The granting authority may carry out reviews on the proper implementation of the action and compliance with the obligations under the Agreement (general project reviews or specific issues reviews). Such project reviews may be started during the implementation of the action and until the time-limit set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 6). They will be formally notified to the coordinator or beneficiary concerned and will be considered to start on the date of the notification. If needed, the granting authority may be assisted by independent, outside experts. If it uses outside experts, the coordinator or beneficiary concerned will be informed and have the right to object on grounds of commercial confidentiality or conflict of interest. 49 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 The coordinator or beneficiary concerned must cooperate diligently and provide — within the deadline requested — any information and data in addition to deliverables and reports already submitted (including information on the use of resources). The granting authority may request beneficiaries to provide such information to it directly. Sensitive information and documents will be treated in accordance with Article 13. The coordinator or beneficiary concerned may be requested to participate in meetings, including with the outside experts. For on-the-spot visits, the beneficiary concerned must allow access to sites and premises (including to the outside experts) and must ensure that information requested is readily available. Information provided must be accurate, precise and complete and in the format requested, including electronic format. On the basis of the review findings, a project review report will be drawn up. The granting authority will formally notify the project review report to the coordinator or beneficiary concerned, which has 30 days from receiving notification to make observations. Project reviews (including project review reports) will be in the language of the Agreement. 25.1.3 Audits The granting authority may carry out audits on the proper implementation of the action and compliance with the obligations under the Agreement. Such audits may be started during the implementation of the action and until the time-limit set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 6). They will be formally notified to the beneficiary concerned and will be considered to start on the date of the notification. The granting authority may use its own audit service, delegate audits to a centralised service or use external audit firms. If it uses an external firm, the beneficiary concerned will be informed and have the right to object on grounds of commercial confidentiality or conflict of interest. The beneficiary concerned must cooperate diligently and provide — within the deadline requested — any information (including complete accounts, individual salary statements or other personal data) to verify compliance with the Agreement. Sensitive information and documents will be treated in accordance with Article 13. For on-the-spot visits, the beneficiary concerned must allow access to sites and premises (including for the external audit firm) and must ensure that information requested is readily available. Information provided must be accurate, precise and complete and in the format requested, including electronic format. On the basis of the audit findings, a draft audit report will be drawn up. The auditors will formally notify the draft audit report to the beneficiary concerned, which has 30 days from receiving notification to make observations (contradictory audit procedure). The final audit report will take into account observations by the beneficiary concerned and will be formally notified to them. 50 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Audits (including audit reports) will be in the language of the Agreement. 25.2 European Commission checks, reviews and audits in grants of other granting authorities Where the granting authority is not the European Commission, the latter has the same rights of checks, reviews and audits as the granting authority. 25.3 Access to records for assessing simplified forms of funding The beneficiaries must give the European Commission access to their statutory records for the periodic assessment of simplified forms of funding which are used in EU programmes. 25.4 OLAF, EPPO and ECA audits and investigations The following bodies may also carry out checks, reviews, audits and investigations — during the action or afterwards: - the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) under Regulations No 883/201319 and No 2185/9620 - the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) under Regulation 2017/1939 - the European Court of Auditors (ECA) under Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) and Article 257 of EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046. If requested by these bodies, the beneficiary concerned must provide full, accurate and complete information in the format requested (including complete accounts, individual salary statements or other personal data, including in electronic format) and allow access to sites and premises for on-the-spot visits or inspections — as provided for under these Regulations. To this end, the beneficiary concerned must keep all relevant information relating to the action, at least until the time-limit set out in the Data Sheet (Point 6) and, in any case, until any ongoing checks, reviews, audits, investigations, litigation or other pursuits of claims have been concluded. 25.5 Consequences of checks, reviews, audits and investigations — Extension of results of reviews, audits or investigations 25.5.1 Consequences of checks, reviews, audits and investigations in this grant Findings in checks, reviews, audits or investigations carried out in the context of this grant may lead to rejections (see Article 27), grant reduction (see Article 28) or other measures described in Chapter 5. Rejections or grant reductions after the final payment will lead to a revised final grant amount (see Article 22). 19 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999 (OJ L 248, 18/09/2013, p. 1). 20 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities' financial interests against fraud and other irregularities (OJ L 292, 15/11/1996, p. 2). 51 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 Findings in checks, reviews, audits or investigations during the action implementation may lead to a request for amendment (see Article 39), to change the description of the action set out in Annex 1. Checks, reviews, audits or investigations that find systemic or recurrent errors, irregularities, fraud or breach of obligations in any EU grant may also lead to consequences in other EU grants awarded under similar conditions (‘extension to other grants’). Moreover, findings arising from an OLAF or EPPO investigation may lead to criminal prosecution under national law. 25.5.2 Extension from other grants Results of checks, reviews, audits or investigations in other grants may be extended to this grant, if: (a) the beneficiary concerned is found, in other EU grants awarded under similar conditions, to have committed systemic or recurrent errors, irregularities, fraud or breach of obligations that have a material impact on this grant and (b) those findings are formally notified to the beneficiary concerned — together with the list of grants affected by the findings — within the time-limit for audits set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 6). The granting authority will formally notify the beneficiary concerned of the intention to extend the findings and the list of grants affected. If the extension concerns rejections of costs or contributions: the notification will include: (a) an invitation to submit observations on the list of grants affected by the findings (b) the request to submit revised financial statements for all grants affected (c) the correction rate for extrapolation, established on the basis of the systemic or recurrent errors, to calculate the amounts to be rejected, if the beneficiary concerned: (i) considers that the submission of revised financial statements is not possible or practicable or (ii) does not submit revised financial statements. If the extension concerns grant reductions: the notification will include: (a) an invitation to submit observations on the list of grants affected by the findings and (b) the correction rate for extrapolation, established on the basis of the systemic or recurrent errors and the principle of proportionality. The beneficiary concerned has 60 days from receiving notification to submit observations, revised financial statements or to propose a duly substantiated alternative correction method/rate. On the basis of this, the granting authority will analyse the impact and decide on the implementation (i.e. start rejection or grant reduction procedures, either on the basis of the revised financial statements or the announced/alternative method/rate or a mix of those; see Articles 27 and 28). 52 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 25.6 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, costs or contributions insufficiently substantiated will be ineligible (see Article 6) and will be rejected (see Article 27), and the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Such breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5. ARTICLE 26 — IMPACT EVALUATIONS 26.1 Impact evaluation The granting authority may carry out impact evaluations of the action, measured against the objectives and indicators of the EU programme funding the grant. Such evaluations may be started during implementation of the action and until the time-limit set out in the Data Sheet (see Point 6). They will be formally notified to the coordinator or beneficiaries and will be considered to start on the date of the notification. If needed, the granting authority may be assisted by independent outside experts. The coordinator or beneficiaries must provide any information relevant to evaluate the impact of the action, including information in electronic format. 26.2 Consequences of non-compliance If a beneficiary breaches any of its obligations under this Article, the granting authority may apply the measures described in Chapter 5. CHAPTER 5 CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE SECTION 1 REJECTIONS AND GRANT REDUCTION ARTICLE 27 — REJECTION OF COSTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS 27.1 Conditions The granting authority will — at beneficiary termination, interim payment, final payment or afterwards — reject any costs or contributions which are ineligible (see Article 6), in particular following checks, reviews, audits or investigations (see Article 25). The rejection may also be based on the extension of findings from other grants to this grant (see Article 25). Ineligible costs or contributions will be rejected. 27.2 Procedure If the rejection does not lead to a recovery, the granting authority will formally notify the coordinator or beneficiary concerned of the rejection, the amounts and the reasons why. The coordinator or 53 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 beneficiary concerned may — within 30 days of receiving notification — submit observations if it disagrees with the rejection (payment review procedure). If the rejection leads to a recovery, the granting authority will follow the contradictory procedure with pre-information letter set out in Article 22. 27.3 Effects If the granting authority rejects costs or contributions, it will deduct them from the costs or contributions declared and then calculate the amount due (and, if needed, make a recovery; see Article 22). ARTICLE 28 — GRANT REDUCTION 28.1 Conditions The granting authority may — at beneficiary termination, final payment or afterwards — reduce the grant for a beneficiary, if: (a) the beneficiary (or a person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed: (i) substantial errors, irregularities or fraud or (ii) serious breach of obligations under this Agreement or during its award (including improper implementation of the action, non-compliance with the call conditions, submission of false information, failure to provide required information, breach of ethics or security rules (if applicable), etc.), or (b) the beneficiary (or a person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed — in other EU grants awarded to it under similar conditions — systemic or recurrent errors, irregularities, fraud or serious breach of obligations that have a material impact on this grant (see Article 25). The amount of the reduction will be calculated for each beneficiary concerned and proportionate to the seriousness and the duration of the errors, irregularities or fraud or breach of obligations, by applying an individual reduction rate to their accepted EU contribution. 28.2 Procedure If the grant reduction does not lead to a recovery, the granting authority will formally notify the coordinator or beneficiary concerned of the reduction, the amount to be reduced and the reasons why. The coordinator or beneficiary concerned may — within 30 days of receiving notification — submit observations if it disagrees with the reduction (payment review procedure). If the grant reduction leads to a recovery, the granting authority will follow the contradictory procedure with pre-information letter set out in Article 22. 28.3 Effects 54 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 If the granting authority reduces the grant, it will deduct the reduction and then calculate the amount due (and, if needed, make a recovery; see Article 22). SECTION 2 SUSPENSION AND TERMINATION ARTICLE 29 — PAYMENT DEADLINE SUSPENSION 29.1 Conditions The granting authority may — at any moment — suspend the payment deadline if a payment cannot be processed because: (a) the required report (see Article 21) has not been submitted or is not complete or additional information is needed (b) there are doubts about the amount to be paid (e.g. ongoing audit extension procedure, queries about eligibility, need for a grant reduction, etc.) and additional checks, reviews, audits or investigations are necessary, or (c) there are other issues affecting the EU financial interests. 29.2 Procedure The granting authority will formally notify the coordinator of the suspension and the reasons why. The suspension will take effect the day the notification is sent. If the conditions for suspending the payment deadline are no longer met, the suspension will be lifted — and the remaining time to pay (see Data Sheet, Point 4.2) will resume. If the suspension exceeds two months, the coordinator may request the granting authority to confirm if the suspension will continue. If the payment deadline has been suspended due to the non-compliance of the report and the revised report is not submitted (or was submitted but is also rejected), the granting authority may also terminate the grant or the participation of the coordinator (see Article 32). ARTICLE 30 — PAYMENT SUSPENSION 30.1 Conditions The granting authority may — at any moment — suspend payments, in whole or in part for one or more beneficiaries, if: (a) a beneficiary (or a person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed or is suspected of having committed: (i) substantial errors, irregularities or fraud or (ii) serious breach of obligations under this Agreement or during its award (including 55 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 improper implementation of the action, non-compliance with the call conditions, submission of false information, failure to provide required information, breach of ethics or security rules (if applicable), etc.), or (b) a beneficiary (or a person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed — in other EU grants awarded to it under similar conditions — systemic or recurrent errors, irregularities, fraud or serious breach of obligations that have a material impact on this grant. If payments are suspended for one or more beneficiaries, the granting authority will make partial payment(s) for the part(s) not suspended. If suspension concerns the final payment, the payment (or recovery) of the remaining amount after suspension is lifted will be considered to be the payment that closes the action. 30.2 Procedure Before suspending payments, the granting authority will send a pre-information letter to the beneficiary concerned: - formally notifying the intention to suspend payments and the reasons why and - requesting observations within 30 days of receiving notification. If the granting authority does not receive observations or decides to pursue the procedure despite the observations it has received, it will confirm the suspension (confirmation letter). Otherwise, it will formally notify that the procedure is discontinued. At the end of the suspension procedure, the granting authority will also inform the coordinator. The suspension will take effect the day after the confirmation notification is sent. If the conditions for resuming payments are met, the suspension will be lifted. The granting authority will formally notify the beneficiary concerned (and the coordinator) and set the suspension end date. During the suspension, no prefinancing will be paid to the beneficiaries concerned. For interim payments, the periodic reports for all reporting periods except the last one (see Article 21) must not contain any financial statements from the beneficiary concerned (or its affiliated entities). The coordinator must include them in the next periodic report after the suspension is lifted or — if suspension is not lifted before the end of the action — in the last periodic report. ARTICLE 31 — GRANT AGREEMENT SUSPENSION 31.1 Consortium-requested GA suspension 31.1.1 Conditions and procedure The beneficiaries may request the suspension of the grant or any part of it, if exceptional circumstances — in particular force majeure (see Article 35) — make implementation impossible or excessively difficult. The coordinator must submit a request for amendment (see Article 39), with: 56 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - the reasons why - the date the suspension takes effect; this date may be before the date of the submission of the amendment request and - the expected date of resumption. The suspension will take effect on the day specified in the amendment. Once circumstances allow for implementation to resume, the coordinator must immediately request another amendment of the Agreement to set the suspension end date, the resumption date (one day after suspension end date), extend the duration and make other changes necessary to adapt the action to the new situation (see Article 39) — unless the grant has been terminated (see Article 32). The suspension will be lifted with effect from the suspension end date set out in the amendment. This date may be before the date of the submission of the amendment request. During the suspension, no prefinancing will be paid. Costs incurred or contributions for activities implemented during grant suspension are not eligible (see Article 6.3). 31.2 EU-initiated GA suspension 31.2.1 Conditions The granting authority may suspend the grant or any part of it, if: (a) a beneficiary (or a person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed or is suspected of having committed: (i) substantial errors, irregularities or fraud or (ii) serious breach of obligations under this Agreement or during its award (including improper implementation of the action, non-compliance with the call conditions, submission of false information, failure to provide required information, breach of ethics or security rules (if applicable), etc.), or (b) a beneficiary (or a person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed — in other EU grants awarded to it under similar conditions — systemic or recurrent errors, irregularities, fraud or serious breach of obligations that have a material impact on this grant (c) other: (i) linked action issues: not applicable (ii) additional GA suspension grounds: not applicable. 31.2.2 Procedure Before suspending the grant, the granting authority will send a pre-information letter to the coordinator: - formally notifying the intention to suspend the grant and the reasons why and 57 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - requesting observations within 30 days of receiving notification. If the granting authority does not receive observations or decides to pursue the procedure despite the observations it has received, it will confirm the suspension (confirmation letter). Otherwise, it will formally notify that the procedure is discontinued. The suspension will take effect the day after the confirmation notification is sent (or on a later date specified in the notification). Once the conditions for resuming implementation of the action are met, the granting authority will formally notify the coordinator a lifting of suspension letter, in which it will set the suspension end date and invite the coordinator to request an amendment of the Agreement to set the resumption date (one day after suspension end date), extend the duration and make other changes necessary to adapt the action to the new situation (see Article 39) — unless the grant has been terminated (see Article 32). The suspension will be lifted with effect from the suspension end date set out in the lifting of suspension letter. This date may be before the date on which the letter is sent. During the suspension, no prefinancing will be paid. Costs incurred or contributions for activities implemented during suspension are not eligible (see Article 6.3). The beneficiaries may not claim damages due to suspension by the granting authority (see Article 33). Grant suspension does not affect the granting authority’s right to terminate the grant or a beneficiary (see Article 32) or reduce the grant (see Article 28). ARTICLE 32 — GRANT AGREEMENT OR BENEFICIARY TERMINATION 32.1 Consortium-requested GA termination 32.1.1 Conditions and procedure The beneficiaries may request the termination of the grant. The coordinator must submit a request for amendment (see Article 39), with: - the reasons why - the date the consortium ends work on the action (‘end of work date’) and - the date the termination takes effect (‘termination date’); this date must be after the date of the submission of the amendment request. The termination will take effect on the termination date specified in the amendment. If no reasons are given or if the granting authority considers the reasons do not justify termination, it may consider the grant terminated improperly. 32.1.2 Effects The coordinator must — within 60 days from when termination takes effect — submit a periodic report (for the open reporting period until termination). The granting authority will calculate the final grant amount and final payment on the basis of the report 58 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 submitted and taking into account the costs incurred and contributions for activities implemented before the end of work date (see Article 22). Costs relating to contracts due for execution only after the end of work are not eligible. If the granting authority does not receive the report within the deadline, only costs and contributions which are included in an approved periodic report will be taken into account (no costs/contributions if no periodic report was ever approved). Improper termination may lead to a grant reduction (see Article 28). After termination, the beneficiaries’ obligations (in particular Articles 13 (confidentiality and security), 16 (IPR), 17 (communication, dissemination and visibility), 21 (reporting), 25 (checks, reviews, audits and investigations), 26 (impact evaluation), 27 (rejections), 28 (grant reduction) and 42 (assignment of claims)) continue to apply. 32.2 Consortium-requested beneficiary termination 32.2.1 Conditions and procedure The coordinator may request the termination of the participation of one or more beneficiaries, on request of the beneficiary concerned or on behalf of the other beneficiaries. The coordinator must submit a request for amendment (see Article 39), with: - the reasons why - the opinion of the beneficiary concerned (or proof that this opinion has been requested in writing) - the date the beneficiary ends work on the action (‘end of work date’) - the date the termination takes effect (‘termination date’); this date must be after the date of the submission of the amendment request. If the termination concerns the coordinator and is done without its agreement, the amendment request must be submitted by another beneficiary (acting on behalf of the consortium). The termination will take effect on the termination date specified in the amendment. If no information is given or if the granting authority considers that the reasons do not justify termination, it may consider the beneficiary to have been terminated improperly. 32.2.2 Effects The coordinator must — within 60 days from when termination takes effect — submit: (i) a report on the distribution of payments to the beneficiary concerned (ii) a termination report from the beneficiary concerned, for the open reporting period until termination, containing an overview of the progress of the work, the financial statement, the explanation on the use of resources, and, if applicable, the certificate on the financial statement (CFS; see Articles 21 and 24.2 and Data Sheet, Point 4.3) 59 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 (iii) a second request for amendment (see Article 39) with other amendments needed (e.g. reallocation of the tasks and the estimated budget of the terminated beneficiary; addition of a new beneficiary to replace the terminated beneficiary; change of coordinator, etc.). The granting authority will calculate the amount due to the beneficiary on the basis of the report submitted and taking into account the costs incurred and contributions for activities implemented before the end of work date (see Article 22). Costs relating to contracts due for execution only after the end of work are not eligible. The information in the termination report must also be included in the periodic report for the next reporting period (see Article 21). If the granting authority does not receive the termination report within the deadline, only costs and contributions which are included in an approved periodic report will be taken into account (no costs/ contributions if no periodic report was ever approved). If the granting authority does not receive the report on the distribution of payments within the deadline, it will consider that: - the coordinator did not distribute any payment to the beneficiary concerned and that - the beneficiary concerned must not repay any amount to the coordinator. If the second request for amendment is accepted by the granting authority, the Agreement is amended to introduce the necessary changes (see Article 39). If the second request for amendment is rejected by the granting authority (because it calls into question the decision awarding the grant or breaches the principle of equal treatment of applicants), the grant may be terminated (see Article 32). Improper termination may lead to a reduction of the grant (see Article 31) or grant termination (see Article 32). After termination, the concerned beneficiary’s obligations (in particular Articles 13 (confidentiality and security), 16 (IPR), 17 (communication, dissemination and visibility), 21 (reporting), 25 (checks, reviews, audits and investigations), 26 (impact evaluation), 27 (rejections), 28 (grant reduction) and 42 (assignment of claims)) continue to apply. 32.3 EU-initiated GA or beneficiary termination 32.3.1 Conditions The granting authority may terminate the grant or the participation of one or more beneficiaries, if: (a) one or more beneficiaries do not accede to the Agreement (see Article 40) (b) a change to the action or the legal, financial, technical, organisational or ownership situation of a beneficiary is likely to substantially affect the implementation of the action or calls into question the decision to award the grant (including changes linked to one of the exclusion grounds listed in the declaration of honour) (c) following termination of one or more beneficiaries, the necessary changes to the Agreement 60 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 (and their impact on the action) would call into question the decision awarding the grant or breach the principle of equal treatment of applicants (d) implementation of the action has become impossible or the changes necessary for its continuation would call into question the decision awarding the grant or breach the principle of equal treatment of applicants (e) a beneficiary (or person with unlimited liability for its debts) is subject to bankruptcy proceedings or similar (including insolvency, winding-up, administration by a liquidator or court, arrangement with creditors, suspension of business activities, etc.) (f) a beneficiary (or person with unlimited liability for its debts) is in breach of social security or tax obligations (g) a beneficiary (or person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has been found guilty of grave professional misconduct (h) a beneficiary (or person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed fraud, corruption, or is involved in a criminal organisation, money laundering, terrorism-related crimes (including terrorism financing), child labour or human trafficking (i) a beneficiary (or person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) was created under a different jurisdiction with the intent to circumvent fiscal, social or other legal obligations in the country of origin (or created another entity with this purpose) (j) a beneficiary (or person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed: (i) substantial errors, irregularities or fraud or (ii) serious breach of obligations under this Agreement or during its award (including improper implementation of the action, non-compliance with the call conditions, submission of false information, failure to provide required information, breach of ethics or security rules (if applicable), etc.) (k) a beneficiary (or person having powers of representation, decision-making or control, or person essential for the award/implementation of the grant) has committed — in other EU grants awarded to it under similar conditions — systemic or recurrent errors, irregularities, fraud or serious breach of obligations that have a material impact on this grant (extension of findings from other grants to this grant; see Article 25) (l) despite a specific request by the granting authority, a beneficiary does not request — through the coordinator — an amendment to the Agreement to end the participation of one of its affiliated entities or associated partners that is in one of the situations under points (d), (f), (e), (g), (h), (i) or (j) and to reallocate its tasks, or (m) other: (i) linked action issues: not applicable 61 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 (ii) additional GA termination grounds: not applicable. 32.3.2 Procedure Before terminating the grant or participation of one or more beneficiaries, the granting authority will send a pre-information letter to the coordinator or beneficiary concerned: - formally notifying the intention to terminate and the reasons why and - requesting observations within 30 days of receiving notification. If the granting authority does not receive observations or decides to pursue the procedure despite the observations it has received, it will confirm the termination and the date it will take effect (confirmation letter). Otherwise, it will formally notify that the procedure is discontinued. For beneficiary terminations, the granting authority will — at the end of the procedure — also inform the coordinator. The termination will take effect the day after the confirmation notification is sent (or on a later date specified in the notification; ‘termination date’). 32.3.3 Effects (a) for GA termination: The coordinator must — within 60 days from when termination takes effect — submit a periodic report (for the last open reporting period until termination). The granting authority will calculate the final grant amount and final payment on the basis of the report submitted and taking into account the costs incurred and contributions for activities implemented before termination takes effect (see Article 22). Costs relating to contracts due for execution only after termination are not eligible. If the grant is terminated for breach of the obligation to submit reports, the coordinator may not submit any report after termination. If the granting authority does not receive the report within the deadline, only costs and contributions which are included in an approved periodic report will be taken into account (no costs/contributions if no periodic report was ever approved). Termination does not affect the granting authority’s right to reduce the grant (see Article 28) or to impose administrative sanctions (see Article 34). The beneficiaries may not claim damages due to termination by the granting authority (see Article 33). After termination, the beneficiaries’ obligations (in particular Articles 13 (confidentiality and security), 16 (IPR), 17 (communication, dissemination and visibility), 21 (reporting), 25 (checks, reviews, audits and investigations), 26 (impact evaluation), 27 (rejections), 28 (grant reduction) and 42 (assignment of claims)) continue to apply. (b) for beneficiary termination: 62 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 The coordinator must — within 60 days from when termination takes effect — submit: (i) a report on the distribution of payments to the beneficiary concerned (ii) a termination report from the beneficiary concerned, for the open reporting period until termination, containing an overview of the progress of the work, the financial statement, the explanation on the use of resources, and, if applicable, the certificate on the financial statement (CFS; see Articles 21 and 24.2 and Data Sheet, Point 4.3) (iii) a request for amendment (see Article 39) with any amendments needed (e.g. reallocation of the tasks and the estimated budget of the terminated beneficiary; addition of a new beneficiary to replace the terminated beneficiary; change of coordinator, etc.). The granting authority will calculate the amount due to the beneficiary on the basis of the report submitted and taking into account the costs incurred and contributions for activities implemented before termination takes effect (see Article 22). Costs relating to contracts due for execution only after termination are not eligible. The information in the termination report must also be included in the periodic report for the next reporting period (see Article 21). If the granting authority does not receive the termination report within the deadline, only costs and contributions included in an approved periodic report will be taken into account (no costs/ contributions if no periodic report was ever approved). If the granting authority does not receive the report on the distribution of payments within the deadline, it will consider that: - the coordinator did not distribute any payment to the beneficiary concerned and that - the beneficiary concerned must not repay any amount to the coordinator. If the request for amendment is accepted by the granting authority, the Agreement is amended to introduce the necessary changes (see Article 39). If the request for amendment is rejected by the granting authority (because it calls into question the decision awarding the grant or breaches the principle of equal treatment of applicants), the grant may be terminated (see Article 32). After termination, the concerned beneficiary’s obligations (in particular Articles 13 (confidentiality and security), 16 (IPR), 17 (communication, dissemination and visibility), 21 (reporting), 25 (checks, reviews, audits and investigations), 26 (impact evaluation), 27 (rejections), 28 (grant reduction) and 42 (assignment of claims)) continue to apply. SECTION 3 OTHER CONSEQUENCES: DAMAGES AND ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS ARTICLE 33 — DAMAGES 63 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 33.1 Liability of the granting authority The granting authority cannot be held liable for any damage caused to the beneficiaries or to third parties as a consequence of the implementation of the Agreement, including for gross negligence. The granting authority cannot be held liable for any damage caused by any of the beneficiaries or other participants involved in the action, as a consequence of the implementation of the Agreement. 33.2 Liability of the beneficiaries The beneficiaries must compensate the granting authority for any damage it sustains as a result of the implementation of the action or because the action was not implemented in full compliance with the Agreement, provided that it was caused by gross negligence or wilful act. The liability does not extend to indirect or consequential losses or similar damage (such as loss of profit, loss of revenue or loss of contracts), provided such damage was not caused by wilful act or by a breach of confidentiality. ARTICLE 34 — ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS AND OTHER MEASURES Nothing in this Agreement may be construed as preventing the adoption of administrative sanctions (i.e. exclusion from EU award procedures and/or financial penalties) or other public law measures, in addition or as an alternative to the contractual measures provided under this Agreement (see, for instance, Articles 135 to 145 EU Financial Regulation 2018/1046 and Articles 4 and 7 of Regulation 2988/9521). SECTION 4 FORCE MAJEURE ARTICLE 35 — FORCE MAJEURE A party prevented by force majeure from fulfilling its obligations under the Agreement cannot be considered in breach of them. ‘Force majeure’ means any situation or event that: - prevents either party from fulfilling their obligations under the Agreement, - was unforeseeable, exceptional situation and beyond the parties’ control, - was not due to error or negligence on their part (or on the part of other participants involved in the action), and - proves to be inevitable in spite of exercising all due diligence. Any situation constituting force majeure must be formally notified to the other party without delay, stating the nature, likely duration and foreseeable effects. 21 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (OJ L 312, 23.12.1995, p. 1). 64 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 The parties must immediately take all the necessary steps to limit any damage due to force majeure and do their best to resume implementation of the action as soon as possible. CHAPTER 6 FINAL PROVISIONS ARTICLE 36 — COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE PARTIES 36.1 Forms and means of communication — Electronic management EU grants are managed fully electronically through the EU Funding & Tenders Portal (‘Portal’). All communications must be made electronically through the Portal, in accordance with the Portal Terms and Conditions and using the forms and templates provided there (except if explicitly instructed otherwise by the granting authority). Communications must be made in writing and clearly identify the grant agreement (project number and acronym). Communications must be made by persons authorised according to the Portal Terms and Conditions. For naming the authorised persons, each beneficiary must have designated — before the signature of this Agreement — a ‘legal entity appointed representative (LEAR)’. The role and tasks of the LEAR are stipulated in their appointment letter (see Portal Terms and Conditions). If the electronic exchange system is temporarily unavailable, instructions will be given on the Portal. 36.2 Date of communication The sending date for communications made through the Portal will be the date and time of sending, as indicated by the time logs. The receiving date for communications made through the Portal will be the date and time the communication is accessed, as indicated by the time logs. Formal notifications that have not been accessed within 10 days after sending, will be considered to have been accessed (see Portal Terms and Conditions). If a communication is exceptionally made on paper (by e-mail or postal service), general principles apply (i.e. date of sending/receipt). Formal notifications by registered post with proof of delivery will be considered to have been received either on the delivery date registered by the postal service or the deadline for collection at the post office. If the electronic exchange system is temporarily unavailable, the sending party cannot be considered in breach of its obligation to send a communication within a specified deadline. 36.3 Addresses for communication The Portal can be accessed via the Europa website. The address for paper communications to the granting authority (if exceptionally allowed) is the official mailing address indicated on its website. For beneficiaries, it is the legal address specified in the Portal Participant Register. 65 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 ARTICLE 37 — INTERPRETATION OF THE AGREEMENT The provisions in the Data Sheet take precedence over the rest of the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement. Annex 5 takes precedence over the Terms and Conditions; the Terms and Conditions take precedence over the Annexes other than Annex 5. Annex 2 takes precedence over Annex 1. ARTICLE 38 — CALCULATION OF PERIODS AND DEADLINES In accordance with Regulation No 1182/7122, periods expressed in days, months or years are calculated from the moment the triggering event occurs. The day during which that event occurs is not considered as falling within the period. ‘Days’ means calendar days, not working days. ARTICLE 39 — AMENDMENTS 39.1 Conditions The Agreement may be amended, unless the amendment entails changes to the Agreement which would call into question the decision awarding the grant or breach the principle of equal treatment of applicants. Amendments may be requested by any of the parties. 39.2 Procedure The party requesting an amendment must submit a request for amendment signed directly in the Portal Amendment tool. The coordinator submits and receives requests for amendment on behalf of the beneficiaries (see Annex 3). If a change of coordinator is requested without its agreement, the submission must be done by another beneficiary (acting on behalf of the other beneficiaries). The request for amendment must include: - the reasons why - the appropriate supporting documents and - for a change of coordinator without its agreement: the opinion of the coordinator (or proof that this opinion has been requested in writing). The granting authority may request additional information. 22 Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1182/71 of the Council of 3 June 1971 determining the rules applicable to periods, dates and time-limits (OJ L 124, 8/6/1971, p. 1). 66 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 If the party receiving the request agrees, it must sign the amendment in the tool within 45 days of receiving notification (or any additional information the granting authority has requested). If it does not agree, it must formally notify its disagreement within the same deadline. The deadline may be extended, if necessary for the assessment of the request. If no notification is received within the deadline, the request is considered to have been rejected. An amendment enters into force on the day of the signature of the receiving party. An amendment takes effect on the date of entry into force or other date specified in the amendment. ARTICLE 40 — ACCESSION AND ADDITION OF NEW BENEFICIARIES 40.1 Accession of the beneficiaries mentioned in the Preamble The beneficiaries which are not coordinator must accede to the grant by signing the accession form (see Annex 3) directly in the Portal Grant Preparation tool, within 30 days after the entry into force of the Agreement (see Article 44). They will assume the rights and obligations under the Agreement with effect from the date of its entry into force (see Article 44). If a beneficiary does not accede to the grant within the above deadline, the coordinator must — within 30 days — request an amendment (see Article 39) to terminate the beneficiary and make any changes necessary to ensure proper implementation of the action. This does not affect the granting authority’s right to terminate the grant (see Article 32). 40.2 Addition of new beneficiaries In justified cases, the beneficiaries may request the addition of a new beneficiary. For this purpose, the coordinator must submit a request for amendment in accordance with Article 39. It must include an accession form (see Annex 3) signed by the new beneficiary directly in the Portal Amendment tool. New beneficiaries will assume the rights and obligations under the Agreement with effect from the date of their accession specified in the accession form (see Annex 3). Additions are also possible in mono-beneficiary grants. ARTICLE 41 — TRANSFER OF THE AGREEMENT In justified cases, the beneficiary of a mono-beneficiary grant may request the transfer of the grant to a new beneficiary, provided that this would not call into question the decision awarding the grant or breach the principle of equal treatment of applicants. The beneficiary must submit a request for amendment (see Article 39), with - the reasons why - the accession form (see Annex 3) signed by the new beneficiary directly in the Portal Amendment tool and 67 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 - additional supporting documents (if required by the granting authority). The new beneficiary will assume the rights and obligations under the Agreement with effect from the date of accession specified in the accession form (see Annex 3). ARTICLE 42 — ASSIGNMENTS OF CLAIMS FOR PAYMENT AGAINST THE GRANTING AUTHORITY The beneficiaries may not assign any of their claims for payment against the granting authority to any third party, except if expressly approved in writing by the granting authority on the basis of a reasoned, written request by the coordinator (on behalf of the beneficiary concerned). If the granting authority has not accepted the assignment or if the terms of it are not observed, the assignment will have no effect on it. In no circumstances will an assignment release the beneficiaries from their obligations towards the granting authority. ARTICLE 43 — APPLICABLE LAW AND SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES 43.1 Applicable law The Agreement is governed by the applicable EU law, supplemented if necessary by the law of Belgium. Special rules may apply for beneficiaries which are international organisations (if any; see Data Sheet, Point 5). 43.2 Dispute settlement If a dispute concerns the interpretation, application or validity of the Agreement, the parties must bring action before the EU General Court — or, on appeal, the EU Court of Justice — under Article 272 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU). For non-EU beneficiaries (if any), such disputes must be brought before the courts of Brussels, Belgium — unless an international agreement provides for the enforceability of EU court judgements. For beneficiaries with arbitration as special dispute settlement forum (if any; see Data Sheet, Point 5), the dispute will — in the absence of an amicable settlement — be settled in accordance with the Rules for Arbitration published on the Portal. If a dispute concerns administrative sanctions, offsetting or an enforceable decision under Article 299 TFEU (see Articles 22 and 34), the beneficiaries must bring action before the General Court — or, on appeal, the Court of Justice — under Article 263 TFEU. For grants where the granting authority is an EU executive agency (see Preamble), actions against offsetting and enforceable decisions must be brought against the European Commission (not against the granting authority; see also Article 22). ARTICLE 44 — ENTRY INTO FORCE 68 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 The Agreement will enter into force on the day of signature by the granting authority or the coordinator, depending on which is later. SIGNATURES For the coordinator For the granting authority [--TGSMark#signature-994060075_75_210--] [--TGSMark#signature-service_75_210--] Kristiina Alliksaar with ECAS id n00du47y signed in the Participant Signed by Hans Ulrich RHEIN with ECAS id rheinha as an Portal on 23/10/2023 at 12:53:35 (transaction id SigId-90708-hCxasz authorised representative on 23-10-2023 13:08:57 (transaction id ZKun3xxYD5QjapMHYNiC9VwS7fYyonmUpzJd4uzk8OU92yp10yBB4 SigId-91017-Kj5cGznhbXJONeqH45XsCRX2hbJ7dUQGUmys4O5jm SILaGabSctoui2JduNfrxEThUo8m-jpJZscgsw0KSOvXY2lRJoe-NChYga p3o7fnqkbbSQvYlWyCzUl4Gis04JkZKoVICEzk6TEOiGUm- ovYELVkm7ZXcE52w6fbOsJV27QReYijdj6G4D9cQNMrc5um5xAuMsK jpJZscgsw0KSOvXY2lRJoe-lgdLeTWzIsE8vQC2ddxHk5RLewDdl4uds earyUP5EupI1dteYGnJ9WEWuQW). Timestamp by third party at Xyjf2pzsdXj3vR43C6LqWk35LjH8Izbk3YY06b4k8FKBxyg1HeuoQW) 2023.10.23 12:53:40 CEST 2023.10.23 13:08:59 CEST 69  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 1 Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE) Description of the action (DoA) Part A Part B Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION (PART A) COVER PAGE Part A of the Description of the Action (DoA) must be completed directly on the Portal Grant Preparation screens. PROJECT Grant Preparation (General Information screen) — Enter the info. Project number: 101120831 Project name: Integrated renovation services for heritage homes of Estonia Project acronym: LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME Call: LIFE-2022-CET Topic: LIFE-2022-CET-HOMERENO Type of action: LIFE-PJG Service: CINEA/D/01 Project starting date: fixed date: 1 November 2023 Project duration: 36 months TABLE OF CONTENTS Project summary ......................................................................................................................................................3 List of participants .................................................................................................................................................. 3 List of work packages .............................................................................................................................................4 Staff effort ............................................................................................................................................................. 18 List of deliverables ................................................................................................................................................19 List of milestones (outputs/outcomes) .................................................................................................................. 25 List of critical risks ............................................................................................................................................... 27 2 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 PROJECT SUMMARY Project summary Grant Preparation (General Information screen) — Provide an overall description of your project (including context and overall objectives, planned activities and main achievements, and expected results and impacts (on target groups, change procedures, capacities, innovation etc)). This summary should give readers a clear idea of what your project is about. Use the project summary from your proposal. The primary goal of the LIFE heritageHOME project, known as "Integrated Renovation Services for Heritage Homes of Estonia” is to pioneer a comprehensive renovation service that guides owners of historic homes in Estonia through the process of enhancing their properties' energy efficiency. LIFE heritageHOME builds upon the principles and guidance laid out in the 'European Heritage Green Paper’ and engages a range of national policy makers, heritage operators, researchers and representatives of civil society to facilitate the uptake of these principles in Estonian context. The solutions developed and tested will set up a model on how to facilitate energy-efficient renovations within historical building contexts and equip it with necessary toolbox. Moreover, the project places a strong emphasis on involving homeowners in co-creating solutions and collaborating with scientific and professional communities to harness best practices tailored for heritage homes. The ultimate aim is to assemble an integrated set of services that effectively surmounts the obstacles impeding energy-efficient renovations for heritage properties. The project's scope includes the development and customization of necessary solutions for the integrated service, boosting the capabilities of key facilitators who support energy renovations for heritage homes, and creating a user- friendly digital platform. This platform will serve as a client-facing interface, making it effortless for property owners to access essential information and navigate the various steps required throughout their renovation journey. Crucially, the solutions devised within LIFE heritageHOME are not solely applicable to heritage homeowners in Estonia; they are designed to be replicable in other European countries. The project aims to extend its reach to heritage authorities in the Nordic-Baltic region, particularly in cold climates, and engage with the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) National Committees. By doing so, it will introduce both the technical renovation solutions and the service design of a digital one-stop-shop, simplifying the customer journey toward achieving improved energy efficiency in heritage homes. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS PARTICIPANTS Grant Preparation (Beneficiaries screen) — Enter the info. Number Role Short name Legal name Country PIC 1 COO KUM KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM EE 994060075 2 BEN MKA MUINSUSKAITSEAMET EE 951666710 3 BEN KLIM KLIIMAMINISTEERIUM EE 941609750 4 BEN TalTech TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL EE 999842536 5 BEN EKA EESTI KUNSTIAKADEEMIA EE 955368327 6 BEN ICOMOS MITTETULUNDUSUHING EESTI ICOMOS EE 884437465 3 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIST OF WORK PACKAGES Work packages Grant Preparation (Work Packages screen) — Enter the info. Work Work Package name Lead Beneficiary Effort Start End Deliverables Package No (Person- Month Month Months) WP1 Project management and coordination 1 - KUM 36.00 1 36 D1.1 – Coordination tools (communication plan, sensemaking plan, replication strategy) D1.2 – Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool D1.3 – Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool WP2 Mapping the Customer Journey for the heritage 5 - EKA 36.20 1 24 D2.1 – Public registry data model for home energy renovations heritage buildings D2.2 – Synthesis report for owner centred service design process D2.3 – Green Transition Charter of Estonian heritage buildings WP3 Standardization of solutions for cost-effective 4 - TalTech 54.30 1 30 D3.1 – Technical solutions for single and less disruptive renovation of the historical renovation measures (Month 12) buildings D3.2 – Technical report on the renovation solutions D3.3 – Technical solutions for single renovation measures and configuration criteria WP4 Building the partnership for integrated heritage 2 - MKA 38.50 1 36 D4.1 – Implementation report for owner home renovation service centred service design process WP5 Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage 3 - KLIM 33.20 1 36 D5.1 – Replication guideline for digital one- homeowners stop-shops of heritage home renovations 4 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Work packages Grant Preparation (Work Packages screen) — Enter the info. Work Work Package name Lead Beneficiary Effort Start End Deliverables Package No (Person- Month Month Months) WP6 Disseminating the best practices and solutions for 1 - KUM 24.20 1 36 D6.1 – Energy renovation atlas of heritage sustainability and replication homes D6.2 – Legacy report of LIFE heritageHOME 5 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Work package WP1 – Project management and coordination Work Package Number WP1 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Work Package Name Project management and coordination Start Month 1 End Month 36 Objectives WP1 provides the organizational infrastructure and management of the project, necessary to operate the project and to perform all administrative, financial and operational tasks, directly related to the coordination of the project. This includes: 1) project planning, coordination, and progress control; 2) reporting to Grant Authority (including necessary audits etc); 3) provision of information required by Grant Authority & local monitoring team; organization of project meetings; project communication, internal communication and knowledge exchange; 4) valuation and transfer of the input of the communication platform on the project website & social media channels; 5) monitoring the KPI of the project. WP1 also includes the internal monitoring, quality control and the feedback loops of project implementation and actions to achieve project visibility. Description T.1.1 Contractual management and coordination KuM (COO), all beneficiaries contribute The task includes overall coordination of the project as well as performing the tasks of administrative, financial and contractual management. For the implementation of the whole project the internal arrangements regarding their operation and coordination are made, to ensure that specific synergistic roles are understood for the actions to be implemented properly. All the roles defined under the chapter 4 of the (model) Grant Agreement, are to be carried out under the task. Also, the routine of steering panel will be organized. Coordination activities include the overall project strategy implementation, including project planning, performance and financial control, quality assurance, risk management and contingency planning, and administration of the LIFE grant. KuM is responsible for internal communication management, ensuring that an adequate level of communication exists among the consortium, including through the preparation of minutes of meetings, and circulars to the consortium where appropriate. Next to the scheduled meetings frequently scheduled web-meetings will take place; in addition, ad hoc web- meetings will take place, at least every month (or more frequent, depending on the necessity and the state of play of the tasks concerned). Administrative, Financial and Contractual Management activities are carried out according to general conditions and provisions set forth within the Grant Agreement and the LIFE guidelines for the implementation of projects. KuM as a coordinator will act as a permanent helpdesk for all project participants, providing practical support particularly for the compilation of Financial Statements in compliancy with the LIFE Financial and Guidance Notes on Project Reporting, and the Grant Agreement, where necessary. KuM will be responsible also for the overall contractual management with Grant Authority (such as requests for amendments to the Grant Agreement). Consortium Management will include tasks like organization of official project meetings such as periodic Progress Meetings, Steering Board meetings. Also, the coordinator will be responsible for the distribution of deliverables and reports to the consortium, and maintenance of a project archive. Associated beneficiaries engaged to the task will be keeping information stored in the SyGMA up to date as well as they will take the responsibility for submitting to the coordinator in good time: 1) the financial statements (and additional documentation required as certificates etc); 2) the contribution to the deliverables and technical reports; 3) any other documents or information required by the granting authority under the Agreement. Steering of the project: A consortium-wide project steering panel is aimed to follow the projects progress. Annual meetings for the steering group are foreseen. See the management structure also explained under section 4.2 Project management structure of the proposal. T.1.2 Sensemaking, evaluation, and learning MKA (BEN), all beneficiaries contribute 6 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 This task concerns the continuous internal monitoring of the project results by the participants and joint sensemaking on project progress towards expected impact and cross fertilization between project work streams (Figure 10). The internal monitoring will be including: 1) Overall monitoring of the progress and achieved results in relation to the project time schedule and schedule of deliverables by the coordinator; 2) Monitoring of the results achieved by the individual participants in terms of quality of the work delivered in relation to their tasks, involvement of necessary key actors (outside the consortium) and target groups; 3) Devising a contingency plan and alternative approaches in case of deviations to the work programme or performance indicators; 4) The results of the internal project monitoring are to be disseminated in progress and screening meetings and applied for the overall coordination tasks (T1.1). The comprehensive monitoring of internal project progress allows to apply timely response to any variances (force majeure, unforeseen circumstances, potential for complimentary efforts etc). The task will also include reporting of (estimated and actually achieved) key-performance indicators (KPIs) in the LIFE KPI web tool within the first 9 months from grant signature and at the end of the project. Various externally collected data (state monitoring programs, city statistics, university researchers) analyzed for correlations with project results. Under this task data in various reports is aggregated and concluded. T.1.3 Project visibility. Communication and media activities KuM (COO), ICOMOS (BEN) The task’s primary goal is to disseminate project results and promote the use of EU funds to achieving clean energy transition goals. Project communication and visibility task lasts throughout the project and will focus on promoting the use of LIFE funds. The overall promotion of LIFE is to be achieved by the following actions: Webpage: An important part of the project’s objectives and dissemination of results is a constantly updated to a specially dedicated project website at a separate subsection of KuM webpage. We expect all the other partners promote the project in their webpages in some form. Project web page will cover project objectives, activities, details of implementation progress and results as suggested by LIFE communication guidelines. The page will be in Estonians, with summaries in English. As the project will be using various digital applications for the homeowners, the web page will be interlinked to such tools and thematic content will be included in the webpage. Information about important events related to the project and links to other relevant websites (e.g. other LIFE projects) will be published on the website. Project partners will also provide the project’s main information on their websites and will have links to the project website. In terms of social media, very targeted approach is applied and rather than overall project accounts, partner accounts will be used for distributing specific information to target groups. Communicating LIFE contribution, assuring project visibility during the implementation of the tasks and after project has ended: This task will produce all the specific project materials, such as project banner, message boards in the city space, newsletters, exhibition stands, etc. Each of these contains unique information material about the LIFE heritageHOME project, its goals, planned actions, and expected results. The exact need, format and content for such materials will be developed in the project communication plan drafted in the beginning of the project. The task will follow and comply all necessary communication requirements provided by the contractual obligations for communicating, also recommendations from the LIFE communication toolkit will be applied. The LIFE logo will be featured on every publication / keepsake item / presentation. Tripod display board stand is planned for meetings and conferences. Overall media work about the project results is to be carried out. Regular news about the different relevant activities carried out and especially significant milestones and deliverables will be distributed to the media channels. A presence policy in relation to significant EU events is being pursued. Participating events organized by CINEA: heritageHOME consortium will contribute, upon invitation by the Agency, to common activities related to information (like reporting on impact indicators), dissemination and visibility, and synergies with other LIFE and EU supported actions. Work package WP2 – Mapping the Customer Journey for the heritage home energy renovations Work Package Number WP2 Lead Beneficiary 5. EKA Work Package Name Mapping the Customer Journey for the heritage home energy renovations Start Month 1 End Month 24 7 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Objectives This work package will establish needed baselines for many further concrete tasks that support the specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME. SpO 1 – Align policy: The expert panels (T.2.1) will engage >90 experts, covering different policy sectors like heritage protection, energy, housing, urban planning. SpO 2 – Agree procedures. The expert panels (T.2.1) will serve as baseline for agreeing the procedures. The owners’ heritage assembly will enable homeowners to have a say in policy making prior to designing the measures, thereby simplifying further process for coordinating and approving the planned policy procedures. SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: The revision of exploitation potential of digital solutions (T.2.2) will assist in further design of digital services. Outreach to homeowners via facilitated assembly will help to identify the entry level capacity of owners for further development and design of user-specific tools. SpO4 – Empower of owners: the owners’ heritage assembly (T.2.3) is expected to bring together ~50 homeowners (representative random sample), whose awareness will be raised. Known spokespersons (~10 persons) of homeowners of heritage buildings will be invited to the expert panels (T.2.1). We aim to empower all 7000 homeowners by these initiatives as well as dissemination of their results via project communication channels and public media. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: The owners heritage assembly format will be analyzed for further replication as a routine outreach mode. Description T.2.1 Building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings EKA (BEN), MKA (BEN), TalTech (BEN), KuM (COO), KLIM (BEN), ICOMOS (BEN) Before entering the service design process for heritage home energy renovation as well as developing specific solutions, it is necessary to conduct broader discussions, which include narrower and wider circle of experts. These discussions seek answers to basic questions like: Should the architectural monuments be part of Green Deal? What are the benefits and disadvantages? What does Green Deal mean while considering the architectural monuments? What could it entail? What could be the basic solutions and the so-called red lines? For example, would the solar panels on the roofs of the monuments be allowed? What are the multifaceted considerations (i.e. the aspects EN 16883 Conservation of cultural heritage) that should be weighed and in what scale? These and other questions that will be more specifically drafted for the event series need to lead to the root question - how to support the heritage homeowners on their pursuit for improved living quality and energy performance in architectural monuments? Moreover, these questions need to be answered for different policy scenarios (preliminary scenarios drafted along with proposal – figure 11). As indicated in the section 1.4, we acknowledge the paradigm shift and potentially contradicting perception on the matter, which is due a professional facilitation is foreseen for the seminars. Also, we’ll integrate the principles and key steps outlined in the Green Transition Roadmap of construction sector currently being compiled by KLIM (see explained in section 1.6). Three facilitated seminars will be held within the project: 1. A seminar which is aimed at narrower circle of experts. There will be speakers (5-6 persons) from European Heritage Institutions. The aim is to receive a better knowledge of the practices and opinions on Green Deal at the architectural monuments. 2. A seminar for the wider circle of experts (heritage experts, restoration architects, engineers, energy efficiency experts, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communication). The aim of the seminar is to discuss which are the benefits as regards Green Deal at the architectural monuments from the state point of view and how could the state support this action? Event is targeted towards ~50 professionals in the field. 3. A discussion between heritage stakeholders. The aim is to compose a Charter of the Green Deal of Estonian architectural monuments which submits the basic positions of heritage stakeholders (Estonian National Heritage Board). Event is targeted towards ~30 heritage stakeholders. Parallelly to the facilitated seminars described above that set the goal (why? what? when?) and roles (who? how?) for the green transition of heritage homes, a series of expert interviews is carried out for rapid assessment on the possible means of innovation, that could help to obtain the set goals either faster or more efficiently. The interviews will feed into joint workshops of academia representatives and public officials that aims to map the further heritage energy renovation research needs. The possible topics identified via interviews are weighed based on common methodology and facilitated process, which helps to identify the most urgent applied research topics on the matter that need to be implemented as spin-off’s and follow-up’s of the current project. The results of the innovation workshop are included to the charter as an annex, but moreover follow-up projects will be launched based on these. The LIFE heritageHOME results are to be exploited also in: 8 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 - policy work regarding the energy renovations of heritage homes (coupling the challenges of solving the challenges of energy poverty and protecting the European built heritage authenticity). key ministries are engaged to the project as beneficiaries as well are the significant state authority and the leading civil society organization, all findings of the project will integrate in policy work. - policy work regarding the energy renovations of historic homes (milieu-valuable buildings protected locally). Project findings will be as much possible integrated in the planning and construction laws of Estonia. T.2.2 Examination of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions MKA (BEN), KLIM (BEN), TalTech (BEN) Information about heritage buildings is available in different registries managed by authorities including building registry, heritage registry, Museums Public Portal. In addition, there are different web interfaces for processing national subsidies, and various web-tools for E-ehitus (see explained section 1.6) are advanced. When setting up the digital one- stop-shop for home renovation services of heritage homes, we aim to first understand the possible service gaps of existing and already developed tools for identifying the special features of heritage homes that need to be integrated into such systems. Data about the building geometry, building envelope structures and service systems is incomplete in the building register. There is no machine-readable information about building envelope structures in the National Register of Cultural Monuments. However, this incomplete or missing information is an inevitably necessary input when renovating a building. The database of the National Register of Cultural Monuments and the special conditions for heritage protection must be updated so that it contains machine-readable information. More detailed building typology will be worked out that represents better historic building geometry (3D and meter scale), details (2D and cm scale), structures (1D and mm scale) and service systems. In addition, to building shape also other parameters will be used for generation the typology on the building level: function / use, ownership, age, etc. This building typology is later input for working out renovation solutions. It will be tested and validated how it is possible to identify the characteristics of building envelope structures and service systems on the basis of the parameters entered in the database search. T.2.3 Co-creation with owners: heritage assembly for private owners EKA(BEN), MKA (BEN), other beneficiaries can be invited to specific events at prior agreement. Various studies (e.g. LINK, LINK) have shown that in heritage buildings residents often negotiate creative and informal comfort practices specific to their own circumstances and contexts, although these frequently pass under the radar of policymakers. This is particularly found in buildings considered to be less energy efficient, and while this may sometimes be because of fuel poverty, it is acknowledged that these practices are in many cases conscious choice, related to a sense of sufficiency and frugality, especially in older buildings. Such behavioural changes and minor retrofits are likely to negatively affect heritage values compared with more significant fabric alterations, in some cases even creating heritage enhancement, and are likely to have much lower financial costs (LCC). The need to support such positive user interactions with their buildings and systems is being highlighted by the heritage assembly work in the project. The aim of the task is to replicate the social engagement model of climate assembly successfully implemented in different cities of Europe among the homeowners of heritage buildings. The invited mini- publics would be chosen by the representative random sample of 50-60 heritage homeowners, who would be invited to discuss and agree on the most critical measures needed to improve the existing services and procedures supporting renovations. The longer vision is to institutionalise deliberative mini-publics in the governance of the green transition of private heritage buildings. Also, such collaboration forms encourage and empower the heritage homeowners to take active role in policy discussions and future service design. The owners’ heritage assembly will be invited together in two rounds. As a first step owners are informed and engaged for series of thematic co-creation events, which will be succeeded by feedback round for the same group to inform them about how their recommendations have been implemented and revalidate the feasibility and urgency of the policy initiatives that were sprouted from the assembly. Work package WP3 – Standardization of solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings Work Package Number WP3 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Work Package Name Standardization of solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings Start Month 1 End Month 30 9 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Objectives This work package will develop the technical renovation solutions. The agreed solutions and guidance provided to the owners on how to implement them will contribute to several specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME. SpO 1 – Align policy: N/A SpO 2 – Agree procedures: develop feasible and efficient renovation solutions accepted by heritage authorities. Agree the building level limits of acceptable change to be allowed (T.3.3) SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: Identify (T.3.1) and develop (T.3.2) technical renovation solutions (50 solutions at TRL 3-5) for heritage homes and propose feasible step-by-step renovation sequences for homeowners (T.3.3). This will simplify renovation for >5000 heritage homes and around 60 000 historic buildings in Estonia by (partially) solving the contradicting challenge of preserving unique solutions with standardized solutions and identifying the limits of acceptable changes. As a result of the WP a professional guidance report is produced enabling heritage authorities, consultants, energy performance auditors and engineers designing the renovations (>500 professionals). SpO4 – Empower of owners: Solutions developed within the project will be published as renovation atlas of heritage buildings in (T.6.1), for that the solutions need to be simplified and sufficiently explanatory to allow uptake by non- expert homeowner. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: For all solutions replication potential will be assessed, based on which the solutions will be disseminated to various other interested parties (national and beyond). For example, the practical renovation guidance will be well applicable for renovation of public buildings for which a grant scheme is currently being prepared nationally. Revision procedure to sustain the timeliness for developed solutions will be agreed within the project. All solutions developed within the project will be also disseminated among owners of conventional homes (via outreach channels of LIFE IP BUILDEST). Description T.3.1 Analysis of existing best practices MKA (BEN), TalTech (BEN), EKA (BEN), ICOMOS (BEN) The aim is to make existing deep renovation best practice experiences available to homeowners, architects, engineers, heritage specialists, real estate developers, and other stakeholders to draw inspiration from these examples and put them into practice. Each historical building will be analysed as a specific case. IEA SHC Task 59 | Renovating Historic Buildings Towards Zero Energy suggestions have been considered for the minimum requirements for case studies: • Deep energy renovation of the building. The aim is to provide examples that have considered the building as a whole, and not only individual renovation measures. Therefore, the cases included in the database must be aimed at improving the energy performance. Renovation of the whole building is preferred for cases studies, but individual measures may also be possible under certain conditions, if the information about reducing energy demand of renewable energy production is available. • The project has been implemented. Most of the influences on the energy-renovation of historic buildings appear from compatibility with the existing construction and/or intended use. It is therefore important that the best practice example shows a renovation project that has already been implemented. • The intervention followed the results of a thorough heritage value assessment. The improvement of the energy performance of historic buildings cannot be achieved at the expense of losing their heritage value. Heritage values must be sufficiently quantified to be assessed. • A significant improvement of energy performance was achieved. The final goal of project is to achieve the clear reduction of energy demand in historic homes, therefore energy use before and after the energy renovation must be known. Targeted heat saving is 40 % - 50 % depending on the heritage value of the building. • Detailed documentation of technical solutions and monitoring data is available. As previously discussed, access to detailed and reliable information is important in overcoming obstacles to the renovation of historic homes. Therefore, any examples included in the best practice database must be well documented and make this information available to other stakeholders. To reach all stakeholders groups, the quality of visual information transfer is very important - specially to building owners -: photos, short and concise texts, easy-to-read diagrams, detailed drawings of solutions and the experience of colleagues. A good browsing experience is also very important. The best practice examples should inspire stakeholders. Therefore, the presentation begins with images of the entire building and its interiors, describing with photos and text the aesthetic and historical values and how the responsible modernization improved the comfort of the residents. Within this task the recent building specific special conditions for heritage conservation will be analysed, also the recently highlighted renovation houses (prize winners) will be reviewed. Based on this, buildings will be selected to be assessed for their post-renovation performance and heritage status. Also, international state of the art solutions and best practice guidelines will be analysed for their replication potential. The solutions documented here will be fed into digital interface content as well as various dissemination materials to be published under T.6.1. 10 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 T.3.2 Development of single technical renovation measures for different historic building envelopes and service systems TalTech (BEN), EKA (BEN), MKA (BEN) Deep renovation solutions will be developed in the task based on the typology of the building, boundary envelope structures and service systems determined in T.2.2. Since during the renovation of the heritage building it may be necessary to preserve some building components in their original form, other building components must be made more energy efficient (energy saving donation). Since some renovation measures may not be implemented when renovating step by step, renovation solutions are developed with the understanding that not all measures need to be implemented at once. This may mean that the measures used may not be the most cost-effective, but at the expense of this we can better preserve the historical heritage. Therefore, renovation solutions with different energy efficiency characteristics are developed in the task. It can be estimated that deep renovation solutions will cover at least 90% of the building types, handled in the project, if we consider a certain degree of generalization: • for external walls, up to 10 different renovation solutions. • for basement wall, up to 6 different renovation solutions. • for roof / attic floor, up to 6 different renovation solutions. • for the basement/floor, up to 6 different renovation solutions. • for windows / door, up to 4 different renovation solutions. • for ventilation system, up to 4 different renovation solutions. • for heating system, up to 4 different renovation solutions. • for heat source up to 4 different renovation solutions (including renewable-based heating and cooling). • for energy from renewable sources up to 4 different solutions. • for building automation and control systems. Final list to be agreed in the beginning of the project. With agreeing the list of single renovation solutions also methods for validating their resilience and performance and fitness for heritage contexts will be determined for allowing adequate modelling for validation and testing beyond available practice. To reduce costs and time of design these standardised renovation solutions will be available in digital format for: • homeowners (easy to understand pdf) understanding that the user is usually non-professional decision maker • consultants (construction companies, architects, engineers, urban planners) (dwg) for direct use or for modifications as needed. We’ll exploit the assessment categories and criteria of EN 16883 Conservation of cultural heritage, however go beyond from assessing the level of risk against different criteria, but more specific parameters are considered for performance assessment. While doing this, the national adaptation to assessment criteria is foreseen. T.3.3 Investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings TalTech (BEN), EKA (BEN), MKA (BEN) This task combines various renovation solutions and services into packages by combining single renovation measures (input from T.3.2) in order to create confidence and simplify the renovation process. Since it is a multi-variable task, different criteria will be taken into account when developing and evaluating solutions: preservation of historical value, improvement of energy performance, economic capacity of the building owner, prevention of energy poverty, extension of the service life of the building, creation of a safe living environment, etc. Results of this task will help to develop the final renovation concept, determine special conditions for heritage protection. Different attitudes of building owners are possible to take into account: keeping original architectural appearance the least to save heritage buildings, maximizing energy saving and minimizing emissions or best economically viable effect. The packages will be presented to attain different energy savings: from 25-30% as a minimum primary energy saving to ≥40-60% as primary energy saving requirement for deep energy renovation of existing buildings targeting self- sustainability in the medium to long term. All renovation will fulfil basic requirements set in the building product regulation. Renovation packages will deliver an optimal level of Indoor Environmental Quality to the building occupants. For example, ventilation airflow will fulfil indoor climate category II requirements. Selection of renovation packages considers key building elements to cover, and when it cannot be completed in one step, carefully plans renovation steps, which outline the selection of energy-saving measures and renewable energy installations to be executed, avoiding any lock-in, damaging architectural appearance, loosing heritage values, and can possibly be linked to progressive financial support. To ensure cost effectiveness and price transparency of services provided to homeowners, renovation measures are equipped with cost and cost-effectiveness indicators. The validated renovation solutions will be published as Technical report (D3.2), as well as fed into digital toolset of integrated renovation service. For the latter selected digital models (>30 models of single renovation measures) will be developed to be tested in the digital renovation passport tool (D3.1; D3.3). 11 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Work package WP4 – Building the partnership for integrated heritage home renovation service Work Package Number WP4 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Work Package Name Building the partnership for integrated heritage home renovation service Start Month 1 End Month 36 Objectives This work package will prepare the service design and raise capacity among the enablers of integrated renovation service. The agreed solutions and guidance provided to the owners on how to implement them will contribute to several specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME SpO 1 – Align policy: The service design for the complete journey (from ideation to inspecting outcomes) for energy renovation of heritage homes is analysed, policy gaps are identified and steps are foreseen to bridge the most critical gaps. To do this, we engage authorities in jurisdiction of different ministries (KuM, KLIM, but also RaM – Ministry of Finance, KeM – Ministry of Environment). The government ordinances (~10 acts) regulating various procedures (granting, permitting, …) are analysed for fitness. Financial incentives currently available in the market (MKA, KredEx (including renovation support measures for energy poor households), municipal) and various models applied in EU are analysed for possibilities to blend them for multi-benefit effect. Novel business models are proposed (>5). SpO 2 – Agree procedures: Clarification of objectives, roles and communication of different actors participating the workflow from different jurisdictions. Agreeing joint communication frameworks and packaging the mutually understood content to be presented for the end-users in the digital one-stop-shop. SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: Service design for the digital one-stop-shop to be implemented in T.5.1 SpO4 – Empower of owners: Exploiting the owners’ feedback from T.2.3 to develop the needed service. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: All solutions proposed need to be sustainable after the end of the project, this will be achieved by active participation of policy-makers on highest possible level and development of new business models (>5) for solving the possible service gaps identified in the process. Description T.4.1 Preparing the heritage home renovation service MKA (BEN), KuM (COO), KLIM (BEN) Based on the inputs gathered from T.2.1 and T.2.3 a thorough service design process is foreseen. It needs to engage various stakeholders (elaborated under section 3.3 of the proposal and illustrated in Figure 12). We’ll exploit the concept of Double Diamond for Design thinking for the service design facilitation (explained under section 1.4 of the proposal). The hypothetical service flow and interactions between participants of it will be drafted along with beneficiaries and external stakeholders. The drafted concept for the Integrated Service will be validated by end-user feedback both among the representative sample assembly (T.2.3) as well as test group formed from owners that have initiated renovations in the project and selected as a test group for the service (T.6.2). Different interlinked workflows are foreseen within the service design (policy work is foreseen in T.4.2 to initiate the needed changes.): 1) Fitness check of regulatory framework is carried out, to identify possible regulative barriers that would hinder the implementation of the service. 2) Fitness of strategic policy: setting a shared ambition for green transition of heritage homes. 3) Agreeing the workflow to streamlined service between national and regional authorities. 4) Planning the governance changes for Estonian National Heritage Board (MKA). Exploiting the 360 Degree Feedback is an evaluation system or process, the current governance practices and procedures are analysed and the necessary changes are identified to institutionalize energy performance considerations in current decision making workflow. 5) Analysis will be conducted to identify possible service gaps and assess the possibility to include additional internal resources or engage external stakeholders. For identified service gaps business models are drafted, for which more thorough fitness check will be carried out in T.4.3. 6) Analysis of integrated consultation service is carried out, more specifically the service requirements for energy auditors of heritage buildings will be drafted (training programme for the consultants will be piloted in T.4.2). 7) Preparing the terms of reference for the digital information gate for the Integrated energy renovation service for heritage homes, which will be implemented in T.5.1. Interactions with different existing data sources are drafted and content gaps are identified. 12 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 8) The fundamentals of evaluating an environmentally friendly product and an environmentally friendly service/work related to home renovation are described so that they can be applied to renovation process and their procurement. 9) - consultations of heritage homeowners & permitting procedures: while we expect to set up a digital one-stop-shop, then it will also include direct consultations by heritage authorities. The heritage authorities will be trained during and after the project to provide evidence-based advice/support for the homeowners when requested for information. Also, the service and its components will provide baseline and data-based decision support for future permitting procedures. 10) To secure the streamlined process for the complex and integrated workflow, an internal workplan is to be agreed (MS13). The Workplan will define roles, testing policy, and subtask deadlines for the overall process. It is expected that this process has significant impact on construction and heritage protection laws of Estonia as well as support implementation of them by raised capacity and awareness. To achieve this, the relevant policy makers that are engaged to the project as beneficiaries (KuM, KliM, MKA) will integrate the project results into national thematic policies (permitting procedures, grant schemes, collaboration with regional authorities and local municipalities etc.) T.4.2 Building partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service MKA (BEN), EKA (BEN), TalTech (BEN) This task encompasses both the policy work and coordination of partnerships identified in T.4.1 (to be implemented by MKA), but also specific training and capacity building of the client-facing consultant’s network. More specifically this will include: Successful cooperation requires that all the parties can communicate in the same “language”. At the moment, the vast majority of heritage officials, who in their daily work communicate with house owners and among other things have to solve issues related to energy saving, lack basic knowledge of energy efficiency. In the framework of the project, we will conduct training for 25 heritage officials. Additionally, we will develop the competence requirements that the heritage official should know about energy efficiency while advising the homeowners, with a purpose to continuing training (aiming to improve understanding of the performance and effects of solutions developed in T.3.2 - T.3.3). Strong emphasis is put to training heritage authorities how to raise awareness of homeowners. For this a new educational solution is proposed - using prototypes (TRL 3-4) of the most important joints of the building envelope structures (for example, the joint of the external wall and window, external wall and basement wall joint, eaves) are also built so that it is possible to assess the construction solution on a 1:1 scale. On the other hand, there is a great need for specialists who can give balanced recommendations for the energy efficiency of architectural monuments and buildings of the heritage conservation areas. Today, there are lack of competent specialists who have knowledge of both energy efficiency and heritage. In the course of the project, we will develop the professional requirements for a specialist who could give recommendations to owners of architectural monuments and buildings of high value category on energy efficiency. We will train 20 consultants of heritage energy efficiency who would advise both homeowners and, if necessary, heritage officials. We propose competence models for vocational program: heritage – energy consultant specialist competence model or similar. The aim is to ensure regional coverage of the consultants energy efficiency of heritage homes. In addition to identified experts, trainings are also developed for other participants in the renovation process (architects, engineers, designers >50 experts). Professional-specific training covers the skills, knowledge and experience that are missing in regular education and professional work. Instead of the usual talk-listen-watch lecture, the focus is on a more active and involved learning process. Workshops are organized to support the various stages of the renovation process: from the conceptual design of the initial stage to the detailed design documentations that will be the basis of the renovation works. Construction companies & renovation professionals are engaged to identifying existing best practices for delivering energy efficiency measures in renovation of heritage buildings (T3.1) as well as in later stages of the project informed about the developed renovation solutions (T3.2, T3.3) and facilitation services made available via digital one-stop- shop (T5.2). This is expected to have a positive influence on technical quality of the buildingworks. Also, the validated solutions also increase the interest of professionals to participate the renovation market. T.4.3 Fitness check of renovation business models for owners of heritage homes KuM (COO), KLIM (BEN), MKA (BEN) The energy renovation of private homes is currently grant dependent even in regular residential buildings. As energy renovation works of heritage buildings are comparatively more expensive, the owners’ interest to implement these is limited. This task will analyse the fitness of the different available business models to the socio-economic setting in Estonia. Various existing best practices are analyzed for replication for incentivizing renovation of heritage buildings in Estonia The service gaps identified in T.4.1, and namely the need for additional financial incentives for supporting energy renovations of heritage homes will be a baseline for selecting the sample of business models to be analysed for the fitness of applicability. We’ll build on the models developed for conventional residential buildings (e.g. LINK or LINK) and 13 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 the existing business models exploited in Estonia. Based on the fitness check most feasible business models (>5) are developed to policy recommendations. The preliminary list of models to be analysed: 1) on-bill schemes and repayment programmes; 2) climate claims & offsetting; 3) efficient blending of existing grants; 4) financing through rent increase and reinventing the use of semi- abandoned houses; 5) crowdfunding models, 6) carbon taxing by considering environmental impacts throughout the life- cycle (LCA). In terms of internal service gaps the possible financing models (including LCC) also will be discussed. As a baseline we’ll exploit a comprehensive analysis carried out by Renowave project coordinated by KLIM (financed by DG Reform Technical Support Instrument). Renowave has listed various potential incentives (fiscal, financial, regulative, etc.) LIFE heritageHOME will narrow the broad list of measures according to the relevancy regarding the heritage buildings and further analyze the feasibility of implementing the business models in Estonia. During the project the market potential of various monetized digital services that can be interlinked to the renovation passports and digital one-stop-shop will be investigated. To achieve this the service concept will be introduced to possible interested service suppliers (>3 contacts and rapid assessment of business potential carried out). The other aspect of the business model regarding the operation of the digital one-stop-shop is securing the upkeep and further development of the proposed one-stop-shop, which will depend clearly from the state budget. The model to finance the service gaps is to be agreed within the policy work foreseen in WP2 and WP4. The policy work regarding implementing the business models will be at parts supported by the project expertise. Work package WP5 – Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage homeowners Work Package Number WP5 Lead Beneficiary 3. KLIM Work Package Name Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage homeowners Start Month 1 End Month 36 Objectives This work package will develop the digital tools facilitating the integrated renovation service for heritage homes. The agreed solutions and guidance provided to the owners on how to implement them will contribute to several specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME. SpO 1 – Align policy: N/A SpO 2 – Agree procedures: N/A SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: a pilot digital renovation passport tool for heritage homes is launched (T.5.1) demonstrating how it is possible to simplify the ideation stage of energy renovations in heritage homes. The workpackage also includes a key output of the project, the digital dashboard for the integrated renovation service for heritage homes (T.5.2). SpO4 – Empower of owners: The digital tools developed by the project need to be compatible to the end-user needs, simplifying technical information sufficiently to find right information. Within the tool we integrate the different features, gadgets and information upgrade in a manner, that owners are also educated about the energy renovations throughout the journey. Establishment the owners platform to the digital dashboard encourages the peer-to-peer learning among homeowners. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: By integrating the digital one-stop-shop with various existing services developed and maintained by state allows to sustain the service in the future. Moreover, the digital solutions developed for the heritage homes have also value for owners of historic and conventional homes (~100 000 detached buildings and ~14 000 apartment buildings) in Estonia and transfer potential to heritage homes in other countries. Description T.5.1 Piloting heritage home renovation passports TalTech (BEN); KLIM (BEN); EKA (BEN) KLIM is currently developing the national system for Renovation Passports by LIFE IP BUILDEST project. The planned decision support is intended to support preliminary design decisions for building renovations. Within LIFE IP BUILDEST the tool will be designed for regular buildings. While the general framework for the service can be applicable to all buildings, the uniqueness of heritage homes is not considered in the generic tool. The LIFEheritageHOME will propose an add-on for the generic tool and pilot it based on >20 test-buildings using the model buildings analysed WP3 of the project. The tool is aimed to simplify the ideation process of energy renovations in heritage homes. 14 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Piloting heritage home renovation passports require involvement different professions, who may have different background and may speak in different “language”. Making good decisions requires knowledge, time and money. But due to the general lack of these resources, the approach must be fit for purpose. Due to more complexity, more resources should be given to the planning process. Because tailored solutions are not possible in all cases, there will always be some need for general recommendations and simple rules of thumb (he main focus is on private non-professional decision makers). In this task, we develop fuzzy applications to facilitate decision making and comparison of renovation options: Assessment of energy performance of buildings based on: • building geometry from Estonian building register digital twin data, building typology (result of T.2.2) or user defined input data. • buildings structures and service systems based on data from improved National Heritage Register (result of T.2.2), building register (www.ehr.ee), building typology or user defined input data. • possibility to use energy from renewable sources based on data from improved National Heritage Register (result of T.2.2) and Estonian building register digital twin data (roof orientation and angle). • deep renovation criteria: reduction in primary energy consumption - energy savings or maximum primary and/ or final energy consumption (minimum energy needs, EPC rating), or maximum kgCO2/m²/year (operational phase). For the engine of the tool, we use the existing spreadsheet method of energy calculation for apartment buildings, which we adapt to suit also to detached house. The user interface will be web-based and simplified in such a way that even the owner of the building can handle it (no professional prior knowledge is required). The tool is primarily intended for the comparison of renovation options. During further design, professional energy calculation software is already used. Both tools are simplified to a certain extent so that they can be used by all participants in negotiations. This ensures greater transparency and trust between participants in the decision-making process. It also allows change the role of the architect/engineer and heritage specialist / conservation scientist understanding the arguments of the other side better and participating more actively in planning, predicting the consequences of different alternatives and contributing more actively in the early stages of the renovation process. As the Renovation Passport is aimed towards homeowners with non-technical expertise, the solution needs to be tested for clarity and consistency towards delivering accurate information on needed renovation works. The committed test group (engaged in T6.2) along with additional test-users are to be integrated in developing the digital tool with the functionality needed by the homeowners. T.5.2 Setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service KLIM (BEN); MKA (BEN); TalTech (BEN), EKA (BEN) The concept for the digital one-stop-shop for integrated renovation service of heritage homes is illustrated in Figure 13. We’ll aim to package the whole customer journey in a manner that homeowner can easily find its way with a easy access from home, or from the entry point of first contact. The digital dashboard will exploit various existing digital developments in the field (as explained in section 1.6 of the proposal and illustrated in Figure 14), but the LIFE heritageHOME project will allow to develop and integrate the specific features of heritage homes into the system. Presentation layers (front-ends) and data access (back-end) will be upgraded for specific purposes of assisting homeowners to find the right information in clear and concise manner. Digital dashboard will provide information on: • the expected steps in the workflow, requirements and procedures to improve trust towards such integrated services. • links to other specific tools, among others renovation passport tool piloted in the project (T.5.1), but also digital energy audit tool, incentive calculators etc (developed externally from the project). • easy to understand guidance on renovation concepts (renovation building fabric, integrating renewable technologies, quality assurance etc.). • streamline access to various support measures (including for specific target groups), guidance on how to prepare for these. • information exchange platforms for experts and owners. • contact lists for consultants, supervisory authorities and consumer protection as well simplified and improved search and co-ordination of contractors. Work package WP6 – Disseminating the best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication Work Package Number WP6 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Work Package Name Disseminating the best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication Start Month 1 End Month 36 15 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Objectives This work package will disseminate the integrated renovation service for heritage homes for sustainability and replication. The tasks foreseen in the WP will contribute to several specific objectives (SpO) of LIFE heritageHOME. SpO 1 – Align policy: N/A SpO 2 – Agree procedures: N/A SpO 3 – Develop user-specific toolset: N/A SpO4 – Empower of owners: The dissemination of the service and the need to improve energy performance of heritage homes is directly targeted towards empowerment of owners. With the project outreach (T.6.1, T.6.2) we’ll aim to engage >30 000 homeowners in heritage protection areas. SpO 5 – Sustain and replicate: The workpackage is namely focused to sustaining the service by disseminating it among possible end-users (T.6.1 – T.6.2) as well as promoting the concept among possible followers for amplified effect (T.6.3). By the foreseen outreach we aim to introduce the service concept for at least 10 follower countries. Description T.6.1 Highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions KuM (COO), MKA (BEN), ICOMOS (BEN), KLIM (BEN) For disseminating the service as well as drawing attention for the challenge of energy renovations of heritage homes in the society the different outreach tools need to be published. Within this task we comply, edit and publish different dissemination materials for intended target groups of the project. These are: A) Energy renovation atlas of heritage homes: Target group: HOMEOWNERS The solutions analysed and developed in WP3 are oriented towards professional end-users, within this task we target the same solutions to homeowners, for which different presentation is required. To reach all stakeholders groups, the quality of visual information transfer is very important - specially to building owners: photos, short and concise texts, easy-to- read diagrams, detailed drawings of solutions and the experience of peers. A good browsing experience is also very important. The best practice examples should inspire stakeholders. Therefore, the presentation begins with images of the entire building and its interiors, describing with photos and text the aesthetic and historical values and how the responsible modernization improved the comfort of the residents. Subsections from the content of the atlas will be published as renovation info-charts and included to the set produced and published in LIFE IP BUILDEST. B) Best practice demo-videos: Target group: HOMEOWNERS Based on the best practice analysis carried out in WP3, the flagship solutions will be selected for be documented in demo-videos to inspire followers. Videos will provide owners insights, demonstrate end-results, describe challenges and solutions how to overcome these. Videos will be integrated to the campaign to launch the service among homeowners (T.6.2). C) Legacy report Target group: INTERNATIONAL HERITAGE COMMUNITY A synthesis report of the results, learnings and planned follow-ups and recommendations for the future of the LIFE heritageHOME. The learnings and recommendations will beshared with the international heritage community (ICOMOS national councils, heritage authorities and collaborating networks). However, while targeted towards heritage protection experts the content is also relevant for wider audience of European Renovation Wave. The legacy report will constitute the final publishable report presenting the key results, main lessons learnt, and recommendations for the future. It will be professionally designed, attractive and tailored to the target group. The content and final draft of the report must be discussed with CINEA before publication The legacy report is distributed via web, but also in the printed format to be shared at international thematic events. T.6.2 Launching integrated renovation service for heritage homes MKA (BEN), other beneficiaries contribute This task encompasses 2 workflows: A) Engaging test-users group for assessing the integrating renovation service: Various co-creation methods are exploited for the design of the integrated renovation service (outreach to owner’s heritage assembly (T.2.3), engagement of owner’s spokespersons to the expert panels (T.2.1) and integration of continuous feedback from the market). However, to sustain the model in long-run, we aim to test and validate the tool among homeowners (~10-15 people) who initiate energy renovations of their heritage homes in 2024-2025. The test- users will be actively providing feedback for the whole service and its specific tools to avoid failures before launching the service to a broad audience. 16 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 B) Series of events to introduce the service for the homeowners: 11 public events to introduce the whole integrated service to homeowners residing in heritage conservation areas in Estonia will be carried out. Planned as a road-show the web interface, specific tools, consultant network and developed incentives will be introduced. Also, communication campaign is carried out including social media, public broadcast and printed media to introduce the tools and service provided and the challenge we aim to face in energy renovations of heritage homes. This outreach aims to engage the attention of homeowners to whom the service is developed for. T.6.3 Networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU ICOMOS (BEN), MKA (BEN), KuM (COO), KLIM (BEN) LIFE heritageHOME concept for the integrated service of energy renovations of heritage homes is introduced via different professional networks, including: • Scientific community: solutions developed with LIFE heritageHOME are introduced at national scientific conferences (>5 events, like International Conference on Energy Efficiency in Historic Buildings, Renewable Energy Conference, International Conference on Durability of Building Materials and Components, Central European Symposium on Building ,Central European Symposium on Building Physics, Nordic Building Physics Conference, etc.) and published at peer-reviewed scientific journals (>3 articles, in journals like: Journal of Cultural Heritage, Heritage, Building and environment etc). • Heritage community (ICOMOS) events: >10 participation at EU national councils and global council meetings and symposiums to introduce the project, its results and outcomes. ICOMOS Estonia is active participant in Climate and Heritage Working Group, the process and results will be introduced and consulted in that group. In 2023 the president of ICOMOS Estonia is co-chair of “Heritage for Climate” in ICOMOS International General Assembly and Symposium. This project can be introduced there. And in forthcoming Europe Group meeting and symposium in Tartu 2023. • Heritage authorities in neighbouring countries: joint workshops (>4 events) with Swedish, Finnish (see LoS), Latvian, Norwegian (see LoS) Heritage Agencies and governmental authorities (>3 events) to discuss green transition of heritage homes. • Integration of project results into outreach flow of LIFE IP BUILDEST to expand and amplify the results of both projects. 17 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 STAFF EFFORT Staff effort per participant Grant Preparation (Work packages - Effort screen) — Enter the info. Participant WP1 WP2 WP3 WP4 WP5 WP6 Total Person-Months 1 - KUM 23.40 5.80 7.20 10.80 47.20 2 - MKA 3.60 4.80 9.00 18.00 2.40 3.60 41.40 3 - KLIM 2.00 2.40 3.60 18.00 1.80 27.80 4 - TalTech 2.00 5.00 28.80 2.50 11.60 0.50 50.40 5 - EKA 2.00 18.20 16.50 7.20 1.20 0.50 45.60 6 - ICOMOS 3.00 7.00 10.00 Total Person-Months 36.00 36.20 54.30 38.50 33.20 24.20 222.40 18 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIST OF DELIVERABLES Deliverables Grant Preparation (Deliverables screen) — Enter the info. The labels used mean: Public — fully open ( automatically posted online) Sensitive — limited under the conditions of the Grant Agreement EU classified —RESTREINT-UE/EU-RESTRICTED, CONFIDENTIEL-UE/EU-CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET-UE/EU-SECRET under Decision 2015/444 Deliverable Deliverable Name Work Lead Beneficiary Type Dissemination Level Due Date No Package (month) No D1.1 Coordination tools (communication plan, WP1 1 - KUM R — Document, report SEN - Sensitive 6 sensemaking plan, replication strategy) D1.2 Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI WP1 1 - KUM R — Document, report SEN - Sensitive 9 webtool D1.3 Updated extract of the project data from the WP1 1 - KUM R — Document, report SEN - Sensitive 36 LIFE KPI webtool D2.1 Public registry data model for heritage WP2 2 - MKA R — Document, report SEN - Sensitive 12 buildings D2.2 Synthesis report for owner centred service WP2 2 - MKA R — Document, report PU - Public 24 design process D2.3 Green Transition Charter of Estonian WP2 2 - MKA R — Document, report PU - Public 24 heritage buildings D3.1 Technical solutions for single renovation WP3 4 - TalTech R — Document, report PU - Public 12 measures (Month 12) D3.2 Technical report on the renovation solutions WP3 4 - TalTech R — Document, report PU - Public 30 D3.3 Technical solutions for single renovation WP3 4 - TalTech R — Document, report PU - Public 30 measures and configuration criteria 19 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Deliverables Grant Preparation (Deliverables screen) — Enter the info. The labels used mean: Public — fully open ( automatically posted online) Sensitive — limited under the conditions of the Grant Agreement EU classified —RESTREINT-UE/EU-RESTRICTED, CONFIDENTIEL-UE/EU-CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET-UE/EU-SECRET under Decision 2015/444 Deliverable Deliverable Name Work Lead Beneficiary Type Dissemination Level Due Date No Package (month) No D4.1 Implementation report for owner centred WP4 2 - MKA R — Document, report PU - Public 36 service design process D5.1 Replication guideline for digital one-stop- WP5 4 - TalTech R — Document, report PU - Public 34 shops of heritage home renovations D6.1 Energy renovation atlas of heritage homes WP6 2 - MKA R — Document, report PU - Public 30 D6.2 Legacy report of LIFE heritageHOME WP6 1 - KUM R — Document, report PU - Public 34 20 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Deliverable D1.1 – Coordination tools (communication plan, sensemaking plan, replication strategy) Deliverable Number D1.1 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Deliverable Name Coordination tools (communication plan, sensemaking plan, replication strategy) Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level SEN - Sensitive Due Date (month) 6 Work Package No WP1 Description Coordination tools for the project. PDF documents in Estonian, available at request. Deliverable D1.2 – Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool Deliverable Number D1.2 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Deliverable Name Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level SEN - Sensitive Due Date (month) 9 Work Package No WP1 Description PDF documents in English, submitted to CINEA. Deliverable D1.3 – Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool Deliverable Number D1.3 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Deliverable Name Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level SEN - Sensitive Due Date (month) 36 Work Package No WP1 Description PDF documents in English, submitted to CINEA.. Deliverable D2.1 – Public registry data model for heritage buildings Deliverable Number D2.1 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Public registry data model for heritage buildings Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level SEN - Sensitive Due Date (month) 12 Work Package No WP2 Description PDF document, stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian. 21 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Deliverable D2.2 – Synthesis report for owner centred service design process Deliverable Number D2.2 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Synthesis report for owner centred service design process Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 24 Work Package No WP2 Description PDF document, published on project web-page. Report will be complied in English. Deliverable D2.3 – Green Transition Charter of Estonian heritage buildings Deliverable Number D2.3 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Green Transition Charter of Estonian heritage buildings Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 24 Work Package No WP2 Description PDF document, published on project web-page. Report will be complied in Estonian Deliverable D3.1 – Technical solutions for single renovation measures (Month 12) Deliverable Number D3.1 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Deliverable Name Technical solutions for single renovation measures (Month 12) Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 12 Work Package No WP3 Description PDF and dwg document, stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian and ENG summary. Deliverable D3.2 – Technical report on the renovation solutions Deliverable Number D3.2 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Deliverable Name Technical report on the renovation solutions Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 30 Work Package No WP3 Description PDF and dwg document, stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian and ENG summary 22 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Deliverable D3.3 – Technical solutions for single renovation measures and configuration criteria Deliverable Number D3.3 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Deliverable Name Technical solutions for single renovation measures and configuration criteria Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 30 Work Package No WP3 Description Technical drawings (50 + configuration criteria) for renovation solution prototypes are to be integrated to the piloted digital renovation passports. Deliverable D4.1 – Implementation report for owner centred service design process Deliverable Number D4.1 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Implementation report for owner centred service design process Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 36 Work Package No WP4 Description PDF document, published on project web-page. Report will be complied in English. Deliverable D5.1 – Replication guideline for digital one-stop-shops of heritage home renovations Deliverable Number D5.1 Lead Beneficiary 4. TalTech Deliverable Name Replication guideline for digital one-stop-shops of heritage home renovations Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 34 Work Package No WP5 Description PDF document, published on project webpage. Report will be complied in English. Deliverable D6.1 – Energy renovation atlas of heritage homes Deliverable Number D6.1 Lead Beneficiary 2. MKA Deliverable Name Energy renovation atlas of heritage homes Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 30 Work Package No WP6 Description PDF document, published on project webpage. Report will be complied in Estonian, with English summary. 23 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Deliverable D6.2 – Legacy report of LIFE heritageHOME Deliverable Number D6.2 Lead Beneficiary 1. KUM Deliverable Name Legacy report of LIFE heritageHOME Type R — Document, report Dissemination Level PU - Public Due Date (month) 34 Work Package No WP6 Description PDF document, published on project webpage. Limited edition of publications will be printed. Report will be complied in English. 24 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIST OF MILESTONES Milestones Grant Preparation (Milestones screen) — Enter the info. Milestone Milestone Name Work Package No Lead Beneficiary Means of Verification Due Date No (month) 1 Project staff appointed WP1 1-KUM Contract 1 2 Webpage launched WP1 1-KUM Project page available as sub-page of the web of 4 KuM 3 KPI reported at web-tool WP1 1-KUM KPI reported according to GA 6 4 Technical progress meeting with CINEA WP1 1-KUM Meeting recording. Meeting minutes. 9 5 Periodic report submitted WP1 1-KUM Interim report completed according to GA. 20 6 Final report completed according to GA. WP1 1-KUM Final report completed according to GA. Due in 36 36+2 M 7 Green transition scenario seminars WP2 2-MKA Participant list, photos, conclusions 12 8 Owners heritage assembly (1st round) WP2 5-EKA Participant list, photos, conclusions; 12 9 Owners heritage assembly (2nd round) WP2 5-EKA Participant list, photos, conclusions; 24 10 Agreeing the final list of renovation measures WP3 4-TalTech List of single renovation measures agreed 6 developed along with validation methods. Workplan agreed between engaged beneficiaries. 11 Preparatory analysis carried out WP3 4-TalTech Analysis of existing best practices. Systematized 12 datasets handed over for COO 12 Concepts agreed for single technical WP3 4-TalTech Preliminary design of most applicable renovation 18 renovation measures measures (50). Systematized datasets presented to the consortium 13 Service design workplan WP4 2-MKA Agreeing the internal workplan to prepare 3 the heritage home renovation service. Internal 25 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Milestones Grant Preparation (Milestones screen) — Enter the info. Milestone Milestone Name Work Package No Lead Beneficiary Means of Verification Due Date No (month) workplan agreed. Work meeting conclusions Participant list, photos, presentations. 14 Policy recommendations for integrated WP4 2-MKA Agreed roadmap towards improving existing 24 renovation service of heritage home energy service across different sectoral policies. A policy renovations workshop will be held where the roadmap will be presented. Roadmap (PDF document, stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian and ENG summary) Policy workshop Participant list, photos, conclusions; 15 Policy recommendations for implementing WP4 2-MKA >5 business models fitness analyses and policy 24 business models to sustain the energy recommendations. Roadmap (PDF document, renovations of heritage homes stored in MKA document registry, handed over at request. Report in Estonian and ENG summary) 16 Training events carried out WP4 2-MKA Heritage officials (~25), energy consultants 36 (~20), other professionals (~50) Training material sets (2); Training workshop participant lists, photos, conclusions; 17 Digital renovation passport tool piloted WP5 4-TalTech Digital renovation passport tool for heritage 24 homes piloted for 20 buildings Prototype of the tool 18 Digital dashboard for integrated service WP5 3-KLIM Digital one-stop-shop for heritage home 24 renovations. Online interface for the one-stop- shop launched 19 Best practice demo-videos WP6 2-MKA 10 best practice demo-clips (a’ 2 min videos). 24 Demo video files uploaded on project webpage. 20 Test-user feedback session completed WP6 2-MKA 10-15 test-users have tested and commented 32 the solutions and tools integrated into service. Feedback forms, test-session recordings. 26 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Milestones Grant Preparation (Milestones screen) — Enter the info. Milestone Milestone Name Work Package No Lead Beneficiary Means of Verification Due Date No (month) 21 Service launch campaign WP6 2-MKA 11 events for homeowners in Estonian heritage 35 protection areas. Participant lists, photos, conclusions; 22 International transfer of LIFE heritageHOME WP6 6-ICOMOS >22 events, >3 scientific papers. Photos, 36 concept presentation printouts, conclusions; Publication in peer-reviewed journals. LIST OF CRITICAL RISKS Critical risks & risk management strategy Grant Preparation (Critical Risks screen) — Enter the info. Risk Description Work Package Proposed Mitigation Measures number No(s) 1 Delays due to administrative barriers Likelihood for WP2, WP4, WP5, We have built in time at the start of the project to obtain all necessary permits, regulatory occurrence: low Impact: high WP6 approvals and carry out public procurements. During the preparation of the project, we have already consulted the relevant officials. 2 Citizen Resistance Likelihood for occurrence: WP2, WP6 Co-creation is foreseen to be carried out with representative sample of heritage owners. medium Impact: medium Engagement of the owners can be hindered due to their resistance (previous discouragement etc). We will make an effort to target broad sample and encourage owners to participate. Sufficient preparatory time is foreseen to reach out to additional people, if initial sample will not be available. Similar approach is implemented when engaging the test group (T.6.2). Dissemination of the service as a whole is coupled with public outreach campaign, which aims to create positive background for the service launch. 27 Project: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Critical risks & risk management strategy Grant Preparation (Critical Risks screen) — Enter the info. Risk Description Work Package Proposed Mitigation Measures number No(s) 3 Planned actions do not yield desired energy WP3, WP2, WP4, While the project intervention logic is thoroughly thought through the continuous learning performance benefits Likelihood for occurrence: WP5 and sensemaking is foreseen. We aim to adapt to the end user needs and adapt the actions low Impact: high to benefit the end-users. 4 Results not implemented due to lack of funding WP3, WP2, WP4, A significant effort is made in the project to increase the funding available for renovating Likelihood for occurrence: low Impact: high WP5 heritage buildings. Novel business models will be developed (T.4.3). 5 Lessons learned remain only in LIFE WP3, WP2, WP4, We avoid this by spreading the knowledge gained in this project to research and heritage heritageHOME circle Likelihood for occurrence: WP1, WP5, WP6 protection communities in Europe. medium Impact: medium 6 Low number of pilot buildings and the expected size WP3, WP2, WP4, Project one aim is to bring the field of different funding measures closer to owners of heritage of the test group Likelihood for occurrence: medium WP5 buildings and so widen the audience of people interested and aware of all possibilities to Impact: high renovate their homes and therefore willing to take 28  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B ANNEX 1 Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE) Description of the action (DoA) Part A Part B Version 1.0 15 April 2021 1  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B TABLE OF CONTENTS HISTORY OF CHANGES ............................................................................................................................................... 3 1. RELEVANCE ........................................................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Background and general project objectives......................................................................................................... 11 1.2 Specific project objectives ................................................................................................................................... 14 1.3 Compliance with LIFE programme objectives and call topic ............................................................................... 15 1.4 Concept and methodology .................................................................................................................................. 17 1.5 Upscaling results of other EU funded projects .................................................................................................... 21 1.6 Complementarity with other actions .................................................................................................................... 23 1.7 Synergies and co-benefits with other LIFE sub-programmes .............................................................................. 24 1.8 Synergies and co-benefits with other EU policy areas ........................................................................................ 25 2. IMPACT.................................................................................................................................................................... 27 2.1 Ambition of the impacts ....................................................................................................................................... 27 2.2 Credibility of the impacts ..................................................................................................................................... 29 2.3 Sustainability of project results............................................................................................................................ 30 2.4 Exploitation of project results .............................................................................................................................. 32 2.5 Catalytic potential: Replication and upscaling ..................................................................................................... 32 3. IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................................................................. 34 3.1 Work plan ............................................................................................................................................................ 34 3.3 Stakeholder engagement .................................................................................................................................... 40 3.4 Impact monitoring and reporting.......................................................................................................................... 41 3.5 Communication, dissemination and visibility ....................................................................................................... 42 4. RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................................... 43 4.1 Consortium set-up............................................................................................................................................... 43 4.2 Project management ........................................................................................................................................... 45 4.3 Green management ............................................................................................................................................ 46 5. MEMBERS OF THE CONSORTIUM ........................................................................................................................ 48 1- Ministry of Culture ................................................................................................................................................. 48 2 – Estonian National Heritage Board ....................................................................................................................... 49 3 – Ministry of Climate .............................................................................................................................................. 50 4 – Tallinn University of Technology ......................................................................................................................... 52 5 – Estonian Academy of Arts ................................................................................................................................... 55 6 – ICOMOS Estonia ................................................................................................................................................ 56 2  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B HISTORY OF CHANGES Following the order of revision points Date Objective of change/ESR comment Change description 19.07.23 Inclusion of following activity in the The requested specification is included to the Task 1.3 - relevant task of the management work Project visibility. Communication and media activities. package: “Contribute, upon invitation by the Agency, to common activities As a similar collaboration with other projects in EU was related to information (like reporting foreseen (however not specifically elaborated related on impact indicators), dissemination to the events organized by CINEA) then no changes in and visibility, and synergies with other budget are needed. LIFE and EU supported actions.” 19.07.23 Inclusion of the management work As agreed during the first phone call of the revision package a deliverable at month 9 process, we prefer to organize a technical progress entitled ‘Technical progress report’. meeting with CINEA instead of submitting a technical progress report. 19.07.23 Inclusion of the following deliverables The requested compulsory deliverables are included to in the management work package: the workplan as follows: - ‘Extract of the project data from the D1.2 Extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI LIFE KPI webtool’ by month 9 webtool: M9. - ‘Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool’ at the end D1.3 Updated extract of the project data from the LIFE KPI webtool: M36. of the project 02.08.23 Inclusion of the relevant task of the The final publishabel report will be merged with the communication work package: legacy report. Following text was added to WP6, task "The project will prepare a final 6.1: The legacy report will constitute the final publishable report presenting the key publishable report presenting the key results, main lessons learnt, and recommendations for the future. It results, main lessons learnt, and will be professionally designed, attractive and tailored to recommendations for the future. The the target group. The content and final draft of the report final publication should be must be discussed with CINEA before publication professionally designed, attractive and tailored to the target group. The content and final draft of the publishable report must be discussed with CINEA before publication". Please insert a deliverable ‘final publishable report’ due 2 months before the end of the project. 19.07.23 ESR comment: A testing phase is In part B, Section 1.4 “Methodology” several included but is not sufficiently paragraphs are added related to elaborated. Furthermore, the practical “Testing the components of the integrated service”; operation of the digital one-stop-shop “Modelling the performance of technical renovation and the interaction with homeowners solutions”; “Engaging committed test users for testing”; is not sufficiently described. “Applying the official test guidance for Estonian state 3  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B digital tools published in 2023”. Under workplan following amendments were submitted: 19.07.23 ESR comment: the practical operation In part A: of the digital one-stop-shop and the interaction with homeowners is not Task 3.2 – a sentence is added «With agreeing the list sufficiently described of single renovation solutions also methods for validating their resilience and performance and fitness for heritage contexts will be determined for allowing adequate modelling for validation and testing beyond available practice. « Task 3.3 A sentence is included : «The validated renovation solutions will be published as Technical report (D3.2), as well as fed into digital toolset of integrated renovation service. For the latter selected technical solutions in digital form (>30 models of single renovation measures) will be developed for the digital renovation passport tool (D3.1; D3.3). « Task 4.1 A sentence is included : To secure the streamlined process for the complex and integrated workflow, an internal workplan is to be agreed (MS13). The Workplan will define roles, testing policy, and various subtask deadlines for the overall process. Task 5.2 A paragraph is included : As the Renovation Passport is aimed towards homeowners with non- technical expertise, the solution needs to be tested for clarity and consistency towards delivering accurate information on needed renovation works. The committed test group (engaged in T6.2) along with additional test-users are to be integrated in developing the digital tool with the functionality needed by the homeowners. The following milestones are added: MS10 Agreeing the final list of renovation measures developed (Month 6) MS13 Service design workplan (Month 3) The following deliverables are added: D3.1 Technical solutions for single renovation measures (Month 12) ; D3.3 Technical solutions for single renovation measures and configuration criteria (Month 30).* 19.07.23 ESR comment: The selection of pilot In part B, Section 1.4 “Methodology” several buildings and support offered besides paragraphs are added on: the digital tool are insufficiently - Pilot buildings of test group (15 buildings) 4  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B developed for the pilot phase (T.6.2 - Buildings for which Renovation Passports are to “Launching integrated renovation be developed (aforementioned test group + >5 additional buildings – total >20 buildings) service for heritage homes”). - Case study buildings based on which the 50+ renovation solutions 19.07.23 ESR comment: The impacts of the 2.1 Ambition of the impacts part was elaborated for one-stop-shop service on the target each expected impact (regarding systematisation of relevant information needed to implement energy group are not fully evidenced (e.g. the renovation tasks in heritage buildings; investments in number of renovations expected to be sustainable energy; partnerships, availability of induced by the service is lacking), and adequate financing). Elaboration was given in task 4.3. baselines, benchmarks and assumptions are not sufficiently A clearer target was set: within 5 years of operation of explained. the services the system will facilitate renovations of up to 200 building per year 02.08.23 Could you envisage a more specific This was shown in Table 3 Assumptions of LIFE KPI (number of people reached, heritageHOME KPI. The number of partnerships formed number of people trained, number of was added to the tabel. partnerships formed etc) 19.07.23 ESR comment : The expected impacts Further information was given: The estimated range for in terms of energy savings (based on the energy saving potential is derived from previous 20-60% savings in F-labelled heritage successful renovations of such buildings and that buildings entering the renovation impact is achieved either by implementing only single process), renewable energy production measures (20%) or undergoing the deep renovation and investment triggered during and affecting the whole building (60%). The estimated after the project lifetime are expected impact is assessed using the Estonian quantified. However, they are not methodology for assessing building performance of sufficiently evidenced. buildings, baseline calculations are available if needed. 02.08.23 ESR comment: There are insufficient Elaboration was given in task 4.3 e.g The model to activities dedicated to exploring finance the service gaps is to be agreed within the policy work foreseen in WP2 and WP4. The policy work business models for running the service regarding implementing the business models will be at without public funding. parts supported by the project expertise. 19.07.23, ESR comment: Exploitation relies on Text was elaborated in task 2.1 02.08.2023 research activities, collaboration and engagement with commercial market The LIFE heritageHOME results are to be exploited also in: participants as well as synergies with the LIFE IP BUILDEST project, which is - policy work regarding the energy renovations of relevant. However, these elements are heritage homes (coupling the challenges of solving the not sufficiently elaborated. challenges of energy poverty and protecting the European built heritage authenticity). key ministries are engaged to the project as beneficiaries as well are the significant state authority and the leading civil society organization, all findings of the project will integrate in policy work. - policy work regarding the energy renovations of historic homes (milieu-valuable buildings protected locally). Project findings will be as much possible 5  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B integrated in the planning and construction laws of Estonia. Text was elaborated in task 4.1 9) consultations of heritage homeowners & permitting procedures: while we expect to set up a digital one-stop- shop, then it will also include direct consultations by heritage authorities. The heritage authorities will be trained during and after the project to provide evidence- based advice/support for the homeowners when requested for information. Also, the service and its components will provide baseline and data-based decision support for future permitting procedures. 10) To secure the streamlined process for the complex and integrated workflow, an internal workplan is to be agreed (MS13). The Workplan will define roles, testing policy, and subtask deadlines for the overall process. It is expected that this process has significant impact on construction and heritage protection laws of Estonia as well as support implementation of them by raised capacity and awareness. To achieve this, the relevant policy makers that are engaged to the project as beneficiaries (KuM, KliM, MKA) will integrate the project results into national thematic policies (permitting procedures, grant schemes, collaboration with regional authorities and local municipalities etc.) Text was elaborated in task 4.2 We propose competence models for vocational program: heritage – energy consultant specialist competence model or similar. /…/ Construction companies & renovation professionals are engaged to identifying existing best practices for delivering energy efficiency measures in renovation of heritage buildings (T3.1) as well as in later stages of the project informed about the developed renovation solutions (T3.2, T3.3) and facilitation services made available via digital one-stop-shop (T5.2). This is expected to have a positive influence on technical quality of the buildingworks. Also, the validated solutions also increase the interest of professionals to participate the renovation market. 19.07.23 ESR comment: Deliverables and Additional milestones/deliverables were included for milestones are overall appropriate and WP3 (for renovation solutions and their digital models) relevant. However, their timing is not and the digital dashboard is brought forward in always fully suitable. For example, the schedule (month 24). changes were made in partB. Technical Report on renovation solutions (D3.1) is not due until month 30 and the Digital Dashboard for integrated services (M14) is not due 6  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B until month 36, which limits the actual use phase. 19.07.23 ESR comment: It is unclear why several Explanation was given: All partners have been assigned partners do not have resources management effort (min 1 PM per reporting period). By this change the total effort of WP 1 has increased from assigned for management (WP1)”. 28.8 to 36 PM-s. The change in budget is covered partly by transferring effort from other work-packages and from the skipped audit (according to RP15d). 02.08.23 ESR comment: The risk of low risk assesment was added to risk management section engagement of citizens and other key 4.5 regarding the number of pilot buildings and the expected size of the test group. stakeholders is not sufficiently addressed. 04.08.23 ESR comment: Some significant additional justification was provided in budget annex subcontracting costs such as the rows 38 and 40 “Development of the web interface for technical guidance for heritage homes under Ehitusgiid” and other costs such as the publishing costs for the energy renovation atlas are not sufficiently justified in the context of the proposed activities. 19.07.23 The average monthly salary rate Explanation was given: TalTech has assigned senior foreseen for beneficiary 4. Tallinna level research staff (in the field of building energy performance, renovation, building physics, digital Tehnikaülikool seems to be very high construction) to the project. Their expertise is highly for what is observed in Estonia for valued also in commercial construction sector. To similar activities, the mentioned respond to the competition, the PM rate for the beneficiary is kindly invited to justify renovation and building performance, digital or reduce their personnel costs. If they construction is higher than the Estonian average. Moreover, it needs to be acknowledged that for the decide to maintain these costs heritage buildings the top-level experts, who have unchanged, be aware that even if specific expertise on the culturally valuable buildings budgeted, the costs may be subject to and their preservation is required, which narrows down ex-ante checks at final payment stage the possibilty to replace the senior experts with less or ex-post audits after the final experienced staff. payment and could still be rejected if not complying with the eligibility criteria. 19.07.23 In the Annex “detailed budget table”, the budget item was removed from the table and Beneficiary 1. Kultuuriministeerium transferred to the budget under project management budgeted, among its purchase costs to secure internal financial management. for “other goods, works and services”, 10,000 EUR for “project audit”. If this cost is aimed a covering a financial audit please note that, as the threshold for mandatory audit is not reached by any of the beneficiaries, such cost is not eligible and it should be removed, otherwise please explain the type of audit it is meant to cover. 7  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 19.07.23 The following expenditures foreseen Cost items transferred to Other goods, works and under “subcontracting” in the annex services. “detailed budget table” do not appear to imply the implementation of part of the action. seem to be better fit in the category of Other cost: International thematic experts heritage & energy renovations (~3 experts, 1-2 day assignments related to project events) foreseen by beneficiary 1. Kultuuriministeerium in the framework of work-package 2. External consultancies engaged to the training events (~10 experts, 4 days, a' 250 eur) foreseen by beneficiary 2. Muinsuskaitseamet in the framework of work-package 4. 19.07.23 Please be so kind to further clarify the Clarification and explanation was given about what is justification of the following costs: behind these figures: In the budget calculation, the cost Setup of the front-end from MKA web of IT development has been taken into account based for the digital Integrated Renovation on a duration of five months (with the development Service interface (1 service) foreseen team expenses amounting to average 10,000 euros per by beneficiary 2. Muinsuskaitseamet month), effort estimations for development of the web and interface for technical guidance for heritage homes Development of the web interface for under Ehitusgiid are planned based on previous technical guidance for heritage homes contracts outsourcing similar activities, inflation rate under Ehitusgiid foreseen by ~5% per year is considered). beneficiary 3. Majandus Ja Kommunikatsiooniministeerium in the framework of work-package 5. the “Service testing (15 homeowners, a' 2000 eur fee) and Service launch campaing (11 events, a' 3000 eur)” foreseen in the annex “detailed budget table” under “purchase costs e.g. for other services” by beneficiary 2. Muinsuskaitseamet. In particular, with reference to their purpose, need and work-package. 17.08.23 The following cost seems to be partially Justification was given and detailed budget was overlapping/duplicating. Could you be updated: so kind to check and adjust either the estimate or the description as The cost items are from now on described as: necessary? Facilitation of Service and Interaction Design for the heritage home renovation service (T4.1): 30 000 eur • “Service & interaction design for the digital Integrated Renovation Setup of the front-end/back-end web solutions from Service interface (1 service)” for a total MKA (T5.2): 50 000 eur of 30.000 EUR budgeted by beneficiary 8  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B MKA in the subcontracting category for Development of the web interface for technical WP4; guidance for heritage homes under Ehitusgiid. The digital technical guidance in the form of web interface • “Setup of the front-end/back- is planned as smart renovation passport, assisting end from MKA web for the digital homeowners in planning, designing and implementing Integrated Renovation Service renovations (T5.2): 53 529 eur interface (web platform)” for a total of 50.000 EUR budgeted by beneficiary MKA in the subcontracting category for WP5 and • “Development of the web interface for technical guidance for heritage homes under Ehitusgiid.” for a total of 53.529 EUR budgeted by beneficiary KLIM in the subcontracting category for WP5. 17.08.23 Please be so kind to clarify what type of Budget was changed and further details were provided costs you intend to cover with the on what costs have been planned instead of the budget provision of 30.000 EUR budgeted by that was originally planned as generic service testing 30 beneficiary MKA in the category other 000 eur. goods works and services for “Service testing (15 homeowners, a' 2000 eur)”. Subcontracting. 2 - MKA. 22500 eur. For the buildings participating in the testing, an energy audit is compiled, Please be so kind to consider that taking into account the constraints arising from the support to third parties cannot be value of the buildings, and proposing suitable energy considered an eligible cost in the efficiency packages accordingly. The energy audit is framework of the Life Clean Energy part of the essential preliminary data that need to be Transition (LIFE-2022-CET), please see determined for the buildings involved in the project, point 10 page 74 of the call document. this is also relevant among buildings that have already undregone a renovation to evaluate the outcome compared to the result they were aiming to achieve (15 buildings, a' 1500 eur). Other direct costs. 2 - MKA. Other goods, works and services: 7500 eur Service testing will cover various direct costs related to the testing period in which the test users are engaged (study trips, meetings, logistics, etc) 17.08.2023 Please be so kind to confirm that the Confirmation was given and initial vision of the events cost “Service launch campaign (11 were given as follows: events, a' 3000 eur)” has been budgeted by beneficiary MKA in the The specifics of the service launch campaign is to be category other goods works and determined during the project, various events in services is intended to cover only the different regions of Estonia will be held to introduce logistics for the organization of the service and its components. 1-2 events will be held separate meetings and that the indoors as a introduction seminar. The other events are purpose, content and agenda of the conducted in the form of a tour, encompassing various meetings will be defined by the types of buildings that face the challenge of achieving beneficiary. energy efficiency, such as the main buildings of valuable estates with exquisite interiors, simpler estate 9  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Otherwise please be so kind to move utility buildings, rural architecture, heritage area the related cost in the “subcontracting” apartment buildings, etc. During the tour, different category as it would represent the options and already implemented solutions are implementation of part of the action. introduced. 17.08.2023 The “Publishing cost for energy this row was moved to «subcontracting » renovation atlas” budgeted by beneficiary MKA in the category other costs appears to represent the implementation of part of the action and, as such, it should be moved to the subcontracting category. Please be so kind to make the necessary adjustment or to explain the reasoning behind its inclusion in “other cost”. 10  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 1. RELEVANCE 1.1 Background and general project objectives Background and general project objectives CHALLENGE OF ENERGY PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT OF HISTORIC HOMES EU policy makers have for a long time recognised the importance of building performance in the effort to mitigate climate change - starting with the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) and the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED). However, by acknowledging the need, then capturing the energy saving potential of the building stock is still posing a challenge. However, with the current rate of building stock replacement in EU (1% per year), retrofitting existing buildings is therefore one of the key strategies in achieving the efficiency aims for the built environment. It must be acknowledged that the EU building stock is very heterogeneous. Across all Member States, the majority (EU average 75,82%) of the floor area of existing buildings is composed by private housing. Moreover, a significant share (~20%) from European homes encompass some historic value (Figure 1). Figure 1 Breakdown of residential building by construction year. Historical buildings, and moreover the ones of significant heritage value usually have very poor energy performance in their original condition. The preservation, protection needs and retrofit compatibility with heritage values needs always to be considered first for heritage buildings. Due to this the current EU Renovation Wave, likewise the EPBD, have exempted buildings officially protected as part of a designated environment or because of their special architectural or historical merit from energy performance requirements. Allowing this exception, the directive still encourages energy renovations that can be implemented without altering the buildings character or appearance. Moreover, EC directive 2018/844 stresses that research into, and the testing of, new solutions for improving the energy performance of historical buildings and sites should be encouraged, while also safeguarding and preserving cultural heritage. Although the energy-saving potential in the historic building stock is somewhat insignificant in relation to the entire stock, the homeowners themselves want to reduce the building's energy consumption and their energy costs. The topic is especially relevant right now because recently the cost of energy has increased several times. Until recently the owners of heritage homes have been treated as a transient phenomenon for the monument. Also, non-renovation of heritage buildings (caused by heritage protection restrictions) have been comforted by the expectation that new and more capable owners will take over and set up a feasible heritage-driven business models for the buildings. In the case of homes, we cannot talk about the business idea of living and we need to acknowledge that the majority of the residential heritage 11  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B buildings have no potential of becoming business cases even with the most capable owners. Several sources indicate that the heritage protection regime increases the value of real estate, this however is not a case in shrinking and ageing communities well spread across the whole Eastern Europe. Moreover, if a person wants to live in his/her home, a high property value does not make the living conditions better. It can be useful when the homeowner has to sell his/her home however in this stage the problem has already gotten too far. The owner must be able to sustainably maintain and manage his/her home, especially when as doing so, they’ll maintain and manage the joint heritage. While energy retrofits of private housing are considered cumbersome for the owners, the road to energy efficient home is much more challenging for the owners of historical buildings. As the architectural characteristics must be preserved, standard solutions that are feasible for other buildings will be unacceptable for heritage buildings if they bring a change in appearance and character. Even when technical solutions exist feasible, it still means that relative prices for energy improvement of historic homes are much higher compared to other building types. Also, the rules of possible financing schemes for energy efficient renovation may put heritage buildings at a disadvantage, where all applications are judged on an equal basis. Unless subsidised or supported in other ways, heritage buildings may not succeed in obtaining public funds because there is no recognition of the higher investment-to-savings ratio. Moreover, as also the bureaucracy of the permitting processes encompasses more hurdles, leaving homeowners discouraged to even attempt to make a change. The multifaceted barriers hindering energy renovations of historic homes do not only leave us with leaking buildings with high energy use – in long run such homes are abandoned, putting the built heritage in even higher risk. It must be acknowledged that historic homes, which as such hold a great public value clearly need improved market conditions as well as integrated services to facilitate the energy renovations. In 2021, the European Cultural Heritage Green Paper subtitled “Putting Europe’s shared heritage at the heart of the European Green Deal”, was published. This document, commissioned by the European Commission and complied by the acknowledged experts of the field, delineates a conceptual framework for how cultural heritage could help with the European efforts to achieve the climate neutrality. Concepts like resource efficiency and resiliency that are prioritized in the Green Deal, a deeply rooted principles in heritage preservation. The time-tested technologies, the product of place-adapted innovation still can be exploited for climate proofing contemporary buildings, especially as they typically not addicted to oil-dependent economy). Moreover, the paper highlights that addressing energy poverty of Europe’s lower income populations who live in historic housing is a must. BUILDINGS IN THE SCOPE OF LIFE heritageHOME LIFE heritageHOME project clearly focus on the energy performance improvement of residential (single or multi-family buildings) heritage monuments and of residential buildings located within the borders of national heritage protection areas. In total there are 5268 building monuments and ~5700 built-up properties in the urban heritage protection areas (old towns of Tallinn, Tartu, Pärnu, Rakvere, Kuressaare, Lihula, Paide, Haapsalu, Viljandi, Võru, Valga). For both building types, similar heritage protection regulations apply for energy renovations. Of the listed heritage buildings approximately 7000 are considered to have (at least partial) residential use. Moreover, most of the residential housing in Estonia is privately owned. While no energy performance requirement is enforced for such buildings, the private homes located in the historical town centres encompass a significant value not only for having preserved authentic usage, but also for resource efficient urban layout. Heritage buildings are the flagship examples for resilient building stock, demonstrating resource efficiency and resilience and adaptability to changing conditions, which is due we need to assist their owners in their pursuit to better living environment and lower energy cost. Moreover, when focusing on developing streamlined renovation services for the homeowners of heritage buildings (non-professional decision makers), we will also empower owners of historic homes in general. Many conventional renovation solutions are not applicable for the homes built prior to II world war (~60 000 buildings, 18% from the national residential building stock), however the services and solutions provided for heritage homes are well fitted also for these. Typical building in the scope of project (examples presented in Figure 2) has one or two stories and is made of traditional, locally available building materials such as wood, bricks or natural stone. The wall construction material could be exposed but, in most cases, it is covered either by plaster or wooden boards. Majority of the buildings have at least some decoration elements and preserving these is essential for keeping architectural character as well as keeping the original design of windows and doors. 12  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 2 Residential buildings in Võru town centre. THE BARRIERS HINDERING ENERGY RENOVATION OF ESTONIAN HERITAGE HOMES Built heritage is a cornerstone of the European identity and has an important role in creating and preserving community values and we-feeling also in Estonia. Although neither the European strategic documents on green transition nor Estonian regulations require the energy renovations of architectural monuments or buildings that have noteworthy heritage value, the owners of such protected buildings are obligated to maintain them according to Heritage Conservation Act. A heritage home has meaning to the broader community; however, its significance typically does not reflect in higher property value. Being built long ago, heritage homes often lack more recent energy-saving features and thus generate high energy costs. Homeowners who want to renovate their homes to meet today’s energy efficiency needs would not only face the various barriers of coordinating the bureaucracy, contractual management, and financing of the retrofit, they also must be aware of the challenges and opportunities that come with a heritage building. Heritage conservation regulations typically require renovation and conservation of a heritage building in accordance to specific requirements so the building and neighbourhood continue to look historically authentic. However, the regulations do not completely restrict energy efficiency measures. Rather than the protection regime, the renovation plans become cancelled due to a list of various other barriers, which we aim to solve within this project. The most relevant barriers hindering energy renovation of Estonian heritage homes are listed below: Contradicting instructions & incomprehensible communication: the information about the possible renovation interventions, right sequence of needed procedures is often partial or misleading. Instructions, being currently scattered between different sources, can at times be contradicting. Non-expert homeowner lacks capabilities to seek for the answers to questions “which authority to contact first”, “what are the baseline requirements that need to be met in preserving the heritage values”, also when starting the renovation journey, owners are unaware, what is expected from the process. Solving the information barriers is the key aim of this project. Limited knowledge on multi-benefit renovation solutions: energy retrofit of heritage buildings is a relatively new task for the construction sector, as it is also unfamiliar challenge for the heritage community. It is therefore important to offer reliable solutions to practitioners and end-users that prevent any undesired outcome. Often, the lack of trust and awareness of the available solutions (incl. renovation, integration of renewable energy solutions and implementing energy saving technologies etc.) is limiting the extent of interventions. This has a negative effect on the final energy savings and occupants’ comfort, important factors when it comes to the use and conservation of historic buildings. Moreover, failures in implementing renovation measures, have long term effects – damaged heritage value and lost investments hindering any repair of failures. Limited knowledge on the right sequence of renovation works: As the renovation of heritage buildings is expensive and the owner’s financial capacity usually is limited, then the renovation is typically implemented using stepwise approach, in such manner the applied solutions deviate from optimal and in worst case harm the hygrothermal performance or heritage value of the building. Also, it can happen that the stepwise approach locks the following interventions, due the owners reaching the loan ceiling or becoming discouraged from the discomfort and inconveniences of the renovation works. Within LIFE heritageHOME project, we will develop technical deep renovation solutions for most typical building envelopes and service systems of historic buildings. Also, we’ll train the enablers of heritage home renovations. Ineffective coordination among the enablers: the current procedures and practices do not favour collaboration between different participants of coordination of the renovation process. Instead, the current practice has led to confrontation of heritage specialists and designers of deep renovation measures. Such contradiction, combined with perception that heritage preservation excludes energy retrofit, is misleading to the homeowners. The roots of the problem lay in the fact that the different disciplines do not use the same “vocabulary” and often the most significant decisions about the renovation are made without 13  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B analysing the feasibility of possible alternatives. We’ll facilitate the concerted collaboration of actors, both for discussing the overall goals of the green transition of built heritage but also will agree streamlined procedures for future interdisciplinary collaborations. The clarified coordination coupled with developed digital toolset, will make a significant step in simplifying the process of deep renovations for homeowners. Limited financial capacity of homeowners and lack of feasible business models to finance energy renovations of heritage homes. Investment and financing are crucial arenas of action in all efforts to accelerate the green transition of our societies. This is also a case for energy renovations of the heritage homes. Large amount of privately owned heritage buildings is in a poor technical status and thus require urgent renovations. However, given that the renovation does not include energy retrofit by default, it takes focus, expertise, and funding to realise a building’s full energy saving potential by limited resources available. In case of private heritage buildings, the gap between the incentives to renovate and funding is especially difficult to bridge in short term. Thus, the financial solutions must be secured, guaranteed and solutions must be developed how to transparently blend the different available funding sources. Urban shrinkage and challenging socio-economic settings. Estonia has 12 heritage conservation areas, 11 of which can be found in city centres. Except the ones in larger cities, each of them is affected by population decline. As population decreases, the housing supply may exceed demand, leading to an increase in vacant properties and a decrease in property value. While empty buildings in city centres can constitute an unused potential for local development then the nexus of challenges consisting of aging communities, strict heritage regulations, low financial capacity of owners and local governments and seasonality of the demand for additional services in the town centres can lead to abandonment of more and more heritage buildings. The challenge of shrinkage, abandonment and unfavourable market conditions contributing to it are given in Figure 3. Figure 3 - Abandonment of buildings in heritage conservation area of Võru illustrated by the energy consumption of buildings (LEFT). Red hexagon illustrates the region in town, in which the number of buildings consuming energy have declined. As a comparison the average property value based on real-estate transactions (RIGHT). In Võru town (marked with an arrow) the average price for a residential property (apartment) is 216-356 eur/ m². The deep energy renovation of heritage homes is a long-term sustainable solution only if it also supports the well-being of the residents. If this is not done, the homes may leave vacant and in need demolition. On the positive side, a focus on the potential for social value creation and a holistic approach to sustainability can help justify more expensive energy renovation measures. The "co-benefits" can be qualitatively translated into "willingness to pay" that can be incorporated into multiple methodologies with traditional life cycle cost (LCC) and life cycle assessment (LCA) analysis. PROJECT OVERALL OBJECTIVE The overall objective of the LIFE heritageHOME is to pilot integrated renovation service that will support the whole customer journey for owners of Estonian heritage homes who aim to improve the energy performance of their properties. 1.2 Specific project objectives Specific project objectives 14  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B LIFEheritageHOME has the following specific objectives: SpO 1 – ALIGN POLICY: We aim to align and improve policy measures for deep renovations for heritage buildings currently being exempted from energy performance requirements. We’ll be targeting 6000 buildings in Estonia that are a home for >20 000 residents, by the concerted policy measures we expect to facilitate implementation of energy efficiency measures (incl. renovations). We will coordinate and agree the procedures for transparent blending of various funding instruments (home renovation, heritage protection, municipal support if available and other novel financing models). Moreover, in the frame of service design process we will analyse the fitness of current policy and governance procedures and will present he recommendations for improving the current policies. SpO 2 – AGREE PROCEDURES: We will set up a coordinated system between different enablers facilitating renovations. We’ll pave the way for the whole customer journey of heritage home energy renovations covering the instructions and guidelines for phases like ideation and consultation, overall budgeting, design and obtaining permits, finding qualified professionals, contractual coordination and project management, preparation, implementation and tracking the renovation. The integrated service will align cross-sectoral authorities (heritage, municipal planning and building, technical inspecting etc.), agree right sequence for interdisciplinary goal setting and raise the capacity of the participants enabling the process. The service will be implemented across Estonia, all regional heritage specialists (~20 county level consultants), municipal authorities (~79 local municipalities), administrative collaborators (~10 city level consultants) and external thematic consultants will be informed from the coordinated system and implement it by 2025. SpO 3 –DEVELOP USER SPECIFIC TOOLSET: Develop and institutionalize the necessary toolset for the integrated renovation service of deep energy renovations of heritage homes. We’ll equip the enablers with improved guidelines and agreed procedures, provide the validated best-practice catalogues to be relied on and establish a coordination system which includes policy, governance, joint sensemaking and improved digital tools. Moreover, our approach is client-facing – we'll set up a digital one-stop-shop for owners of heritage homes, assisting them throughout the whole journey of renovation. The toolset developed by the end of LIFE heritageHOME project will consist of different levers like technology & solutions, coordinated policy procedures, engagement and co-creation platforms for participation, funding solutions and learning platform all integrated to a digital one-stop-shop platform. SpO4 – EMPOWER THE OWNERS: We aim to enable the homeowners to take active part in service design and policy making. The owners of Estonian heritage homes have until now not formed strong alliances (only owners of manor houses have formed a union), due to which the peer-to-peer learning for experience exchange on feasible practices (funding, contracting etc) is hindered and the participation in policy design is insufficient. We aim to engage a representative group of >50 owners to the owners’ heritage assembly, with the aim to co-design the requirements for the integrated service. During the project we will set up an owner's learning platform in the digital one-stop-shop, in which we aim to encourage we- feeling and mutually beneficial sensemaking among owners. SpO 5 – SUSTAIN AND REPLICATE: We aim to sustain the viability of the developed service and branch out to replicate the service. The different levers combined to the integrated service will need to be self-sustaining and viable after the end of the project, this will be secured by the policy makers coordinating and supporting the project (KuM, KLIM and MKA). To boost the replication of the solutions we will collaborate synergistic projects, use the platform of LIFE IP BUILDEST and engage the network of ICOMOS council. We aim to actively spread the technical renovation solutions to enablers of heritage renovations in cold climate regions of Europe (Nordic-Baltic and Alpine regions) and introduce the integrated service among the members of ICOMOS network. 1.3 Compliance with LIFE programme objectives and call topic Compliance with LIFE Programme objectives LIFE heritageHOME specific objectives align with the ones of the sub-programme ‘Clean Energy Transition’ as follows: Our project develops, demonstrates and promotes innovative techniques, methods and approaches applicable for heritage buildings for reaching the energy efficiency goals set by EU, and to contribute to the knowledge base and to the application of best practice in the matter. More specifically, we will set an example in Estonia how to support the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement 15  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B of the policy on the transition to sustainable renewable energy or increased energy efficiency in heritage buildings. We’ll engage quadruple ecosystem stakeholders to improve governance and coordination, in particular through enhancing capacities of public and private actors (heritage authorities, energy audit consultants, designers/architects and engineers). We’ll enforce the civil society and engage the owners into co-creation of the developed services. Acknowledging the various barriers hindering energy renovations of heritage homes (concluded in section 1.1) and most of all the investments required to implement the costly renovation measures, we’ll investigate the potential for mobilising investment and improving access to finance. By doing this we’ll support the transition toward an energy-efficient, renewable energy-based, climate-neutral and -resilient heritage buildings, which has high replication potential across Europe. These actions, of high EU added value, aim at breaking market barriers that hamper the socio-economic transition to sustainable energy in heritage protection areas. Due to the specifics of the sector (unique crafts, tailor-made solutions etc.) we’ll be engaging multiple small and medium-size stakeholders, multiple actors including local and regional public authorities and non-profit organisations, bearing in mind the final end-user of the services. LIFE heritageHOME will contribute to the implementation of the energy-related actions of the Green Deal, including the ‘Renovation wave’ initiative for the heritage building sector. It will contribute to the Just Transition objectives by accompanying the territories and the groups of citizens negatively affected by the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, by building capacity of actors and fostering clean energy investments, mainly in energy efficiency and locally available, sustainable, renewable energy sources. Compliance with the call topic LIFEheritageHOME is fit to LIFE CET HOMERENO call as it: 1. Improves market conditions and develops integrated home renovation service for Estonian homeowners of historical and heritage buildings. The service will reduce complexity and simplify decision making for historic homeowners to stimulate demand for energy performance improvements and deep renovation. Also, we expect to set up a system that aligns various bureaucratic procedures as well as necessary services required along building energy performance investment processes. The integrated service will connect relevant actors in the value chain (e.g. policy makers, heritage authorities, energy audit consultants, architects and engineers for the technical solutions etc.). The project will bridge gaps in access to various support measures and propose solutions to blend available funding instruments investigate the potential of novel funding opportunities. By establishment of the integrated service, we’ll expect to improve awareness and trust towards feasibility and effectiveness of energy renovations of historic homes, through clear accountability, quality assurance and owner-focused approach. 2. Proposes self-sustained business model for the integrated home renovation service of heritage buildings, by integration of existing services offered by dedicated operators (public measures like renovation subsidies paid by Foundation of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, state support measures for heritage protection, consultancies, and generic energy renovation one-stop shops) and/or through an improved co-ordination between existing local actors. We expect to set up a system, which encompasses capable experts, digital support system, agreed procedures and established policy. We will investigate the prospect of different possible business models to target sustainability of the deep renovations of heritage homes to long term. 3. The established integrated renovation service of LIFE heritageHOME will provide methods and support for heritage homeowners, by: − Building expertise and raising organisational capacities needed to facilitate the energy renovations of heritage buildings. − Reducing costs on tailor-made design of renovations through standardised approaches (e.g. optimised processes, validated technical solutions, design preparation via renovation passport tool etc etc.). − Investigating the potential to blend funding instruments and set up more viable business models for heritage home renovation and ensure the transparency in blending various funding schemes (climate claim investments, ESCO schemes and crowdfunding etc.). − Supporting the streamlining of standards and practices into consistent and transparent processes homeowners and potential additional investors can rely on, and overall improve financing conditions of renovations. 16  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 4. Moreover, we’ll communicate the feasible technical and organisational solutions, adapted to local contexts for mainstreaming best practices for buildings in Estonia not in scope of the current project as well as to countries struggling with similar challenges. We’ll also be developing and institutionalizing participatory processes for helping to improve legal and regulatory environments. Doing so, we’ll demonstrate a high degree of replicability and include a clear action plan to communicate experiences and results towards potential replicators across the EU. 1.4 Concept and methodology Concept and methodology INTERVENTION LOGIC In the broad view the project is set up from interlinking work-packages that help to prepare, develop and sustain the integrated renovation service for owners of heritage homes (Figure 4), more details about the work-packages are provided in sections 3.1-3.2 of the proposal. Whereas state-wide efforts to streamline home renovations are made in the frame of LIFE IP BUILDEST project, the LIFE heritageHOME will bridge the gaps that have been identified for the specifics of heritage homes. Figure 4 Intervention logic of LIFE heritageHOME We have aligned our intervention logic with the key recommendations from European Heritage Green Paper outlined the for policymakers and operators that are needed to support deep energy renovations of built heritage. The comprehensive report provided by the large community of acknowledged experts has identified the most relevant intervention points, in which the most urgent action is needed. We’ll respond to each of them as follows: Recommendation 1: Utilise new guidance on the Energy Efficiency First principle to help public authorities address renovation of public and privately-owned social infrastructure, to address energy performance standards while safeguarding cultural values. Our response & assumptions: The integrated renovation service with the tools and solutions developed for the homeowners will provide and streamline the utilisation of the needed guidance on energy renovations of Estonian heritage homes. See details: WP 3 (technical solutions); WP 4 (client-facing procedures and service design); WP 5 (digital one-stop-shop). Recommendation 2: Integrate in revisions of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive new approaches to energy performance standards that include the historic built environment, and allow alternate pathways to compliance based on smart, ‘whole hose’ planning and performance assessment, adapted to the needs and values of historic buildings and traditional building systems. Our response & assumptions: We’ll develop and agree procedures for energy audits for heritage homes as well as raise capacity of energy auditors on preservation on built heritage as well as educate heritage 17  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B conservation experts on the possibilities and benefits of energy preservation measures. See details: WP 4 (client facing procedures and service design, training of enablers). We’ll pilot a digital Renovation Passport tool for heritage homes, allowing to carry out preliminary assessment of potential measures possibly improving energy performance of the building. See details: WP 5 (renovation passport). Recommendation 3: Match any extension of building performance standards to heritage buildings with commensurate public incentives. The InvestEU Social Investment and Skills Window and the Sustainable Infrastructure Window should support the design of financial schemes tailored to the owners and occupants of historic buildings, while the newly established European Initiative for Building Renovation should support financing for owners of heritage buildings. Our response & assumptions: We’ll analyse the various business models developed for financing renovations of (heritage) homes and carry out a fitness check to investigate the suitability of such models for supporting improvement of Estonian heritage homes. Based on this policy recommendations will be provided. See details: WP 4 (fitness check of business models). Recommendation 4: Increase funding of heritage agencies in order to support energy efficiency efforts across Europe’s historic built environment. Our response & assumptions: LIFE heritageHOME provide significant help in raising the momentum in the policy field of energy performance of built heritage. The consortium of the project includes the key policy makers, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications and Ministry of Culture allowing to integrate and institutionalize the conclusions of the project. See details: WP 6 (sustainability of the project). Recommendation 5: Link heritage trades, skills, and education to the demands of the Renovation Wave including through enhanced Vocational Education and Training and Continuous Vocational Education and Training. Utilise the Skills Agenda and Pact for Skills to bring together relevant construction and heritage stakeholders to help achieve these objectives. Our response & assumptions: We’ll raise the capacity of the key enablers of deep energy renovations of heritage homes by co-creation of solutions (WP 3), by training of specialists, establishment of coordination routines and agreeing procedures (WP 4). Recommendation 6: Feature the adaptive reuse of historic buildings for affordable housing in the Affordable housing initiative for 100 lighthouse projects. Our response & assumptions: While we’ll not be supporting concrete renovations nor provide direct support for establishment of lighthouse renovations of heritage homes, we will be analysing and disseminating the best renovation solutions worth highlighting as national lighthouses. Also, the integrated service along with its components is expected to support establishment of future lighthouse solutions from complementary (blended and aligned) funds. See details: WP 6 (disseminating best practices). Recommendation 7: Embrace the heritage and Baukultur sectors in the expanded High-Level Forum on construction. Our response & assumptions: The integrated renovation service for owners of heritage homes is expected to serve as a one-stop-shop on a digital platform, allowing to facilitate the necessary permitting procedures, provide support and instructions how to exploit and blend existing financial subsidies, provide technical instructions, contacts of the key enablers and possible contractors for the renovations. See details: WP 5 (digital one-stop-shop). Recommendation 8: Duly integrate the full breadth of culture – from arts to heritage – in all the multi- dimensionality elements of the New European Bauhaus and include cultural heritage representatives in the advisory board of external experts who will co-steer the initiative. Our response & assumptions: We have set up a consortium representing the key actors in the field, policy makers, state heritage operators, civil society and academia. The experts engaged actively work also with policy fields like “Strategy for high-quality living environment” and other national initiatives relating to the concepts of New European Bauhaus (inclusive, sustainable, enriching). Moreover, the LIFE heritageHOME is foreseen as a complementary project for LIFE IP BUILDEST, which is launched to raise the national capacity in pursuing the objectives of Estonian Renovation Wave. While the integrated project aims to facilitate the full implementation of the Estonian Long Term Renovation Strategy and also in bits touches the field of historical buildings, it has clearly identified the urgency of the renovations of the heritage homes. METHODOLOGY 18  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Technical solutions: The International Council on Monuments & Sites (ICOMOS) has stated that “due to homogenisation of culture and of global socio-economic transformation, vernacular building structures all around the world are extremely vulnerable, facing serious problems of obsolescence, internal equilibrium and integration”. While the energy saving pursued in such buildings needs to be led by homeowners need to improve the internal comfort conditions, then the core of our approach lays in the understanding that the renovation solutions must not deteriorate the heritage value of the given buildings. However, we acknowledge that buildings last only as long as they are used. Thereby providing users with current standards of comfort is a crucial requirement to ensure the continued use of historic buildings over time and with that their conservation and durability. We’ll build our solutions on existing best practices acknowledged as local best practices, or the international examples like presented by Historic building atlas (2018) or other national guidelines as developed for example in Norway. We acknowledge the challenge of possible paradigm confrontation, as our consortium engages experts both from the techno-economic as well as cultural heritage management paradigm (Table 1). However, we expect that engaging different perspectives, approaches and mindsets will result in mutually acceptable solutions. Facilitated expert discussions within the project free homeowners from conflicting guidance provided by experts who „do not speak the same language“. This helps to reduce complexity, simplify decision making for homeowners and will stimulate demand for building renovation and energy performance improvements of heritage homes. Digital tools: Considering the limited resources of the Estonian authorities, but exploiting the various available and developed digital tools, we’ll set up the one-stop-shop as a digital service, available in every location in Estonia and at any time, necessary. Project will prototype the solutions, that will be integrated to the state-wide tools. Estonia is a frontrunner in digitalization of its heritage as well as leading operator of digital logbook of buildings. We aim to build on these and deliver recommendations how the renovation passports of heritage buildings could be set up and exploited. Table 1 Two cultures of decision-making. A characterization of how professionals can perceive and approach the same problem with different perspectives. 19  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 5 Design thinking double diamond Service design: We’ll adapt the double diamond for design thinking for service design process (Figure 5), which includes discovery process, definition of outcomes based on insights gathered there, development of the service and delivering and testing the results. In our project the design thinking steps are divided by different work packages but cross-fertilized by joint sensemaking for the end result. In terms of content, we’ll use the process-outcome flow agreed in European Standard CSN/EN 16883, Conservation of cultural heritage - Guidelines for improving the energy performance of historic buildings. We’ll upgrade the standardised procedure by rethinking the customer journey of a homeowner within this (Figure 6). We will branch out homeowners to understand the end-user specifics that need to be considered. Figure 6 Project aims to reinvent the standardized processes to be applied as user driven customer journey in which the homeowners’ entry level capacity will become the starting point for their service. Testing the components of the integrated service: The aim of the whole heritageHOME project is to develop a client facing service, in which the different components are relevant and applicable for a wide range of targeted homeowners. As the heritageHOME project pilots several novel tools and services it is important to ensure that the intended design meets the needs and expectations of end-users and this is achieved by testing the prototypes with real users before launching the service on the market or scaling the digital tools to the wide audience. • Modelling the performance of technical renovation solutions: LIFE heritageHOME will develop both the single technical renovation solutions (T3.2) as well as set up those single measures for renovation packages (T3.3) fitting for heritage buildings. The solutions that we develop and propose as “best practice” will be validated based on tested in externally financed real-life case studies and modelled using state-of-the-art standardized methods for building performance and long-term resilience. 20  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B • Engaging committed test users for testing the integrity and performance logic of the holistic service and its components: A representative sample of test users will be engaged to the service design process (T6.2). A minimum of 15 individual homeowners who have initiated renovation process (and are in different stages of it in the first half of 2024) will be selected and contracted for participating the test group. The prototypes for the digital renovation passports (RP) will be developed for the homeowners, allowing to interlink the characteristics in RP with building specific features of the integrated service and components of it relevant for the specific case. • Applying the official test guidance for Estonian state digital tools published in 2023: We will use the state of the art methods for testing the novel solutions/tools during their development (not in the end stage). In addition to the designated test group, we’ll approach specific additional test audiences as it is relevant. The sensemaking, evaluation and learning (T1.2) integrated to the project management work package establishes interlinkages and adjusts the project workplan based on testing feedback (including engages resources for additional validation of the tools). Selection of pilot buildings: Real life case studies are engaged to the LIFE heritageHOME in different aspects, and the engagement of the case-study building varies in terms of complexity: - Pilot buildings of test group (15 buildings): LIFE heritageHOME project supports development of specific renovation solutions (WP3), Renovation Passport prototypes will be developed for the buildings and the test users are to be integrated to the service design process (T6.2 with links to WP4 and WP5). The pilot buildings integrated into the test group are to be selected from the homeowners that have initiated renovation process (i.e., have applied any of the renovation subsidies available for heritage buildings, have applied for the special heritage conditions for the renovation or acquired permits needed for the works in our scope). The selection criteria (representativeness of the sample buildings, capacity to undergo the planned renovation, variety in expected impact in energy savings etc.) is to be detailed in the start of the project. The building owners will be contacted and engaged to the process, project will assist with facilitating the complex process of planning, designing, implementing, and controlling the renovations, different test users will be provided the full range of services relevant for their planned process. As a motivation the cost of test users related to participating in project events (including study trips) is to be covered also possibilities to engage various municipal and state subsidies are introduced and if necessary, the homeowners are assisted with the technicalities of the applications. - Buildings for which Renovation Passports are to be developed (aforementioned test group + >5 additional buildings – total >20 buildings). Owners of these additional buildings will not be engaged fully into service design and if relevant in terms of building typology, then here also completed renovation might be considered for piloting the data management, service integration and interface logic of the Renovation Passport. The extra buildings are needed to cover representativeness of the sample buildings and test functionality based on buildings for which different baseline data is available). - Case study buildings based on which the 50+ renovation solutions are to be developed. In addition to the aforelisted pilot buildings additional case study objects are to be engaged. 1.5 Upscaling results of other EU funded projects Upscaling results of other EU funded projects A LIFE integrated project was launched in 2021 in Estonia (LIFE IP BUILDEST) to raise the national capacity in implementing the Estonian Long-term renovation strategy. It consists of a set of 21  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B integrated work-packages targeting the renovation policy, improvement of knowledge about technical solutions and demonstrating them in practice. It also deals with climate adaptation and resource efficiency of the renovations, making the solutions more sustainable and climate proof. Different digital solutions are developed as large-scale campaigns to raise the awareness of private property owners is carried out. All the solutions developed in LIFE IP BUILDEST are targeted towards the most typical buildings in Estonia and no focus there is put to heritage homes. However, several of the solutions, as well as lessons learnt are universal and can be exploited for the LIFE heritageHOME project, which will bridge the gaps that have been identified for the specifics of heritage homes. KLIM acting as a coordinator of the LIFE IP BUILDEST project participates LIFE heritageHOME as a beneficiary and aims to coordinate the amplification of results of both project for the benefit of the cause. EAA & Norwegian Grants project Historic Town Centres Revitalized Through Heritage-Based Local Development. The project supported development of new and sustainable uses of cultural heritage buildings in small towns across Estonia, through capacity-building for municipalities and cultural heritage professionals as well as cooperation with vocational schools, restoration centres, local governments, and local communities. The project was mostly targeted towards raising awareness on rejuvenation of built heritage, in the framework of which the urgency of clarifying procedures and developing validated solutions for energy renovation measures became highlighted. The energy performance of historic buildings is not too well studied field. For example, on the list Horizon 2020 Cultural Heritage. The list of projects 2014-2018 was only one project deeply concentrated on energy performance or historic buildings - Robust Internal Thermal Insulation of Historic Buildings (RIBuild). RIBuild strengthened the knowledge on how and under what conditions internal thermal insulation is to be implemented in historic buildings, without compromising their architectural and cultural values, with an acceptable safety level against deterioration and collapse of heavy external wall structures. RIBild project concentrated on Central-European mild climate. Lately defenced Paul Klõšeiko’s doctoral thesis in TalTech studied hygrothermal performance of masonry walls retrofitted with interior insulation in cold climate. This knowledge allows to upscale existing knowledge. No climate data about Estonia exists in RIBild calculation tool and only stone and brick structures exist as a reference. In Estonia al lot of historic buildings are construed by wooden log. LIFE heritageHOME develops the existing results forward and adapts them to the needs of Estonia heritage homes. An ongoing H2020 DRIVE0 (Driving decarbonization of the EU building stock by enhancing a consumer centred and locally based circular renovation process, TalTech is a partner) project is developing a new methodology for ‘circular renovation’ of buildings, based on 100% life cycle renewable energy: in a circular renovation, all materials used within the system boundaries are part of infinite technical or biological cycles with the lowest quality loss as possible. Although some of the Drive 0 project's design principles and technical solutions are adaptable to historic homes, renovation processes for industrial buildings are not always suitable for them, as historic buildings require more personalization. LIFE heritageHOME adapts the principles of circular renovation to historic homes in urban mining, demountability of buildings, reuse of materials (the best use of what is locally available) and other adaptable parts. An ongoing H2020 project Energy efficiency Building ENhancement through performance guarantee Tools (EBENTO, TalTech is partner) is aiming to develop an integrated platform for actors involved in building and renovation sector to provide one-stop-shop to better coordinate and manage Energy Performance Contracting, bringing together the needs from all actors involved in enhancing the building stock. EBENTO will ensure the exchange of relevant information between the different actors, making the renovation process cost-efficient and easy to operate and replicate. The platform will collect data related to performance contracts and guarantees, devices monitoring, energy savings, building information modelling, users’ opinions and comfort levels, among others. The LIFE heritageHOME project uses EBENTO's replication potential for heritage home renovation. Collaboration is planned with the project SCORE (Solutions for green restoration and rehabilitation works) on the following topics: Principles of the circular economy, Heritage protection, including the appreciation of built cultural heritage, Development of vernacular sustainable and durable conservation techniques, Life cycle assessment techniques to assess and minimize the ecological footprint, Forecasting service life to ensure durability in current and future climate conditions, Improvement of preservation characterization techniques. The cooperation is beneficial for both parties, as SCORE's regional focus is not in cold climates, but the research object is the same - a historical building. With the HiBERtool (developed with Interreg AlpineSpace project) possibility is given to explore and find different solutions for the energy-efficient retrofit of historical buildings. The tool documents solutions for windows, walls, ventilation, heating and solar. The tool points to visual information transfer to reach end- users – especially building owners as well as planners and architects –: photos, short and concise texts, 22  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B easy to read charts, drawings of solution details, and peer experience. Unfortunately, this tool is not finally usable in Estonia because many of the original constructions and other construction solutions are different from those of the tool. It is possible to use the principle of the tool, but we have to supplement the content with the characteristics of Estonian historic buildings and with technical and architectural solutions suitable for Estonia's cold climate. HeLLo project analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of the most common energy retrofit technical solutions for historic buildings. Solutions related to cold climates (in Estonia) still need to be further analyzed. Erasmus+ funded project, HERIT – Heritage Efficient through Relevant IT use. The project specifically aims at boosting the digital education readiness of the private owners of historic houses, helping them to face the dramatic impact of the COVID-19 crisis on cultural tourism. The central element of HERIT is the creation of a massive open online course (MOOC) tailored for private owners of historic houses. The course will aim at developing and enhancing the expertise of the owners themselves in business development and in the use of digital tools, as well as their knowledge of the regulatory and legal framework in the cultural heritage sector at the national and European level. The experiences of HERIT in establishing digital homeowners’ consultation platform will be investigated by LIFE heritageHOME and further advanced to developing a user-driven digital service. TalTech Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture and the FinEst Twins - FinEst Centre for Smart Cities are developing. REnovation Strategy TOol (RESTO). RESTO is an innovative digital platform for municipal decision-makers that would allow them to optimize required investments into their building stock. Pilot is carried out together with Võru city government in their town centre. RESTO would allow to evaluate the impact of alternatives in connection to different aspects such as technology, building and infrastructure design, urban planning, and business models. RESTO would allow municipalities to define, generate, simulate and quantitatively analyse renovation scenarios adapted to specific districts and buildings in order to make sensible investment decisions. 1.6 Complementarity with other actions Complementarity with other actions Estonian National Renovation Marathon. According to the national Long Term Renovation Strategy, all buildings in Estonia erected before 2000 need to be renovated by 2050 to the energy performance level C. To achieve this goal, the state is developing and implementing various incentives (financial, regulative, informative etc.). Significant amount of the funds allocated according to the Operational Programme for Cohesion Policy Funds and Recovery and Resilience Funds will be directed to supporting renovation of private residential buildings (with a focus on apartment buildings). LIFE IP BUILDEST project (described above under section 1.5) will raise the needed capacity among key enablers for supporting the Estonian National Renovation Marathon and accelerate the renovations with novel solutions. LIFE IP BUILDEST project is coordinated by KLIM and will run until 2028. Life IP BUILDEST has set its focus on the most typical buildings in Estonian building stock. While some historical buildings are in the scope of the BUILDEST project, it does not deliver specific services or renovation solutions for heritage buildings. There’s though a clear synergistic effect between two projects, which is due current project will serve as complementary initiative for the LIFE IP BUILDEST project. E-Ehitus development programme, Estonian LTRS pinpoints the need to develop various digital tools for improving data access both for the building owners and public policymakers. Due to this, as well as the long-term strategy of the construction sector “Long view to Construction”, significant funds from national programme for Recovery and Resilience Funds have been allocated for reinventing the national building registry. A 3D digital twin for the buildings covering the whole country is being developed, as well as an end-user oriented interface for guidance on construction matters (ehitusgiid). The digital building logbook and various components of it are developed on an ongoing basis. Current project will develop needed interfaces and prepare information for the heritage home services to be well integrated to the E-ehitus development initiatives. Roadmap for Green Construction 2040, KLIM is currently preparing a roadmap for green transition in the construction sector. The roadmap is codesigned with an expert panel. The roadmap will be completed by March 2023. While the roadmap will just briefly cover the specifics of the heritage buildings, it will well frame the overall pathway towards more green construction. The roadmap will serve as input for the green transition scenarios of heritage homes developed in the current project. 23  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Management planning of heritage conservation areas, Estonian National Heritage Board has commenced a process of compiling new regulations for Estonian heritage conservation areas. There are 11 urban heritage conservation areas and one landscape heritage conservation area in Estonia. The urban heritage conservation areas include mostly historic city and town centres and surrounding environment which cover more than 10 000 buildings, of which about 5000 are private properties. In the framework of drafting the new regulations the buildings of the heritage conservation areas will be divided into categories based on their heritage value (A, B and C). For most of the buildings assigned to a higher value category (B category) only the exterior is protected by the regulation, and to a lesser extent (A category) both the interior and exterior are protected. For homeowners, whose house is assigned to a higher value category, this means prescribed requirements and restrictions on building insulation and changing the appearance. National subsidies for the restoration of a historic building are very low, and thousands of owners of properties in the heritage conservation areas compete with the owners of architectural monuments for subsidies. Therefore, it is often the case that even one finds resources on his own to renovate or increase energy efficiency of the house, he lacks of knowledge of possible solutions. This often leads to unsuitable solutions for the heritage conservation area and the building and the usage of materials that damage the historic building (for example plastic windows and external insulation of 30 cm). These solutions may also not be the most environment friendly. Therefore, the guidelines and tools created within the LIFE heritageHOME project and receiving advice from trained experts and consultants would significantly contribute to the actions of the owners themselves in increasing the energy efficiency of the building and reduce the pressure on state subsidies. The guidelines and tools of the project could also be an additional data and basic material for the regulations of the heritage conservation areas. Support for the preservation of farm architecture. In order to support the preservation of Estonian traditional rural architecture and the uniqueness of the rural landscape, a support for the preservation of farm architecture has been created. To receive support for the farmhouse, it must be a residential building that is or has been a part of a historic farm complex, i.e., a detached house, which has been built before 1940. The building does not have to be listed as an architectural monument. The application round supports activities that restore or replace the roof covering of a farmhouse and, if necessary, roof structure, using original materials, i.e., materials characteristic to the region, building type and construction period. The technical guidance for heritage homes and services integrated to the digital one-stop shop would facilitate planning and preparing for also implementation of this subsidy scheme. National grant for renovation of public heritage buildings. Ministry of Finance of Estonia is preparing a funding instrument for authentic restauration of publicly used heritage buildings. The funding instrument (~24 M eur) is planned to be implemented during the period of 2022-2026. When the instrument is launched and projects will be implemented with these funds, LIFE heritageHOME aims to establish strong interaction for knowledge transfer for technical solutions successfully implemented there. 1.7 Synergies and co-benefits with other LIFE sub-programmes Synergies and co-benefits with other LIFE sub-programmes LIFE heritageHOME builds synergies and has spillover effects with the following LIFE sub-programmes: Circular Economy and Quality of Life Under the sub-programme Circular Economy and Quality of LIFE the heritageHOME project will create multi benefits with several scopes of projects falling under the priorities of the call “Circular Economy, resources from Waste, Air, Water, Soil, Noise, Chemicals, Bauhaus”. More specifically the project will create synergies with the priorities of: • Circular Economy and Waste: Acknowledging that the construction sector is the biggest source of waste (after oil-shale industry) in Estonia, we are eager to demonstrate the possibilities on how to restore and recycle the building materials in heritage buildings. In many cases the solutions exploited for heritage buildings can be replicable for conventional houses. The technical solutions developed in WP3 (T.3.2-T.3.3) will provide guidance on how to avoid waste and propose restoration or alternate use solutions for building materials disassembled from the renovated buildings. Within the technical renovation solutions developed by the project we also set a high ambition in avoiding future waste, to do this, materials and solutions are preferred, which support disassembly in the future. This will support implementation of the EU circular economy action plan. 24  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B • Air: Project has spillover effects to improving the urban air quality in the historic town centres. The wood-heated ovens are still widely exploited in the buildings located in the heritage protection areas. Based on the year-round monitoring of air quality carried out by Environmental Research Centre, it has been proven that European urban districts that are densely filled with wood-heated houses can have, in peak times, as harmful air as some of the famously polluted Chinese cities. The LIFE heritageHOME will not be directly targeting homeowners to switch the heating sources, but to improve the energy performance and living comfort alternate solutions will be proposed and recommended for homeowners. This will support implementation of the EU Zero Pollution action plan. • A New European Bauhaus: LIFE heritageHOME aligns with the concept of New European Bauhaus (NEB) initiative, as combines the environmental, economic, and cultural aspects in the design, sustainability, accessibility and affordability of renovation of heritage homes in order to help deliver the European Green Deal. We expect that preserving the authentic residential use in heritage buildings is enriching to the societies, as living environment inspired by art and culture, responds to community needs beyond functionality. The solutions we will deliver are sustainable, as support the improved quality of wider natural environment (as explained above). Moreover, we aim that the solutions are inclusive, encouraging a dialogue across cultures, disciplines, genders and ages. This will support implementation of the EU initiative New European Bauhaus – beautiful, sustainable, together. Climate change adaptation and mitigation LIFE heritageHOME will also contribute to the transformation of the EU into a climate neutral and -resilient society, by supporting the implementation of the EU's climate policy and preparing the EU for the climate action challenges in the coming years and decades. Demonstrating that improvement of energy performance is possible also in the most challenging buildings – heritage homes, will have wider effect in accelerating renovations in the residential sector. More specifically the project will have effect in: • Climate change adaptation: technical renovation solutions developed within the LIFE heritageHOME project will consider the projected climate change and propose measures how the renovation can improve future resilience to preserve the buildings in the future. An ongoing LIFE IP BUILDEST (see section 1.5) project is developing various computing parameters that need to be considered for renovations in changing climate (test reference years for indoor climate and energy modelling, for dimensioning of heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems and moisture reference year (MRY) for design durability and longevity of materials). As the current project will be well aligned with solutions developed by LIFE IP BUILDEST, then the new climatic baselines for evaluating performance capacity of solutions are also exploited for the LIFE heritageHOME solutions (T.3.2-T.3.3). This will support implementation of EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change . • Climate change mitigation: as project falls in the scope of LIFE Clean Energy Transition, then it has direct effect towards climate change mitigation priorities of EU. Project contributes directly towards implementing the EU Climate Law and supports the EC vision for Climate Neutral Union by 2050. Nature and Biodiversity Residential heritage buildings often provide habitats for different wildlife, namely for species accustomed to co-habit with humans in urban settings. While typically, these species are widespread and in conservation terms least concern (e.g. Erinaceus europaus, Motacilla alba, Turdus merula etc.), there are some endangered species for which conservation measures need to be implemented (e.g. house dwelling bat species). While the project does not directly target developing conservation measures for biodiversity, then awareness about the possibilities to compensate possible habitat loss during renovations or avoid unnecessary disturbance in vulnerable periods (breeding, hibernation etc) will be raised among homeowners. To do this biodiversity aspects need to be considered when developing the practical renovation solutions (T.3.2, T.3.2) and when disseminating the final solutions (T6.1). Owner awareness can be raised also via facilitated co-creation processes (T2.3), effects of which can be measured in testing the developed service (T.6.2). This will support implementing the EU Biodiversity Strategy as well as consider EU Habitat and Bird directive requirements. 1.8 Synergies and co-benefits with other EU policy areas Synergies and co-benefits with other EU policy areas 25  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B LIFE heritageHOME contributes to various cross-cutting goals that align also with the European Commission priorities for 2019-2024. Most specifically the project is targeted towards the EU Green Deal programme, for which the synergies are more broadly elaborated under sections 1.3 and 1.7). In terms of other priorities, the spillover effects are to be found in the following: A Europe fit for the digital age Digital technology is changing people’s lives. The EU’s digital strategy aims to make this transformation work for people and businesses, while helping to achieve its target of a climate-neutral Europe by 2050. LIFE heritageHOME will exploit a wide set of digital services that aim to facilitate energy renovations for homeowners. We’ll investigate the potential of digital renovation passports (T.5.1) and set up a digital web interface for the one-stop-shop for homeowners’ easy access to the guidance and information (T.5.2). The digital tools developed and tested (T.5.3) among homeowners will have wide replication potential across Europe to plan and facilitate the homeowners’ journey towards more energy efficient homes. More specifically this will support implementation of European data strategy and Digital skills Agenda. An economy that works for people Individuals and businesses in the EU can only thrive if the economy works for them. The EU’s unique social market economy allows economies to grow and to reduce poverty and inequality. As the private owners of heritage homes are expected to preserve the common heritage, they are left with the high cost of living due to high energy cost. Moreover, the solutions and incentives developed for homeowners residing in heritage buildings will create jobs and generate income for different small and medium-sized enterprises are the backbone of the EU’s economy. Within LIFE heritageHOME we’ll build the partnership among the enablers of renovations in heritage homes, meaning we’ll concert the efforts of state, heritage conservation community and construction sector for streamlined processes and optimized technical solutions (T.4.1-T.4.2). The project will also investigate, develop and blend various business models and financial incentives oriented towards accelerating energy renovations in heritage homes (T.4.3). Nudging concrete renovations will create jobs and income for various skilled professionals as well as raise their capabilities in the field (training events foreseen under T.4.2). More specifically this will support implementation of Skills Agenda for Europe and the initiative of A strong social Europe for just transitions. A stronger Europe in the world The European Commission champions multilateralism and a rules-based global order through a more active role and stronger voice for the EU in the world. LIFE heritageHOME consortium includes the national council of ICOMOS in Estonia, an active member of the international ICOMOS. The latter is the only global non-government organisation of this kind, which is dedicated to promoting the application of theory, methodology, and scientific techniques to the conservation of the architectural and archaeological heritage. Solutions developed in Estonia will be spread to ICOMOS councils facing similar challenges in energy renovations of heritage homes, where relevant supporting also the EU enlargement regions (see T.6.3). Promoting our European way of life A Europe that protects must also stand up for justice and for the EU’s core values. Among the latter is the European heritage - rich and diverse mosaic of cultural and creative expressions, an inheritance from previous generations of Europeans and a legacy for those to come. While policy in this area is primarily the responsibility of Member States, regional and local authorities, the EU is committed to safeguarding and enhancing Europe's cultural heritage through a number of policies and programmes. One of the most important features at EU level is the European Framework for Action on Cultural Heritage (2018), which reflects the common set-up for heritage-related activities at European level. LIFE heritageHOME is clearly targeting the areas of continued action within this framework, as aims towards: • more inclusive European heritage: by supporting participation and access for all. We aim that it must be possible to authentically use the historic residential buildings used as homes for generations without falling into energy poverty. We respond to this aim by co-creating the integrated renovation service together with the owners (T.2.3) and aim to pave a way for a streamlined owner-oriented journey instead of the current scattered and sometimes contradicting steps (T.4.1-T.4.3). • more sustainable European heritage: smart solutions and sustainable solutions must be achieved to support the green transition of built heritage. We respond to this by developing renovation solutions and validating them with interdisciplinary expert groups (T.3.1-T.3.3). 26  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B • more resilient European heritage: safeguarding endangered heritage. When thousands of heritage homes fall out of use in historic town centres due to high cost of living and poor indoor living environment, there are little to no chance in preserving these buildings and scenic old towns for the future. This goal is the overall focus for our project, as the integrated service as a whole is targeted towards long-term resilience of the residential heritage buildings. • more innovative European heritage: mobilising knowledge and research for the identified challenges. This goal is a cross cutting aim of the project – our efforts are co-created with both the owners as well as scientific community. We’ll build on the existing state of the art solutions and create new best practices. • a stronger global partnership: reinforcing international cooperation. We respond to this by nudging replication in EU, with a focus on neighbouring countries in the cold-climate region (T.6.3). 2. IMPACT 2.1 Ambition of the impacts Ambition of the impacts The LIFE heritageHOME is directly targeted towards private homeowners of ~7000 buildings protected as architectural monuments or located in heritage protection areas. The energy saving potential of these buildings differs depending on the heritage value (conservation status assessment) and is assessed to vary in between 20-30% (in architectural monuments and A category buildings in heritage conservation areas), 50% (for B category buildings) and 60% (for C category buildings (examples of apartment buildings in Figure 7 and of detached houses in Figure 8). Figure 7 Different apartment buildings protected as architectural monuments or located in heritage conservation areas in Estonia. The renovation of the heritage homes (net floor area - 2 593 000 m ), would trigger annual primary energy 2 savings ~347 GWh and thereby reduce annual emissions of GHG ~52000 tCO e. To achieve this, 2 approximate investments of ~2300 M euro (800-1000 eur/m ) are required, which does not only improve 2 the living environment for the homeowners and support the national ambition in reaching climate neutrality, but also rejuvenate the historic town centres and promote heritage living. Figure 8 Different detached houses protected as architectural monuments or located in heritage conservation areas in Estonia. While LIFE heritageHOME will not contribute to concrete renovations of any of the buildings, we’ll develop and set up an integrated renovation service that would remove the bureaucratic hurdles and technical barriers as well as streamline the workflow among the participants. 27  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Table 2 Character of buildings in the scope of the project Estimate for avg. energy Buildings in the scope Number of saving Net floor Current energy Primary energy of the project buildings potential area performance savings (GWh) Architectural monuments ~1700 30% 705000 61,1 A category buildings 261 30% 133 000 Level E 11,5 ~250 kWh/m2*a B category buildings 2665 50% 1043000 150,8 C category buildings 2491 60% 712 000 123,5 The expected impacts of the project: • Integrated Home Renovation Services implemented, operational and tested at the end of the action, although upscale may happen after project completion. LIFE heritageHOME will develop, design and implement an integrated service for energy renovations of heritage homes with a digital interface (T.5.2), which integrates the various policy initiatives, incentives, agrees the procedures across authorities to clarify the customer journey (T.4.1- T.4.2), integrates end-user-oriented tools within the service (T.3.1-T3.3, T.5.1). We expect that the solution provided by the project will empower owners to be sustainable after the end of the project. LIFE heritageHOME will clarify and systematize all relevant information related what is needed to implement energy renovation tasks in heritage buildings, ie: 1) what are the preparatory studies that are required; 2) what are the restrictions, where to get relevant assistance; 3) what renovation solutions are feasible and impactful for improving energy performance and what are the renovation solutions not- acceptable for certain heritage building types; 4) what can be done by owners themselves and where the professionals are required; 5) various support related to procuring and contracting the construction companies/craftsmen; 6) guidance on incentives and various assistance in organizing practical renovations and what to control during the process (list not complete). More specific scope is to be developed during the task T.4.1, which will set its specific objectives from the project KPI as well as the green transition scenarios of Estonian built heritage to be developed in T2.1. The service will be shared by Ministries of Culture (KuM) and Climate (current KliM), in between which the responsibilities are shared and agreed during the project. As a concept the KliM is responsible for the services guiding individual homeowners to the purposeful renovations whereas KUM is responsible for knowledge-based support for heritage specifics. • Investments in sustainable energy triggered by the project (cumulative, in million Euro, during the action (pilot phase) and within the first 5 years of operation of the services By increasing support and streamlining procedures we expect to encourage more homeowners to renovate, the private investments constitute a minimum of >50% of the total investments needed for the energy renovation. When estimated across all the buildings in the scope of the project, we are aiming to raise ~850 M euro of private investments into clean energy transition during the years following the project. The assumption here is that facilitation system assists homeowners to make their renovation decisions (also when initiated due to other reasons) towards improving energy performance. We foresee that after the project renovation rate of heritage (and historic) buildings for which the solutions are fitting will significantly increase. The 850 M responds to the investment needs to energy renovations of the approximate 7000 residential heritage buildings, while setting the long term ambition we believe that within 5 years of operation of the services the system will facilitate renovations of >200 buildings/year and thus engage ~121 M eur. • Strong and trustworthy partnerships with local actors (e.g. SMEs, architects, engineers, ESCOs, financial institutions, energy agencies, NGOs). Prerequisites for a strong and trustworthy partnerships with local actors are created by the existing relations and joint cooperation projects of the partners and the cooperation plateau of the partners, which will be further developed within the framework of LIFE heritageHOME project. The project consists of two 28  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B ministries (KLIM and COM), whose administrative area includes the focus group of heritage homes. The National Heritage Board and ICOMS ensure that the protection of the historical cultural heritage is ensured during the renovation of the heritage homes. TalTech and EKA have demonstrated good cooperation so far in the form of joint research projects, educational and training programs and the exchange of lecturers. The interest in cooperation by local actors has been proven in the form of letters of support. • Implementation of economically viable business models, ultimately running without the need for public subsidies to cover running costs. The components of the service itself are developed in a manner that do not require significant additional funding but are viable within the existing administrative units and partnerships. To achieve this the reinvented service needs to be well institutionalized into the routine procedures and capabilities of the existing officials and consultants need to be increased. The viability of the central service lays in the fact that the heritage home specialities will be well integrated to the generic services maintained by the state as such. • Availability of adequate financing offers to support investment in home energy performance improvement. LIFE heritageHOME will develop business models for financing service gaps (T.4.3). The project aims to create market conditions to engage additional investments to the sector of renovation of heritage homes. Various grant schemes are already available at the market (KredEx incentives), however the entry requirements are often not obtainable for heritage homes and processes do not consider heritage home specialities. The restoration subsidies paid by MKA typically do not aim towards energy performance, however, do not exempt it as a positive side effect of the solution. By more efficient blending of the existing incentives as well as development of the new business models we aim to find additional financial incentives for the renovations of at least 200 heritage homes per year. • Increased awareness and trust of end-users through clear accountability, quality assurance and dedicated consumer protection mechanisms. End-users will be engaged from the start of the project into different co-creation processes (T.2.3), expert panels (T.2.1), end-user oriented events (T.6.2). End-user interactions in different stages of service design serve the needed assurance for the quality and feasibility of the developed tools. • Data and guidance made publicly available in order to facilitate replication of the approach by other market actors. Evidence that the value of the services offered is recognised by the market. We’ll aim for replication of the service both nationally as well as beyond Estonia (see elaborated in section 2.4 of the proposal). Indirectly the solutions developed in LIFE heritageHOME will contribute to improved service flow of all historic homes (~18% of Estonian private housing stock). The technical solutions developed for the renovation heritage buildings are replicable for neighbouring countries with similar climatic conditions and construction heritage. The service design has transfer potential across Europe and beyond, to support this we aim to disseminate the solutions among the ICOMOS national councils’ network. Technical renovation solutions (WP3) will be freely available for non-professional decision makers and end-users as well for professional c onstruction companies, architects, engineers, urban planners, financers, etc. 2.2 Credibility of the impacts Credibility of the impacts The overall challenge of energy renovation of heritage homes is described in sections 1.1 and 2.1. Information on the characteristics of the buildings selected into the scope of the project is assessed based on the statistics of Heritage Board. Average emission factors, average renovation prices (etc) are derived from the Estonian Long-term Renovation Strategy (2021). More specific information, with details about the building typology as well as their energy performance will be gathered and analysed within the project. The assumptions on the key project indicators are explained in the table below. 29  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Table 3 Assumptions of LIFE heritageHOME KPI LIFE heritageHOME KPI End of 5-y Assumptions project after Primary Energy Savings in 1 10 During the project we engage the direct test users GWh/year triggered by the (10-15 buildings), who pilot the integrated service. In project 5 years after the project the number has increased tenfold. We assess that the homes entering the renovation process are in current performance class F (250 MWh/m2a) and the saving depending on the value class is in range 20-60%. Final Energy Savings in 1,2 12 See above. We estimate that the total savings are GWh/year triggered by the achieved by 4/5 (saving on electricity & heating) project and 1/5 for integrating renewables. Renewable Energy 0,2 2 See above. generation in GWh/year triggered by the project Reduction of greenhouse 128 1200 See above. gas emissions in tons of As emission factor we take the national statistics on CO2 equivalent per year emission factor of 576 kg / 1kWh (expected to (tCO2eq/year) reduce) Cumulative investments in 1 10 See above. The average net floor area is 400 m2, sustainable energy and the projected cost for renovation is 800 eur/ m2. triggered by the project Among the renovations started with the service (million eur) design 1/3 complete it by the end of project. Number of legislation, 10 12 10-12 different level legislative documents will be policies or strategies affected (e.g. charter of policy coordination, created/adapted [to include requirements for consultants, templates for sustainable energy issues] investigations, agreed procedures, special clauses at any governance levels in incentives). due to the project Number of products (goods 1 1 One integrated service interlinking various or services), processes and necessary tools developed within the project (e.g. methods launched into the digital renovation passport, 50 technical renovation market by the project solutions etc) and aligned to it from external sources. Please enter the number of 5 50 Out of the 15 test cases, 1/3 will complete by the end real life implementation of the project. The number will increase tenfold after sites carried out by the 5 years. project Number of market 100 200 25 heritage experts, 20 energy auditors, 55 stakeholders trained with professionals on other fields (designers, architects, increased skills and engineers). Number will double after 5 years of the competencies on energy project. issues due to the project Number of stakeholders 30 000 100 We aim to reach the owners of all 6000 residential reached through media and 000 heritage buildings, additionally the outreach is events during the project targeted towards owners of historic houses. Number of jobs created in 5 15 Project staff (5 FTE) involved in the challenge. FTE New energy consultants for heritage buildings (5 FTE). The latter is projected to double in 5 years. Number of partnerships 10 20 Strong and trustworthy partnerships with local formed actors (e.g. SMEs, architects, engineers, ESCOs, financial institutions, energy agencies, NGO) is formed by the end of project. The partnerships continue to form after the project and is projected to double in 5 years 2.3 Sustainability of project results 30  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Sustainability of project results How will the project impact be ensured and sustained? The project is initiated by the state policy makers of heritage protection and housing renovation. Accordingly, the project topic – energy renovations of heritage buildings has been identified as the key focus by the political level governance of the participating authorities. Having roots in this innovative and forward-looking approach, this project helps the operational staff to solve the practicalities for how this should be done. Fulfilling the national’ vision to move towards carbon neutrality, this project builds long-term energy renovation solutions for buildings currently being exempted from the current energy policy measures. The integrated service is developed by following horizontal principles that ensure the long-term sustainability. • Service needs to be integrated into strategic aims: when aligning policies and designing the service (T.4.1) the policy work needs to be foreseen to both develop national goals that will be included to the Long term renovation strategy (responsibility of KLIM) and the Strategy of Heritage Board (responsibility of MKA and KuM). The understanding what needs to be done to improve the energy performance of heritage buildings is achieved from the long-term scenarios developed under T.2.1. • Operational: For the service itself, we develop a roadmap of Policy recommendations for integrated renovation service of heritage home energy renovations (T.4.1). Such a roadmap will outline the necessary steps needed to implement the service, both in terms of service set-up, but also institutionalization in the routines of the enablers. Operational step-by-step plan helps the different actors (participating in the LIFE heritageHOME as beneficiaries and the external stakeholders engaged to the project) to implement the concerted efforts. • Integrated: The whole project has integrated nature – the aim is to combine existing services, tools and develop need interlinked tools for a challenge specific cause. The solutions build on existing services and networks allowing faster learning pace. When we have established the sufficient baselines with adequate information, clear strategic goals, and operational contexts, we expect to integrate all this in the daily routines of authorities. To adapt the project interventions to the general settings and to allow cross-fertilization across initiatives within the project and beyond its direct scope, we implement the continuous sensemaking and learning activities (T.1.2). • Inclusive: In order to gain public support to the developed service we exploit the co-creation methods and public outreach. We engage random sample owners’ assembly (T.2.3), we engage wide range of experts to consult the service design (T.2.1) and we plan the thorough testing of the service (T.6.2). As a result, the solutions developed are expected to respond the end-user needs and thereby guarantee the wide uptake of the service. • Cost-optimal: When renovation measures and designing restoration interventions, we aim for cost- optimality. Also, the operation of the service is planned as self-sustaining, depending on the contributions from the enablers, with little extra cost. Which parts of the project should be continued or maintained? The integrated renovation service needs to be continued / systematically updated until the energy renovation goals of heritage homes and climate neutrality goals of the county are achieved: • Most critical is to continue to keep the digital one-stop-shop adequate and up-to date: a collaboration scheme is agreed within the project how the different actors contribute and upgrade information to achieve this. The sustainability the digital one stop shop falls into responsibility of KLIM. • As the quality of the integrated service provided in the form of digital one-stop-shop depends from its components, various additional solutions need to be kept up to date: o Technical renovation solutions: a revision process will be agreed in the process. Market adaptations are expected to take place, fitness checks of the solutions based on these will need to be carried out regularly (minimally once in 10 years), this will be a responsibility of MKA. o Policy incentives for supporting renovations: the project will propose business models that can be exploited to raise funding to support the renovations of heritage homes. Preparing, implementing and sustaining the models will depend on different actors. This will be coordinated by KuM. 31  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B o Continuous training programmes: for professionals. Regular training is required to engage new experts as well as provide novel concepts for already trained experts. This will be a responsibility of MKA. o Coordinated procedures: after agreeing the procedures within the project a routine needs to be set in place to keep the policies and procedures aligned. 2.4 Exploitation of project results Exploitation of project results utilisation in further research The project results will also be multiplied and used in further scientific research. The outcomes of monitoring will include scientific articles based on the collected data and recorded changes, as well as opinion pieces with “best practices” ideas and recommendations. Based on the innovation seeking workshop in T.2.1 follow-up projects are initiated. The research consortium will utilize the project results by: • Defending several master’s and at least one PhD thesis from this project results, possibly co- supervised with researchers from different universities of the consortium. • Publishing research papers (>3) and introducing the project to international research audiences (>5 events). utilisation in developing, creating, and providing services for renovating heritage homes The streamlined renovation of heritage home renovations encourages construction companies to target the services towards this market segment. While the heritage homes are a niche then the historic homes are already a significant share of the renovation market (~18%). Improved understanding on the technical renovation solutions and concerted permitting procedures, topped with policy incentives will raise market activity thus creating jobs and generating incomes. Active collaboration via direct consultation of solutions (T.3.2-T.3.3; T.5.1) and engagement in expert panels (T.2.1) is foreseen with commercial market participants to deliver the needed market uptake of the service components. utilisation in developing, creating, and providing services conventional buildings LIFE heritageHOME services is developed in synergies with large LIFE IP BUILDEST and the learnings of heritage specifics will be integrated to the solutions developed for the conventional residential buildings. As KLIM (responsible for LIFE IP BUILDEST) implementation, is a beneficiary also of current project, the interlinkages are already integrated to the project concept. 2.5 Catalytic potential: Replication and upscaling Catalytic potential: Replication and upscaling LIFE heritageHOME has catalytic potential in Estonia as well as beyond its borders. Firstly, the solutions developed with the project for the heritage home owners (usually private non-professional decision makers), but the whole process and some technical solutions are also applicable to ordinary homes. In the scope of the project we plan to raise a broader discussion in the society how to avoid energy poverty in heritage homes with the aim to increase market demand and create policy incentives. The latter is 32  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B expected to activate the market (construction companies, professionals – designers, architects, engineers) and add value for the economy. REPLICATION POTENTIAL 18% of Estonian living space consists of buildings erected before 1945 (Statistics Estonia Webpage). Not all these are protected, however have milieu value. In case the owner of such buildings values his home and wants to preserve its architectural value, the technical solutions and guidelines developed for architectural monuments in LIFE heritageHOME can also be implemented and applied for the buildings of milieu (urban- environmentally valuable) areas as well as other historic buildings Figure 9 Replication potential outside of the heritage conservation areas. The technical solutions of the project can also be applied for the historic buildings in Estonian neighbouring countries (Baltic states and Scandinavia) and cold climate regions. Service design is applicable also in other states (digital one-stop-shop and network of consultants). To achieve the international replication, we exploit the Europe and World-wide via ICOMOS network. The network has 107 national committees, allowing a broad outreach platform. Additionally, the solutions are introduced to heritage authorities via direct thematic workshops, these are planned with the governance authorities and state and local agencies responsible for the energy renovations of heritage homes in the Nordic-Baltic region. Dissemination the solutions is also planned in more passive form, via presenting the best practice developed in various expert meetings, thematic conferences and introducing the solutions in thematic publications. More specifics on the replication potential of the project is elaborated below in the table 4. Table 4 Replication potential of project outcomes Replication challenge Target group Project efforts Market uptake of project solutions by 20 000 homeowners Market launch campaign (T.6.2). the target group (EE) The project pilots of ~7000 heritage Active dissemination of the various tools, however the market uptake buildings solutions to enablers (T3.1- will require specific efforts. T.3.3, T.4.2, T.6.1). Synergies with LIFE IP BUILDEST Value oriented renovation of historic 18% of Estonian Disseminating the solutions to homes (EE) Uptake of solutions by owners housing stock, enablers (T.4.2). Broader of historic homes currently not protected. ~60 000 buildings 33  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B awareness on the solutions (T.6.1) Institutionalization of the service Stakeholders: public Co-creation process (T.2.1, components (EE) Uptake of solutions by authorities (local, T4.1) and active collaboration for different actors not engaged as partners of national) multibenefitial integration of the the consortium services (T.4.1-T.4.2, T.5.1). Replication of technical solutions for National housing Disseminating the solutions heritage buildings and historic stock built before (T.6.3): Engineering and buildings in cold climate region (FI, SE, 1945: FI (12%); SE architecture professionals NO, LV, LT etc) (19%); LV (22%); LT community. Heritage (22%); NO (). community. Replication of service design Collaborations of Disseminating the project results (international, with focus to EU) for heritage heritage authorities in (T.6.1, T.6.3) home energy renovation facilitation: MS Authorities & professionals ICOMOS network (107 global members) 50 000 privately- As an external partner the Homeowners owned historic project will actively work with houses across Estonian union of manor Europe formed in owners, which is a member of European Historic European umbrella of owners Houses aisbl unions. We have agreed to disseminate the solutions in their events and networks (LoS). T.6.3 CATALYTIC POTENTIAL The renovation of buildings in the scope of this project expects the engagement of various market participants. In addition to self-build homeowners, also consultants, designers, architects, engineers, construction companies and construction material producers. We expect that the clearer service, increased demand and agreed and feasible solutions and procedures and novel incentives (new business models and efficient blending of existing grants) attract the private entrepreneur’s interest and supporting the skilled practitioners to move from new building construction sector to renovation and from non- residential sector to residential sector (apartment buildings and detached houses). We estimate that >30% of medium sized construction companies (with annual net sales 3,2-13 M eur) and >60% of small sized construction companies (with annual net sales <3,2 M eur) in Estonia formed as members of association of construction companies will target their services and raise their competences in the scope. To achieve this, we’ll actively collaborate with the Estonian Association of Construction Entrepreneurs and its members. This will be done by synchronization of activities with LIFE IP BUILDEST project. When the renovation of private houses starts to become more active, consultants and designers also have an interest in being more active in this sector, as a more permanent flow of work is guaranteed. During the project, the best practice to date is collected and a catalogue of typical renovation solutions (1D building envelope structures and 2D joints/details/connections) will created. This increases confidence and reduces the need for massive preliminary building survey as well complexity of the whole process. All in all, a more reliable starting point reduces the entrepreneur's risks and therefore also lowers the cost. 3. IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Work plan Work plan 34  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B The intervention logic of LIFE heritageHOME responds to the key recommendations of ‘European Heritage Green Paper’ outlined for the policymakers and operators that are needed to support deep energy renovations of built heritage. The project consists of 6 interconnected work-packages (Figure 9). Within the LIFE heritageHOME the necessary solutions will be prepared and adjusted for the integrated service, the capacity of key enablers supporting the heritage home energy renovations will be raised and a client- facing digital interface will be designed for easy access to information on the different steps owner needs to take on the journey. The project will engage owners in designing the solutions and reach out to scientific and professional communities for exploitation of the best available practices to develop the integrated set of services needed to overcome the barriers hindering energy renovation of heritage homes. More specifically the project will: • WP 2- Prepare the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings. This will be done by engagement of expert panels and empowerment of owners via facilitated heritage assembly. The work- package feeds as input to the work-packages WP3, WP4 and WP5. • WP 3 - Investigate standardized solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings. The project will analyse existing practices, develop feasible solutions and propose the no regret combinations and sequences of renovation works in heritage homes. The technical solutions agreed in this work-package will be exploited as validated solutions for policy measures and financial incentives and these will be packaged both in the digital solutions (WP5 and for broader dissemination published in WP6). • WP 4 - Build partnerships for integrated heritage home renovation service, whereas the solutions developed will be client-facing and aimed to respond to various needs of homeowners with different entry level capabilities and knowledge. The service design carried out here will be institutionalized in the routine procedures among the authorities engaged to the consortium as well as partners, among whom several have indicated interest to do so in the Letters of Support attached to the proposal. Within project the key output will be the digital one-stop shop (WP5) into which the service design will feed into. • WP 5 - Set up a digital one-stop-shop for the owners of heritage homes. The interface will for example include information on required procedures, guidance on contracting the services and information on feasible solutions. Moreover, the heritageHOME project will pilot a heritage home renovation passport tool allowing rapid assessment of energy performance of buildings based on registry data. • WP 6 - Amplifying the effect of best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication . LIFE heritageHOME solutions will not be relevant only for heritage homeowners in Estonia, but replicable also to other countries in Europe. The project will branch out to heritage authorities in Nordic-Baltic region (cold climate) and to the national councils of ICOMOS to introduce both the technical solutions for renovations as well as the service design of the digital one-stop-shop streamlining the customer journey towards improved energy performance of heritage homes. 35  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 10 Project workplan Figures and schemes describing the details of the work-packages and tasks: 36  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 11 Sensemaking logic Figure 12 Preliminary Scenarios for Green Transition of Estonian heritage buildings 37  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Figure 13 Key enablers for integrated service of energy renovation of heritage homes Figure 14 Concept for the digital one-stop-shop service Figure 15 Prototype of the EHITUSGIID (left), web interface for restoration guidance of architectural monuments (right) 38  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 39  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 3.3 Stakeholder engagement Stakeholders engagement The most relevant stakeholders concerning the development of the integrated energy-renovation service are engaged as project beneficiaries. The project consortium is co-operation oriented and has good experiences with working with expert networks expected to be engaged via direct consultations and expert panels and outreach to synergistic think-tanks. The key stakeholders are: Stakeholder Description Mobilisation Owners’ The owners of heritage homes in Estonia have Engagement in expert panels. Associations until now not formed into formal associations. Direct consultation of feasibility There’s a Manor owners union (LoS) and of project solutions, participation Central homeowners union (LoS) that have in sensemaking activities. interest on the matter. Also, the union of Introducing project results in Estonian Apartment Building Associations has regular events of the professional the topic in its priorities (LoS). clusters. Professional Specific technical experiences, e.g. Engagement in expert panels. clusters and Association of Architects (LoS); Association of Direct consultation of renovation agencies Civil Engineers (LoS); Association of solutions. Introducing project Construction Material Producers; Society of results in regular events of the Heating and Ventilation Engineers; Union of professional clusters. Roofers and Facade Makers; Association of Architectural and Consulting Engineering Companies etc. Centre of Sustainable Renovation (LoS). Estonian Heritage Estonian Heritage Assembly - Interdisciplinary Engagement in expert panels. Conservation expert panel under coordination of KuM, Direct consultation on renovation Community Estonian Heritage Society (LoS) service and policy design. Construction Market know-how on corporate and residential Engagement in expert panels. companies real-estate market, renovation interest etc. Direct consultation of renovation Association of Estonian Construction solutions. Introducing project Entrepreneurs, engaged to LIFE IP BUILDEST results in regular events of (engaged by synchronization of activities). construction sector Estonian Business KredEx (LoS) unit of EIS housing department / Engagement in expert panels. and Innovation regional development centres. Direct consultation on renovation Agency (EIS) KredEx is subordinated by KLIM engaged to service design. the project as beneficiary. KredEx is also a Services of KredEx will be partner of LIFE IP BUILDEST project (engaged engaged to the digital one stop by synchronization of activities). shop! Municipality 79 local municipality governments represented Engagement in expert panels. Governments by Estonian Association of Cities and Direct consultation on renovation Municipalities. See LoS from Võru Municipality service design. Introducing actively targeting the challenge of project results in regular events of neighbourhood level renovation of the historic construction sector. town centre (partially a conservation area). Municipality officials are invited to project training events. Consumer protec- Expertise on market regulation and technical Engagement in expert panels. tion and technical requirements in the construction sector. Direct consultation on renovation regulatory authority service design. Introducing 40  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B project results in regular events of construction sector. 3.4 Impact monitoring and reporting Impact monitoring, evaluation and reporting strategy Project internal monitoring & sensemaking Within the Sensemaking activities (T.1.2) we plan to set up a wholistic evaluation and learning system as a first step of the task, which allows the project manager constantly monitor the project progress and report timely to CINEA. The comprehensive monitoring of internal project progress allows to apply timely response to any variances (force majeure, unforeseen circumstances, potential for complimentary efforts etc). The internal monitoring will include: • overall monitoring of the progress and achieved results in relation to the project time schedule and schedule of deliverables by the coordinator. • Monitoring of the results achieved by the individual participants in terms of quality of the work delivered in relation to their tasks, involvement of necessary key actors (outside the consortium) and target groups. • Devising a contingency plan and alternative approaches in case of deviations to the work programme or performance indicators. • The results of the internal project monitoring are to be disseminated in progress and screening meetings, and applied for the overall coordination tasks (T1.1). • A steering group will validate the internal monitoring of the project. Project impact monitoring LIFE heritageHOME KPI Baselines / evaluation methods Primary Energy Savings in GWh/year MKA document registry, building registry: initiated triggered by the project renovations, energy performance before/after. Final Energy Savings in GWh/year triggered MKA document registry, building registry: initiated by the project renovations, energy performance before/after.1,5 Renewable Energy generation in GWh/year MKA document registry, building registry: initiated triggered by the project renovations, energy performance before/after. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in MKA document registry, building registry: initiated tons of CO2 equivalent per year renovations, energy performance before/after. (tCO2eq/year) Cumulative investments in sustainable MKA document registry, building registry: initiated energy triggered by the project (million eur) renovations, energy performance before/after. Market surveys. Number of legislation, policies or strategies Administrative tracking of policy work carried out by: created/adapted [to include sustainable KuM, KLIM, MKA (and beyond) energy issues] at any governance levels due to the project Number of products (goods or services), Monitoring and evaluation will be foreseen for the processes and methods launched into the service design. More specific tasks will be followed to market by the project assess the quality and market uptake of the service. Please enter the number of real life Project tracking / documentation: both quality & implementation sites carried out by the quantity of real-life implementations is assessed. project Specific monitoring scheme to be agreed in the beginning of the project. 41  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Number of market stakeholders trained with Project tracking / documentation: besides tracking the increased skills and competencies on energy number of experts trained, also the quality of training issues due to the project is assessed. Specific monitoring scheme to be agreed in the beginning of the project. Number of stakeholders reached through Media monitoring is foreseen. media and events during the project Please enter the number of jobs created in Project tracking / documentation FTE Project reporting Reporting project progress to CINEA will be done as agreed in the grant agreement. Continuous reporting: We will continuously report on the progress of the action (e.g. deliverables, milestones, outputs/outcomes, critical risks, indicators, etc; if any), in the Portal Continuous Reporting tool and in accordance with the timing and conditions it sets out (as agreed with the granting authority). Standardised deliverables (e.g. progress reports not linked to payments, reports on cumulative expenditure, special reports, etc; if any) are submitted using the templates published on the portal. Periodic reporting: Technical reports and financial statements, in addition, the beneficiaries must provide reports to request payments, in accordance with the schedule and modalities agreed in the Grant Agreement. 3.5 Communication, dissemination and visibility Communication, dissemination and visibility of funding At the beginning of the project, a plan for dissemination and communication of the projects’ results will be developed, which will be updated throughout the project. This document will lay the ground for dissemination and communication actions. Dissemination activities will provide key information about the project results and findings as widely as possible. Dissemination plan includes partner specific tasks and aims for supporting the attraction of different target groups at different levels. Target group Size of the target group Means of outreach Estonian homeowners and >20 000 homeowners Dissemination owners’ heritage assembly residents of heritage buildings programme and its results (T.2.3) >100 000 residents Campaign to introduce the service (T.6.2) General project visibility (T.1.2), more specifically the demo solutions and renovation atlas (T.6.1) Professionals enabling the >500 professionals Experts panel (T.2.1), Training events service: Energy auditors, (T.4.2). Direct consultation for developing designers, architects, engineers. the renovation solutions technical reports (T.3.1-T3.3), disseminating the outputs via the public networks of the professional clusters. International Heritage Authorities Nordic-Baltic region (6 Networking for replication of solutions. countries, a’ 20 people) Joint workshops, experience exchange visits (T.6.3). Disseminating legacy report (T.6.1). International Scientific Cold-climate region Networking for replication of solutions. Community heritage renovations; Joint workshops, experience exchange visits (T.6.3). Publishing project results in peer reviewed journals. 42  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Preservation of architectural monuments; > 1000 researchers General public >100 000 climate & General project visibility (T.1.2), heritage conscious individuals MEANS OF COMMUNICATIONS Activities to disseminate the project results, to facilitate their future use and to collect feedback from our target groups are as follows: A project website with relevant information available in Estonian and English will be our main online tool to deliver project visibility. It will contain all project products: reports, newsletters, press releases, articles, and other material, such as project training materials, policy recommendations formed from service design, events calendar, etc. The page will be built into the KuM existing web as a separate sub-sheet, links to partner pages will be established. Social media networks will be used to involve our target groups and stakeholders in the discussion and to ensure they learn about the project and its results and spread them. Different types of networks are planned in order to reach a maximum number of users. Already existing accounts (e.g. LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook) of the partners will be used to encourage the target groups to learn more about the project and exchange opinions, guaranteeing a lively community even after the end of the project. Following groups will be exploited: MKA Facebook ~7800 followers; KuM Facebook ~9000 followers; KLIM Facebook ~5500 followers; TalTech Facebook ~28 000 followers; EKA Facebook ~3400 followers. ICOMOS Estonia Facebook ~600 followers. National and EU level events: Participation at >22 thematic conferences and workshops including events with a regional scope and at EU and neighbouring countries level (at least 5 presentations in other countries or on general EU level. A list of target events will be established from the beginning of the project and be part of the communication plan. Organisation of various roundtables and related working sessions and development workshops, a kick-off and a final seminar. Trainings and webinars for the target groups: different thematic professional publications will allow targeting the aimed target groups and stakeholders: In order to reach the widest possible audience, press releases will be sent out and articles proposed for various media channels; partners will be asked to submit a list of media channels, which will form the basis of a comprehensive database of media contacts. The publications will be uploaded on the website but also shared via different social media channels. Visibility of the LIFE funding: All project results and documents to be published will be produced in a uniform visual identity (following LIFE communication toolkit) in order to achieve a coherent and recognizable external presentation of the project. Media representatives contributing to the project will receive clear information indicating the LIFE support of the European Union. In addition, the banner with the LIFE logo of the EU at the event locations will emphasize the participation and its contribution to the project 4. RESOURCES 4.1 Consortium set-up Consortium cooperation and division of roles (if applicable) 43  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B The Project coordinator - Estonian Ministry of Culture (KuM) is responsible for national culture policy. Among other KuM is also responsible for the coordination of the whole heritage conservation field in Estonia. In LIFE heritageHOME KuM is leading of Work Package 1: Project management and coordination and Work Package 6: Amplifying the effect of best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication. In addition it is participating to: building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1); preparing the heritage home renovation service (WP 4, T4.1); build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2); fitness check of renovation business models for owners of heritage homes (WP 4, T4.3). Key agency sustaining the service in the future: Estonian National Heritage Board (MKA) operates in the administrative area of the Ministry of Culture. Estonian National Heritage Board is responsible of the preservation and development of the most valuable part of Estonian cultural heritage. In LIFE heritageHOME MKA is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 4: Building the partnership for integrated heritage home renovation service. In addition KLIM is participating to: contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1); sensemaking, evaluation, and learning (WP 1, T1.2); building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1); examination of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.2); co-creation with owners’ heritage assembly for private owners (WP 2, T2.3); analysis of existing best and worst practices applied in energy improvement of historic homes (WP 3, T3.1); development of technical renovation concepts for different historic building envelopes (WP 3, T3.2); investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings (WP 3, T3.3); setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service (WP 5, T5.2); highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions (WP 6, T6.1); Launching integrated renovation service for heritage homes (WP 6, T6.2); nudging replication of integrated renovation service of heritage homes in EU (WP6, T6.3). KLIM is the government authority responsible for the full implementation of the Estonian Long-term Renovation Strategy (LTRS) and linking it to the overall Estonian housing, energy, and climate policies. KLIM is the coordinator of LIFE IP BUILDEST – Pursuing Estonian national climate ambition through smart and resilient renovation. In LIFE heritageHOME KLIM is responsible for leading of Work Package 5: Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage homeowners. Also the KLIM is participating to: contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1); building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1); examine of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.2); build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2); pilot heritage home renovation passports (WP 5, T5.1); networking for replication of technical renovation solutions in cold-climate region (WP 6, T6.3). Several key stakeholders (like KredEx) fall in the KLIM jurisdiction. KLIM intermediates the subordinated agencies to contribute to the project. Tallinn University of Technology (TalTech) is the only university of technology in Estonia and the flagship of Estonian engineering and technology education. The University’s approximately 70,000 alumni have shaped the economic landscape of present-day Estonia. The project partner is Nearly Zero Energy Building (nZEB) Research Group from Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture and the FinEst Twins - FinEst Centre for Smart Cities. In LIFE heritageHOME TalTech is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 3: Standardization of solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings. TalTech is also participating to: contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1); building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.2); examine of exploitation potential of the input- outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.3); build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2); pilot heritage home renovation passports (WP 5, T5.1); networking for replication of technical renovation solutions in cold-climate region (WP 6, T6.3). Estonian Academy of Arts (EKA) is the only public university in Estonia providing higher education in fine arts, design, architecture, media, visual studies, art history, and conservation. In LIFE heritageHOME EKA is responsible for: Leading of WP2: Mapping the Customer Journey of the heritage home energy renovations. EKA is participating to contractual management and coordination the project (WP1, T1.1); analysis of existing best and worst practices (WP3, T3.1); development of technical renovation concepts for different historic building envelopes (WP3, T3.2); Investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings (WP3, T3.3); preparing the heritage home renovation service (WP4, T4.1); building partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP4, T4.2); setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service (WP5, T5.2) and networking for replication of technical renovation solutions in cold-climate region (WP 6, T6.3). 44  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B ICOMOS Estonia (ICOMOS) is a national council formulated as NGO. The International Council of Monuments and Sites concentrates on standards of heritage conservation and enhancement. In LIFE heritageHOME ICOMOS is participating to: contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1); sensemaking, evaluation, and learning (WP 1, T1.2); project visibility. Communication and media activities (WP 1, T1.3); building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1); co- creation with owners’ heritage assembly for private owners (WP 2, T2.3); analysis of existing best and worst practices applied in energy improvement of historic homes (WP 3, T3.1); highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions (WP 6, T6.1); networking for replication of technical renovation solutions in cold-climate region (WP 6, T6.2); nudging replication of integrated renovation service of heritage homes in EU (WP6, T6.3). Project consortium is illustrated in Figure 16. Figure 16 Project consortium and roles 4.2 Project management Project management, quality assurance and monitoring of progress Project management and monitoring will be a continuous activity aiming at smooth implementation of all actions throughout the project lifetime and leading to excellent results. Development and implementation of management structures and decision-making mechanisms consists of the following sub-actions: The overall coordination of the project as well as administrational, financial, and contractual management will be the responsibility of coordinating beneficiary. However, the work-package coordination units are expected to be formed. At project start Coordinator will prepare consortium agreement according to LIFE requirements. On overall level, the project will be coordinated by Project Manager of PP1 KuM. With regard to financial management and reporting, Project Manager will be supported by part time Financial Manager of KuM. Project Manager will be responsible for the overall co-ordinating and time planning of the Project, overall co-ordination of joint activities, arrangement of Project meetings, information exchange, communication with the Contracting Authority, preparation of reports, support of Project Partners in preparation of Partner reports, planning and monitoring the use of Project budget, preparation of payment requests to the Contracting Authority (CA), etc. All partners will be involved in administration, accounting and reporting of their activities and costs. All Partners appoint local Partner Co-ordinators, who are responsible for implementation of activities of relevant Partner and for communication with Project Manager of PP1 KuM. Partner Co-ordinators are responsible for arrangement of competitive procedures needed for project implementation and for preparing Partner reports for auditing. 45  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Financial management. The partners are spending budget according to the overall detailed budget. The financial management structure will be set-up by PM, KuM financial department will oversee overall financial administration and payments of pre-financing instalments to Project Partners. Each partner will have its own accountant performing the partner’s reporting. The partners will follow national requirements for procurement depending on their legal status and volume of contracts. Partners are also encouraged to implement green procurement rules. The LIFE expenditure reporting system and schedule will be explained and supervised by the project management team regularly; the financial reporting will be harmonised and implemented continuously by all partners to avoid delays in payments. Partner interaction and decision making For everyday management of Project, the Project Team (PT) will be formed. The task of the PT is to monitor Project's activities, make decisions on the time schedule and other key aspects of Project implementation, and to evaluate the results. The members of PT will include Project Manager (KuM) and Partner Co- ordinators. PT will have monthly meetings. Day-to-day communication will be maintained through standard methods such as email, phone, electronic conferencing tools and in-person meetings. The Project manager employed by Coordinator will seek to implement an “open door” policy where partners are welcome and encouraged to seek answers and guidance immediately, instead of waiting until the next planned meeting. The PM will be in contact with all partners throughout the project to ensure progress is made according to the plan and to address uncertainties. A password-protected project digital space will be created to store all documents pertaining to the project, including meeting agendas and minutes. Independent steering of the project. For independent monitoring of Project implementation and progress made, the Project Steering Group (SG) will be created. The task of the SG is to accept the proposals made by the Project team, to monitor Project's activities and to evaluate the results. The members of SG will be the head’s of all Partner organisations and representatives of associates and main stakeholders (in total ca 20 permanent members, additional experts-specialists can be invited, depending on the nature of agenda items). Annual meetings for the steering group are foreseen. Furthermore, the Project Manager will act as the link between the project consortium and the Contracting Authority, ensuring that the Contracting Authority is informed about project progress and that the Project Officer is consulted if problems occur. In particular, the PM will attend a kick-off meeting with the Contracting Authority representatives. The PM will monitor the project to identify potential conflicts related to activities and the partners’ contractual obligations in order to swiftly address them. Conflicts will be dealt with as they arise. To facilitate smooth implementation of the project, the project management toolset will be developed in the beginning of the project, the main goal for that is to prepare the project management team with easy-to- understand and easy-to-follow instructions for project implementation. A project management and progress monitoring system will be developed for the consortium of beneficiaries, and a documentation is prepared and introduced to the project network. The project management documentation will consist of templates, forms and guidelines that will be based on the LIFE Grant Agreement and its annexes. The toolset is presented in an easy-to-understand format and communicated via internal (recorded) webinars explaining the grant management procedures, so these will be available for all the beneficiaries at any times. The project consortium will analyse and decide whether an open source project progress monitoring system (i.e. OpenProject Teams etc) will be applied or a separate local database is set up internally. No cost is expected to be assigned to purchasing licences for project management software though, all needed toolsets will be prepared and applied internally. Project management guidelines developed under the task will cover different topics agreed within the consortium (e.g. intellectual property issues when combining complementary projects, green procurement guidelines for project purchases, agreements for reducing project carbon footprint etc) and these will be made available as separate subsections under project management wiki/members-only section of the web that is expected to be set up for the beneficiaries. It is expected that there are topics that need to be covered as soon as the project starts and there will be new ones that will be developed as issues arise in the consortium during project implementation. 4.3 Green management Green management 46  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B The European Commission and several European countries have developed guidance in matters of green procurement, in the form of national GPP criteria. In Estonia local approach apply. Ministry of Environment of Estonia, has developed Estonian Green Procurement principles and these have been in different levels been adopted by all of the Estonian beneficiaries. These principles will be implemented in project procurement principles. Tendering for the project will be organized via the Estonian e-Procurement environment E-Procurement (state-owned software, which is mandatory for projects financed from public or the EU funds) is for finding subcontractors to acquire equipment, services, or works. The system includes GPP evaluation criteria, which will be applied. Additionally, to the implementation of national principles, the green principles of tenders, the technical specifications of the procurement procedures and evaluation templates developed by the EU Horizon 2020 funded project GreenS will be considered as far as possible as well as further advances in green procurements in the targeted field. The GreenS project was designed to focus the attention of public authorities on Green Public Procurement. The project Management Team will where relevant transfer the learning from to LIFE heritageHOME, eg in terms of preparing training materials, indicators, e-tools and procedures of evaluation created by this project. Project will apply GPP for different levels of the project: 1. Criteria related to the ability of the tenderer and requirements to the products and services purchased in the frame of the project. Criteria how the measures foreseen in the project are implemented (choosing the resource efficient alternatives for management works). The Green Procurement rules will be used in case of purchasing new equipment or consumables. During service contracts, there will be specific criteria in the tender documents (as used equipment in the field must be technically correct, methods used during works are considering local environmental conditions, the costs of products and building materials throughout their entire life cycle is considered, etc.). Considering the whole life cycle, it should also enable assessing the ‘rational use of natural resources. 2. Developing the technical renovation solutions (T.3.2-T.3.3) and publishing these in the frame of heritage home renovation atlas (T.6.1). We will develop a framework and via dissemination tools provide instructions to public audiences about how to apply green management or home renovation procurement. To renovation a building, it is possible to include several green contract criteria: energy performance of buildings, electricity from renewable energy sources, low-emission products. Renovation technical specifications will consider environmental impacts throughout the life-cycle (LCA). In terms of Green Management, all state authorities as well as academies engaged to the project have defined the green management objective in some levels. State authorities have assessed the carbon footprint of national digitalization programmes (relevant also for KuM, KLIM), currently a programme is led by Stockholm Environmental Institute Estonia and Ministry of Environment to assess the carbon footprint of Estonian ministries, etc.. Different initiatives like these result by governance changes being adopted to the routines. EKA has approved Environmental Policy for Academy of Arts, which provides a framework for green management in the university. TalTech is the first university in Estonia that has assigned Green Transition vice rector and also has launched various green management initiatives across campus as well as over curricula. 47  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B 5. MEMBERS OF THE CONSORTIUM 1- Ministry of Culture Legal name (short name): Ministry of Culture - KuM DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT The Estonian Ministry of Culture (KuM) is responsible for national culture, sport and heritage conservation, it promotes arts, and coordinates the state’s media policy, audiovisual policy, and the implementation of the integration strategy. National cultural policy is based on the constitutional aim of ensuring the preservation of the Estonian nation, language and culture in perpetuity. To achieve this aim, the culture policy needs to find harmony between the preservation and continuation of culture, on the one hand, and the innovativeness and openness of culture, on the other hand. This is achieved by the following tasks of the ministry: • The ministry forms the principles of financing culture and sport, cooperates with the Cultural Endowment of Estonia and other institutions that support culture and sport. • It is responsible for the coordination of the whole heritage conservation field in Estonia. • It gives national awards and grants for culture and sport. • It supports the cultural activities of minorities, kindred nations and expatriate Estonians. • It handles the integration policy and the implementation of the integration strategy in cooperation with other ministries. • It prepares draft legislation in its area of government and checks that drafts are in compliance with the constitution and other legislation. • It supports the cultural activities of minorities, kindred nations and expatriate Estonians. • It handles the integration policy and the implementation of the integration strategy in cooperation with other ministries. • It prepares draft legislation in its area of government and checks that drafts are in compliance with the constitution and other legislation. In LIFE heritageHOME KuM is responsible for overall coordination of the project, as well as: Leading of Work Package 1: Project management and coordination and Work Package 6: Amplifying the effect of best practices and solutions for sustainability and replication Participating to: − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1) − preparing the heritage home renovation service (WP 4, T4.1) − build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2) − fitness check of renovation business models for owners of heritage homes (WP 4, T4.3) KEY STAFF Reesi Sild, policy adviser on cultural heritage protection, MSc Estonian national heritage policy development and implementation with stress on heritage protection and conservation (museums), networking, and cooperation with national and local policy actors to protect Estonian tangible heritage. Viivian Jõemets, research and development policy adviser, PhD Viivian Jõemets is responsible for the ministerial R&D projects and their coordination with ministries, museums, local authorities, and non-governmental sector. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES Implementing the action plan for digitalization of cultural heritage 2018-2023: KuM has carried out a large-scale programme with the aim to digitalize at least 1/3 of the information stored in the museums, archives, and other registries for fast accessibility of information. This has included also the digitalization of various materials concerning built heritage. The programme has been partly financed by the Financial Programme for EU Structural Funds in Estonia 2014-2021. Pilot renovation grant program for heritage buildings titled "Local development and reduction of poverty”. The grant programme was piloted using the funds EAA & Norwegian Grants. The open call 48  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B for applications regarded the restoration of buildings located in heritage conservation areas in Haapsalu, Kuressaare, Lihula, Paide, Parnu, Rakvere, Viljandi, Valga and Võru and giving them a public purpose in line with the needs of the local community. As the grant aimed to revive heritage conservation areas, unused buildings with great impact on the surrounding space will take precedence. A function attracting a large number of new users was also a requirement. Within the pilot grant programme KuM, MKA with the help of State Service Centre handed out ~3 M euros for the restoration of 14 buildings. 2 – Estonian National Heritage Board Legal name (short name): Estonian National Heritage Board - MKA DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT Estonian National Heritage Board operates in the administrative area of the Ministry of Culture. Estonian National Heritage Board is responsible of the preservation and development of the most valuable part of Estonian cultural heritage. The mission of MKA is to organize the work of heritage protection and to conduct national supervision of monuments and heritage conservation areas. Estonian National Heritage Board also implements museum policy and development of this field. The aim is also to maintain the register of cultural monuments and the information system of museums. MKA reviews applications for the export of cultural values and issues certificates of competence. MKA advises the persons who own or live in an architectural monument of in a building located in a heritage conservation area on issues of maintenance, repair, construction, conservation and restoration of a historic building, gives recommendations and instructions and, if necessary, issues maintenance plans. In the field of museums, MKA, coordinates the national collection policy of museums, provides guidelines for the development of museum collection principles, and advises on issues related to museum operations. In LIFE heritageHOME MKA is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 4: Building the partnership for integrated heritage home renovation service Participating to: − contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1) − sensemaking, evaluation, and learning (WP 1, T1.2) − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1) − examination of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.2) − co-creation with owners’ heritage assembly for private owners (WP 2, T2.3) − analysis of existing best and worst practices applied in energy improvement of historic homes (WP 3, T3.1) − development of technical renovation concepts for different historic building envelopes (WP 3, T3.2) − investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings (WP 3, T3.3) − setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service (WP 5, T5.2) − highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions (WP 6, T6.1) − launching integrated renovation service for heritage homes (WP 6, T6.2) − networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Üllar Alev, M, engineer and adviser of Saare county, PhD Expertise lays in technical restauration and renovation solutions of heritage buildings. Prior to work in MKA worked as researcher in TalTech, with main research fields on Renovation and Energy 49  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Performance Improvement of Estonian Wooden Rural Houses. Long practical experiences in consulting renovation and restoration projects for heritage buildings and monuments. Laura Ingerpuu, F, adviser on built heritage/coordinator, MSc Expertise lays in policy and governance of built heritage. Is a PhD candidate in Estonian Academy of Arts, with main research fields on protection of Socialist Architecture. Long practical experiences in policy making and service design of heritage protection areas and monuments. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES Management planning of Estonian heritage conservation areas: Estonian National Heritage Board has commenced a process of compiling new regulations for Estonian heritage conservation areas. There are 11 urban heritage conservation areas and one landscape heritage conservation area in Estonia. The urban heritage conservation areas include mostly historic city and town centres and surrounding environment which cover more than 10 000 buildings, of which about 5000 are private properties. In the framework of drafting the new regulations the buildings of the heritage conservation areas will be divided into categories based on their heritage value. EAA & Norwegian Grants project Historic Town Centres Revitalized Through Heritage-Based Local Development. The project supported development of new and sustainable uses of cultural heritage buildings in small towns across Estonia, through capacity-building for municipalities and cultural heritage professionals as well as cooperation with vocational schools, restoration centres, local governments and local communities. The project was mostly targeted towards raising awareness on rejuvenation of built heritage, in the framework of which the urgency of clarifying procedures and developing validated solutions for energy renovation measures became highlighted. Pilot renovation grant program for heritage buildings titled "Local development and reduction of poverty”. The grant programme was piloted using the funds EAA & Norwegian Grants. The open call for applications regarded the restoration of buildings located in heritage conservation areas in Haapsalu, Kuressaare, Lihula, Paide, Parnu, Rakvere, Viljandi, Valga and Voru and giving them a public purpose in line with the needs of the local community. As the grant aimed to revive heritage conservation areas, unused buildings with great impact on the surrounding space will take precedence. A function attracting a large number of new users was also a requirement. Within the pilot grant programme KuM, MKA with the help of State Service Centre handed out ~3 M euros for the restoration of 14 buildings. Support for the preservation of farm architecture. In order to support the preservation of Estonian traditional rural architecture and the uniqueness of the rural landscape, a support for the preservation of farm architecture has been created. To receive support for the farm house, it has to be residential building that is or has been part of a historic farm complex, i.e. a detached house, which has been built before 1940. The building does not have to be listed as and architectural monument. The application round supports activities that restore or replace the roof covering of a farm house and, if necessary, roof structure, using original materials, i.e. materials characteristic to region, building type and construction period. 3 – Ministry of Climate Legal name (short name): Ministry of Climate - KliM DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT The overall objective of the Ministry of Climate (KliM) is to develop a responsible attitude towards nature and preserve a clean and naturally diverse living environment for Estonian people. In that capacity, KliM is the competent authority responsible for developing and implementing policy pertaining to construction and housing, energy, transport, tourism, biodiversity, energy, mineral resources, circular economy, green reform. Hence, KliM is the public body responsible for the full implementation of the Estonian Long- term Renovation Strategy (LTRS) and linking it to the overall Estonian housing, energy, and climate policies. KliM is the coordinator of LIFE IP BUILDEST – Pursuing Estonian national climate ambition through smart and resilient renovation. 50  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B In LIFE heritageHOME KliM is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 5: Setting up the Digital one-stop-shop for heritage homeowners Participating to: − contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1) − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1) − examine of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions (WP 2, T2.2) − build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2) − pilot heritage home renovation passports (WP 5, T5.1) − networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Anni Martin, F, head of housing policy, PhD Experienced architect and urban planner. She has served as a head of architetural heritage management National Heritage Board. In KliM acting as a project coordinator for LIFE IP BUILDEST project. Ingrid Aasoja-Zverev, F, analyst of building registry department, MSc Experienced achitect with a demonstrated history of working in the architecture & planning industry. In KliM contributing to digitalisation of built environment services in e-ehitus platvorm (e-construction platform). PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES LIFE IP BUILDEST LIFE20 IPC/EE/000010, “Pursuing Estonian National Climate Ambition through Smart and Resilient Renovation“. The project will raise capacity, increase experiences, and develop the necessary toolset for improving energy performance and reducing carbon emissions of Estonian building stock in the required rate and depth set in LTRS. LIFE IP BUILDEST will also provide a national framework and starter mechanism for carrying out the EU Renovation Wave Initiative on a national level. Sectoral capacity building foreseen in the LIFE IP project will help adoption of the initiative effectively by avoiding negative consequences (possible market failures and negative environmental impacts), establish a national framework for fast adoption of the regulations and financing measures, and improve cross-sectoral mainstreaming of the renovation mechanisms. To achieve this strategic goal, the IP will tackle five sub-targets: Develop, test and demonstrate tools for decarbonising Estonian existing building stock; Establish climate risk evaluation criteria for deep renovation; Apply resource efficiency and circularity principles to renovation; Advance digital technologies for renovation; Increase capacity of relevant target groups and increase demand for renovation. https://kliimaministeerium.ee/en/research-and-development-program-life-ip-buildest-starter-building- renovation-marathon E-Ehitus development programme, Estonian LTRS pinpoints the need to develop various digital tools for improving data access both for the building owners and public policymakers. Due to this, as well as the long-term strategy of the construction sector “Long view to Construction”, significant funds from national programme for Recovery and Resilience Funds have been allocated for reinventing the national building registry. A 3D digital twin for the buildings covering the whole country is being developed, as well as a end-user oriented interface for guidance on construction matters (ehitusgiid). The digital building logbook and various components of it are developed on an ongoing basis. DG Reform TSI project, Support to renovation wave, technical support for optimal M&V, reporting and calculation system including methodologies of energy efficiency measures, legal framework Operating grants and subsidies programme for deep renovation of appartment buildings and detached houses via Estonian Business and Innovation Agency (KredEx). KredEx is a foundation set up and partly financed by the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications in 2001 with the aim of providing financial solutions based on the best practices in the world. See further information on https://kredex.ee/en/we-improve-living-conditions/overview. These incentives are: • KredEx renovation grants for renovation of apartment buildings • KredEx reconstruction grant for small residences • KredEx Housing Loan Guarantee; 51  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B • KredEx Industrial renovation grant; • KredEx support for home renovation for large families; 4 – Tallinn University of Technology Legal name (short name): Tallinn University of Technology - TalTech DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT Tallinn University of Technology (TalTech) is the only university of technology in Estonia and the flagship of Estonian engineering and technology education. The University’s approximately 70,000 alumni have shaped the economic landscape of present-day Estonia. TalTech is to become one of the leading technological universities in the Baltic Sea region. TalTech is a university, which by relying on academic competencies and professional management, responds actively to the needs of the rapidly developing society and is involved in tackling the challenges of the digital era. Cooperation between the university, enterprises and the public sector contributes significantly to knowledge and welfare in the society. TalTech has close to 11 000 students (from 94 different countries) and close to 2000 employees (from 50 different countries). The mission of TalTech is to be a promoter of science, technology and innovation and a leading provider of engineering and economic education in Estonia. TalTech has the high-level competence of testing laboratories by which we can help to solve different development problems and generate new ideas. In addition, we have a very good cooperation with other Estonian and world leading universities and research institutions. TalTech campus is home to more than 200 high-tech companies. The research infrastructure can be further applied in the research and development of enterprises and the public sector and in designing innovative solutions. The university has substantially upgraded its research infrastructure in recent years, and TalTech’s infrastructure is in excellent state. A total of 70 laboratories are in the TalTech departments. The project partner is Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture and the FinEst Twins - FinEst Centre for Smart Cities. The Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture has contributed to the development of Estonian energy performance calculation framework and methodology, to the preparation of technical definitions and system boundaries requirements of energy performance of buildings. The group has long-term experience in scientific and applied research in building physics, renovation of buildings, energy performance, renovation, BIM, and indoor climate related areas. The team is active in international committees, collaborations, task forces (IEA Annex 41, 55, 61, 68, CIB W40 Heat and Moisture Transfer in Buildings, W080 Prediction of Service Life of Building Materials and Components, INTERREG IV A (HELTH, SMC), H2020 (MoreConnect, NetUbiep, NERO, DRIVE0, oPEN Lab, EBENTO) and standardisation such as development of EPBD 1st and 2nd generation standards (TC 371, TC 156 and TC 228), Tempus/Erasmus+ (Mapree, CIMCEB), BUILD UP Skills EE, Buildest II. The FinEst Twins - FinEst Centre for Smart Cities aims to build a smart-city Center of Excellence (CoE) based in Estonia capable of mobilising all leading actors and stakeholders in Estonia and establish a solid long-term partnership with their Helsinki region counterparts, capitalising on the macro region’s scientific knowledge, innovativeness and entrepreneurship. Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture and FINEST Twins collaborate in working out renovation strategy tool – RESTO. In LIFE heritageHOME TalTech is responsible for: Leading of Work Package 3: Standardization of solutions for cost-effective and less disruptive renovation of the historical buildings. Participating to: − contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1) − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.2) − examine of exploitation potential of the input-outputs of existing digital solutions − analysis of existing best practices (WP 3, T3.1) 52  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B − development of single technical renovation measures for different historic building envelopes and service systems; drawing out 1D building envelope solutions (WP 3, T3.2) − investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings (WP 3, T3.3) − build partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP 4, T4.2) − pilot heritage home renovation passports (WP 5, T5.1) − networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP 6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Targo Kalamees, M, professor of building physics, PhD at TalTech since 2009. Research fields: building envelope structures; renovation of buildings; hygrothermal behaviour of buildings structures (computer simulations, laboratory experiments, field studies); boundary conditions for hygrothermal simulations and experiments; building energy consumption and healthy building design; indoor climate and indoor air quality of residential-, office-, and historic buildings. He has published 145 articles in scientific peer rewired journals with 2451 citations and his h-index is 27 according to Scopus. In addition, he has several contributions to international scientific conferences. Endrik Arumägi (M), PhD, Senior researcher in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2009. Senior researcher at TTÜ. Research fields: energy performance of buildings, building service systems, building physics. Teaching: building physics, building service systems, building energy performance. He has published 23 articles in scientific peer rewired journals with 334citations and his h-index is 9 according to Scopus. In addition, he has several contributions to international scientific conferences. Ergo Pikas, (M), PhD, Professor of Digital Construction in the Building Lifecycle Research Group since 2012 At TalTech since 2012. Ergo defended his joint doctoral dissertation in 2019 on engineering design and design management topics at the Aalto University in Finland and the Tallinn University of Technology in Estonia. Ergo has several years of industrial experience working from different construction organizations and roles. He has nine years of research experience and has worked in various academic positions in several countries, including Israel, Estonia, Finland, Denmark, USA, and UK. He has published 41 articles in scientific peer rewired journals with 859 citations and his h-index is 14 according to Scopus. In addition, he has several contributions to international scientific conferences. Kadri-Ann Kertsmik (F), PhD canditate, Researcher in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2021. Research experience in field of architecture and life cycle assessment and sustainability, low carbon renovation solutions. Teaching and training: architecture, LCA. Anti Hamburg (M), PhD, Researcher/lecturer in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2018. Research experience in field of building service systems, energy performance, renovation, Indoor climate. Teaching: HVAC systems, +energy buildings, renovation. He has published 8 articles in scientific peer rewired (ISI) and his h-index is 5 according to Scopus. In additions, he has several contributions to local and international scientific conferences and seminars. Siim Lomp MSc, Researcher, Civil engineer in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2022. Research fields: building survey, renovation solutions, building physics, load bearing structures. Anni Oviir, (F), MSc, Researcher, Building LCA Expert Research fields: EPD creation or verification, building product carbon footprint assessment, LCA & LCC for green building certifications, building carbon foot-printing, Education & training programs. Elisa Iliste (F), MSc, Researcher, Research assistant in nZEB research group at TalTech since 2022. 53  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B Research fields: building typology. Einari Kisel (M), PhD, Head of Partnerships and Strategy in Smart City Center of Excellence at TalTech. Experienced Manager with a demonstrated history of working in the electricity sector, leading energy policy-making in the government and managing international networks. Skilled in Business Planning, Energy Policy and International Relations. Strong professional with a PhD degree (focused in Energy Policy) in addition to MBA and MTech degrees from TalTech. In parallel he is also a Member of Supervisory Boards of Eesti Energia AS, Estonian state-owned energy utility, and of Elektrilevi OÜ, distribution system operator owned by Eesti Energia AS. From 2002 until 2012 he was engaged in the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications of Estonia firstly as the Director of Energy Department and since 2008 as the Undersecretary of State for Energy. In these duties he was responsible for all energy policy affairs of the state: he led number of state committees and was engaged in Supervisory Boards of several state-owned companies and institutions. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES LIFE IP BUILDEST LIFE20 IPC/EE/000010, “Pursuing Estonian National Climate Ambition through Smart and Resilient Renovation“. The project will raise capacity, increase experiences, and develop the necessary toolset for improving energy performance and reducing carbon emissions of Estonian building stock in the required rate and depth set in LTRS. LIFE IP BUILDEST will also provide a national framework and starter mechanism for carrying out the EU Renovation Wave Initiative on a national level. Sectoral capacity building foreseen in the LIFE IP project will help adoption of the initiative effectively by avoiding negative consequences (possible market failures and negative environmental impacts), establish a national framework for fast adoption of the regulations and financing measures, and improve cross-sectoral mainstreaming of the renovation mechanisms. To achieve this strategic goal, the IP will tackle five sub-targets: Develop, test and demonstrate tools for decarbonising Estonian existing building stock; Establish climate risk evaluation criteria for deep renovation; Apply resource efficiency and circularity principles to renovation; Advance digital technologies for renovation; Increase capacity of relevant target groups and increase demand for renovation. oPEN LAB - Open innovation living labs for Positive Energy Neighbourhoods. The aim of the oPEN Lab is to identify replicable, commercially viable solution packages enabling the achievement of positive energy neighbourhoods within existing urban contexts that are seamlessly integrated into the local energy system as an active micro-energy hub, and to test these technologies and package as an integrated solution at neighbourhood scale. Focus is on demonstrating innovations in an integrated approach combining sustainable design tailored to the local context, seamless industrial renovation workflows, renewable energy generation combined with energy storage systems, urban service facilities and smart operation, life cycle thinking and circularity, and this across the whole value chain, targeting the whole life cycle of the building and its neighbourhood, in view of scaling up and wide replication. FINEST TWINS: Establishment of Smart City Center of Excellence". The FINEST Twins project will build a multidisciplinary smart-city Center of Excellence that will match the leading smart city research centres globally and focus on all five key domains of clean and sustainable smart city development: mobility, energy and built environment glued together by governance and urban analytics & data management (research streams). The FINEST Twins will have a globally unique focus on developing user-driven clean and sustainable smart city solutions that are “cross-border-by-default” in the context of emerging twin city between Tallinn and Helsinki. DRVE0 - Driving decarbonization of the EU building stock by enhancing a consumer centred and locally based circular renovation process. DRIVE0 concept is based on developing circular deep renovation solutions and supporting consumer cantered business models for 7 specific study and demonstration cases as real environments. The selected cases are already in preparation and each of these cases have a specific local driver for the need of a holistic and circular deep renovation, which is translated in ‘case specific challenges and tasks’ and case specific key performance indicators. ZEBE - Zero energy and resource efficient smart buildings and districts. ZEBE Center of Excellence in Research (CER) contributes to energy and resource efficiency improvement in buildings and districts. ZEBE CER proposal contributes to Estonian Smart Specialization growth area of More Efficient Use of Resources, Smart and more efficient construction of buildings. On European level ZEBE CER proposal contributes to European objective of 20% primary energy savings in 2020 that is one of the five headline 54  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B targets of the Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Research is focused to zero energy, embodied energy and recourse efficiency, and renewable energy topics. 5 – Estonian Academy of Arts Legal name (short name): Estonian Academy of Arts - EKA DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT Estonian Academy of Arts is the only public university in Estonia providing higher education in fine arts, design, architecture, media, visual studies, art history, and conservation. In LIFE heritageHOME EKA is responsible for: - Leading of WP2: Mapping the Customer Journey of the heritage home energy renovations Participating to: - contractual management and coordination the project (WP1, T1.1) - analysis of existing best practices (WP3, T3.1) - development of technical renovation concepts for different historic building envelopes (WP3, T3.2) - investigating the novel renovation packages for clean energy transition of heritage buildings, drawing out 2D architectural solutions for building envelope connections and visualizing building’s architectural outlook (WP3, T3.3) - preparing the heritage home renovation service (WP4, T4.1) - building partnerships and capacity of key enablers for the service (WP4, T4.2) - setting up the digital dashboard for heritage home integrated renovation service (WP5, T5.2) - networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Kateriin Ambrozevits, F, conservator of architecture and project coordinator, MA Research fields: Preservation and restoration of art works; Coordinates and participates in implementation of LIFE IP BUILDEST project in EKA. Anneli Randla, F, Head of Department, Associate Professor, Senior Researcher in Cultural Heritage and Conservation, PhD Research fields: Preservation and restoration of art works; Art history. Member of various international expert panels for heritage experts, like ICOMOS CIF, Member of EAHN (European Architectural History Network), Council member of the Institute of Theology of the Estonian Evangelical Lutheran Church, Member of ICOMOS-Estonia, Member of the Estonian Society of Art Historians and Curators etc. Maris Mändel, F, conservator of architecture, Senior Researcher, PhD Research fields: Estonian 20th Century Construction History; Architectural Conservation. Has broad practical experience from consulting renovation/restauration projects for heritage buildings, is one of the main lecturers of the advanced training curricula for heritage experts in EKA. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES LIFE IP BUILDEST LIFE20 IPC/EE/000010, “Pursuing Estonian National Climate Ambition through Smart and Resilient Renovation“. The project will raise capacity, increase experiences, and develop the necessary toolset for improving energy performance and reducing carbon emissions of Estonian building stock in the required rate and depth set in LTRS. LIFE IP BUILDEST will also provide a national framework and starter mechanism for carrying out the EU Renovation Wave Initiative on a national 55  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B level. Sectoral capacity building foreseen in the LIFE IP project will help adoption of the initiative effectively by avoiding negative consequences (possible market failures and negative environmental impacts), establish a national framework for fast adoption of the regulations and financing measures, and improve cross-sectoral mainstreaming of the renovation mechanisms. To achieve this strategic goal, the IP will tackle five sub-targets: Develop, test and demonstrate tools for decarbonising Estonian existing building stock; Establish climate risk evaluation criteria for deep renovation; Apply resource efficiency and circularity principles to renovation; Advance digital technologies for renovation; Increase capacity of relevant target groups and increase demand for renovation. Advanced training curricula for heritage and restoration experts. EKA for architects, engineers, public officials. Organized since 1995-… https://www.artun.ee/erialad/muinsuskaitse-ja- konserveerimine/taiendkoolitus/; LIFE Nature WOODMEADOWLIFE, LIFE20 NAT/EE/000074, The Estonian-Latvian joint LIFE project "Restoring and promoting a long-term sustainable management of Fennoscandian wooded meadows in Estonia and Latvia" focuses on the restoration of wooded meadows in Estonia and Latvia, creation of sustainable solutions for maintenance and on raising public awareness of the natural and cultural heritage of wooded meadows and their protection and management. Within this EKA is responsible for investigating the interactions of built and natural heritage in seminatural communities and preparing the UNESCO designation process for including the boreal wooded meadows into world natural heritage list (currently in the tentative list). Various research projects on Estonian built heritage (financed by Estonian Ministry of Culture, The State Chancellery, Social FUnd etc), like: • Upgrading the web portal for manorhouses, ongoing • The studies of the Estonian 20th-century built environment, 01.09.2015–01.09.2020 • Management of state-owned buildings of cultural heritage value. Analysis of existing situation and development of operating principles, 19.12.2014–15.12.2015 • "Protection of privately owned cutural heritage", 17.10.2013–31.03.2014 • The analysis and mapping of the 20th century valuable architecture in Estonia, 01.01.2010– 05.11.2012 6 – ICOMOS Estonia Legal name (short name): ICOMOS Estonia - ICOMOS DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANT International Council of Monuments and Sites concentrates on standards of heritage conservation and enhancement. ICOMOS’s work on climate change and culture heritage includes: • Supporting the development of tools to assess vulnerability to and impacts of climate change on archaeological resources, collections and objects, historic buildings & structures, cultural landscapes, associated & traditional communities and intangible cultural heritage. • Developing new policies and methodologies for the management and conservation of heritage in the face of climate change. • Enhancing the connections between cultural heritage and climate science. • Scaling out cultural heritage-based solutions to climate change mitigation and adaptation and further elaborating the role of arts, culture and heritage in development that is both sustainable and climate-resilient, including strengthening efforts to eradicate poverty and reduce inequalities. • Ensuring consideration of cultural heritage in global climate policy and action as part of the broader global #ClimateHeritage movement. In LIFE heritageHOME ICOMOS is participating to: − contractual management and coordination the project (WP 1, T1.1) − sensemaking, evaluation, and learning (WP 1, T1.2) − project visibility. Communication and media activities (WP 1, T1.3) − building the green transition scenarios of Estonian historic buildings (WP 2, T2.1) 56  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME 101120831 – Annex 1 Part B − co-creation with owners’ heritage assembly for private owners (WP 2, T2.3) − analysis of existing best and worst practices applied in energy improvement of historic homes (WP 3, T3.1) − highlighting best practices for dissemination of feasible solutions (WP 6, T6.1) − networking and nudging replication of integrated renovation service in EU (WP6, T6.3) KEY STAFF Ave Paulus, F, ICOMOS Estonia, president, coordinator, MSc PhD candidate in University of Tartu, with the research focus on The Discourse of the Rights-Based Approach in Cultural Heritage Protection. Member of UNESCO panel of experts on Climate change and World Heritage Committee. ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Legal, Administrative and Financial Issues, ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Water and Heritage etc. Broad experiences in heritage protection in Estonian national parks [LINK to CV] Elo Lutsepp, F, ICOMOS Estonia, member of the board, MSc PhD candidate in University of Tartu, with the research focus on Establishment of new settlements as one possible solution to the social problems of the Republic of Estonia in the 1930s. Member of ICOMOS CIAV. Broad experiences in coordinating the training programme for homeowners via the network of Rural Architecture Centre of Estonian Open Air Museum. PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES ICOMOS Estonia has been involved in developing following relevant policy recommendations, like: 1. ICOMOS Heritage, Climate Justice and Equity Guidance (2022). Link 2. Corporate authors (2022). European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, Strengthening cultural heritage resilience for climate change : where the European Green Deal meets cultural heritage. Publications Office of the European Union. DOI: 10.2766/44688. 3. European Cultural Heritage Green Paper “Putting Europe’s shared heritage at the heart of the European Green Deal”. Europa Nostra, ICOMOS 4. ICOMOS Declaration on Cultural Heritage and the Climate Emergency 2021. Available in: English, French. 5. ICOMOS Climate Change Working Group Contribution UN Special Report on Cultural Rights and Climate Change 2020 Available in: English. 6. Future of our Pasts: Engaging Cultural Heritage in Climate Action 2019 Available in: English, French. 7. UNESCO World Heritage Impact Assessment Guidance 2022, LINK 8. European Quality Principles for EU-funded Interventions with potential impact upon Cultural Heritage - Revised edition November 2020. Manual. ICOMOS International, Paris, 72p. ISBN 978-2-918086-36-9. 9. UNESCO Decision 44 COM 7C concerning Climate Change and World Heritage, forthcoming 2023 ICOMOS Estonia has participated as co-organiser of various events engaging the science- based heritage community on the matter of climate proofing heritage homes: • First Online ICOMOS Scientific Symposium 2021: Living Heritage and Climate Change • GA General Assembly and Scientific Symposium 2023 – co-chair of the theme “Heritage for Climate” • ICOMOS Nordic-Baltic workshop and conferences “Coastal Communities, Heritage and Climate” 2022 • ICOMOS Rights-Based Approaches Heritage Thursdays dedicated to people-centred approaches, incl “Coastal Heritage and Climate Change” 2021. 57  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Detailed Budget Table LIFE heritageHOME Staff effort allocation Participant Number/Short Name WP1 WP2 WP3 WP4 WP5 WP6 Total 1. KuM 23.4 5.8 0 7.2 0 10.8 47.2 2. MKA 3.6 4.8 9 18 2.4 3.6 41.4 3. KliM 2 2.4 0 3.6 18 1.8 27.8 4. TalTech 2 5 28.8 2.5 11.6 0.5 50.4 5. EKA 2 18.2 16.5 7.2 1.2 0.5 45.6 6. ICOMOS 3 0 0 0 0 7 10 Total person-months 36 36.2 54.3 38.5 33.2 24.2 222.4 Personnel costs A1. Employees Subtotal (or equivalent); A.4 SME owners personnel costs A.5 Volunteers A2. Natural and natural without Number of person (Unit costs) Average monthly persons under person (sole volunteers Total Personnel Country months (staff effort must be the salary rate direct contract trader) (A1+A2+A3+A4) - costs per beneficiary) same as in part and A3. beneficiaries must be the A section 3 Seconded (Unit costs in €) same as in part A Persons (costs) section 3 1. KuM EE 47.20 3,612.61 € 170,515.00 € 0€ 170,515.00 € 0€ 170,515.00 € 2. MKA EE 41.40 3,450.00 € 142,830.00 € 0€ 142,830.00 € 0€ 142,830.00 € 3. KliM EE 27.80 4,128.00 € 114,758.40 € 0€ 114,758.40 € 0€ 114,758.40 € 4. TalTech EE 50.40 4,638.65 € 233,787.80 € 0€ 233,787.80 € 0€ 233,787.80 € 5. EKA EE 45.60 3,397.82 € 154,940.40 € 0€ 154,940.40 € 0€ 154,940.40 € 6. ICOMOS EE 10.00 2,943.60 € 29,436.00 € 0€ 29,436.00 € 0€ 29,436.00 € Total 0 846,268 € 0€ 846,268 € 0€ 846,268 € Subcontracting Justification Participant Number/Short Name Subcontract Description Cost (€) WP (Why is subcontracting necessary?) Professional service design facilitation is needed as top-up for the Facilitation of Service and Interaction Design for the 1. KuM 30,000 € 4 service content provided by the consortium and inputs provided heritage home renovation service (T4.1) by the end-users. The facilitator is expected to support the process with competences of Design Thinking (double diamond framework) and assist the consortium in improving the end-user oriented service by the novel digital one-stop-shop interface The project will analyse the fitness of business model and Financial expertise for the business models (100 days x 2. MKA 25,000 € 4 financial incentives. Consortium can analyse the policy feasiblity, 250 eur) (T4.3) however the fitness to the market conditions needs to be analysed by professional finance experts.  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Full development of Digital Renovation Passport is the responsibility of Ministry of Climate (KliM). However, to secure a system with adequate up-to-date data presented for the homeowners, data inputs from heritage authorities need to be Setup of the front-end/back-end from MKA web for the corrected and back-end solutions need to be established to allow 2. MKA 50,000 € 5 adequate interlinkages with legacy systems. Professional web digital Integrated Renovation Service interface (T5.2) interface development is not within the competences of the consortium, which is due the front-end interface for the digital one stop shop is subcontracted. The Interface will allow integration of MKM digital solutions (ehitusgiid, EHR, renovation passport etc) with the information in heritage registry as well as provide front end for the official webpage in MKA allowing visitors to access the digital integrated service also from there. Publishing cost for energy renovation atlas (editing, A publishing team (~3 experts: editor, designers, project language proofing, design and infographics - 40 000 eur). manager) is engaged for ~20 days with an average daily fee of Production cost of demo solution videos (10 x 6000 eur). 100,000 € 250 eur), publishing rights of ~50 photos with average fee of 200 2. MKA 6 (T6.1) eur, printing cost of 15000 eur; Production cost of demo solution videos (10 x 6000 eur). Development of the web interface for technical guidance for Professional web interface development is not within the heritage homes under Ehitusgiid. The digital technical competences of the consortiumc, which is why the development guidance in the form of web interface is planned as smart team needs to be outsourced. KliM is already developing a digital renovation passport, assisting homeowners in planning, renovation passports for detached houses (and small apartment designing and implementing renovations. (T5.2) buildings) with external complementary funds. heritageHOME will integrate the specifics of heritage buildings into the generic tool. Regarding the cost estimation the experience of KliM IT developments for similar tools have been that an adequate 3. KliM 53,529 € 5 development team can be outsourced with an average cost of 10 000 eur/per month. The specifics of heritage to be integrated into the generic tool are estimated to an effort of 5 months. The exact terms of reference for the subcontracted service it to be developed based on the service design process in WP4 and piloted renovation passports developed in WP5. Heritage assembly coordination: facilitation service for the Professional facilitation and coordination of engagement 5. EKA 30,000 € 2 citizen assembly (T2.3) of heritage owners via minipublics format is not within the competences of the consortium. Total estimated costs 288,529 € If subcontracting for the entire project goes beyond 30% of the total eligible costs, give N/A specific reasons. Other direct costs 1 - KuM Cost (€) Justification National travel: Local travel to working meeting - 1 person/1 day/return trip/EUR 60 eur (car fuel reimbursement, EUR 0,3 eur / km x Travel & subsistence 1,800 € 200 km), 30 trips International travel of project staff and invited experts - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, Travel & subsistence 15,000 € accommodation EUR 400 /2 days/1 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 15 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € N/A International thematic experts heritage & energy renovations (~3 experts, 1-2 day assignments related to project events). International Other goods, works and services 3,000 € experts are engaged as speakers at the events and consulting solutions developed for Estonia (related to WP2)  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Logos and stylebook for web (4000 eur). Media cost (printed media, advertisments, mediamonitoring - 10 000 eur). Legacy report Other goods, works and services 39,000 € publishing cost (editing, language proofing, design and infographics - 25 000 eur) Seminars (room rent EUR 1000/1 day meeting/ 30 persons, catering coffee breaks EUR 600/1 day meeting/ 30 persons, equipment Other goods, works and services 5,400 € rent EUR 200/1 day meeting, in total EUR 1800/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 1800 x 3 meetings Coordination & steering panel meetings (room rent EUR 100/1 day meeting/ 10 persons, catering coffee breaks EUR 150/1 day Other goods, works and services 4,500 € meeting/ 20 persons, equipment rent EUR 50/1 day meeting, in total EUR 300/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 300 x 15 meetings Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 68,700 € 2 - MKA Cost (€) Justification National travel: Local travel to working meeting - 1 person/1 day/return trip/EUR 60 eur (car fuel reimbursement, EUR 0,3 eur / km x Travel & subsistence 7,800 € 200 km), 130 Trips International travel of project staff and invited experts - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, Travel & subsistence 6,000 € accommodation EUR 400 /2 days/1 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 6 trips Equipment (incl. Infrastructure) - € N/A External consultancies engaged to the training events (~10 experts, 4 days, a' 250 eur): The training programme to be piloted for the Other goods, works and services 10,000 € enablers of the renovation service will need to include competences not covered by consortium. Meeting costs for training programme for heritage officials: (room rent EUR 300/3 day programme/ 30 persons, 50 eur / night - 15 Other goods, works and services 3,600 € people, 2 nights - 1500 eur, catering 20 eur/ day per person - 30 persons, in total EUR 3600/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 3600 Meeting costs for training programme for energy autiters: (room rent EUR 300/1 day meeting/ 30 persons, catering coffee breaks EUR Other goods, works and services 6,000 € 200/1 day meeting/ 30 persons, in total EUR 500/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 500 x 12 meetings Other goods, works and services 7,500 € Service testing will cover various direct costs related to the testing period in which the test users are engaged (oranizing meetings, study trips, logistics, etc). 33,000 € Service launch campaing (11 events, a' 3000 eur). The specifics of the service launch campaign is to be determined during the project, various events in different regions of Estonia will be held to introduce the service and its components. 1-2 events will be held indoors as Other goods, works and services a introduction seminar. The other events are conducted in the form of a tour, encompassing various types of buildings that face the challenge of achieving energy efficiency, such as the main buildings of valuable estates with exquisite interiors, simpler estate utility buildings, rural architecture, heritage area apartment buildings, etc. During the tour, different options and already implemented solutions are introduced. Other goods, works and services 16,000 € Training materials (digital and physical training materials, models and devices, 2 sets a' 8000 eur). energy savings audit for the test buildings (T5.1). For the buildings participating in the testing, an energy audit is compiled, taking into account the constraints arising from the value of the buildings, and proposing suitable energy efficiency packages accordingly. The Other goods, works and services 22,500 € energy audit is part of the essential preliminary data that need to be determined for the buildings involved in the project, this is also relevant among buildings that have already undregone a renovation to evaluate the outcome compared to the result they were aiming to achieve (15 buildings, a' 1500 eur) Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 112,400 € 3 - KliM Cost (€) Justification International travel - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, accommodation EUR 400 /2 days/1 Travel & subsistence 6,000 € person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 6 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € N/A Other goods, works and services - € N/A Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 6,000 € 4 - TalTech Cost (€) Justification National travel: Local travel to working meeting - 1 person/1 day/return trip/EUR 60 eur (car fuel reimbursement, EUR 0,3 eur / km x Travel & subsistence 4,200 € 220 km) 70 trips International travel to working meeting - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, accommodation Travel & subsistence 6,000 € EUR 400 /2 days/1 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 6 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € N/A Other goods, works and services 5,000 € Publishing fees (1-2 articles), participation fees for thematic conferences and events (1-2 events). Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 15,200 € 5 - EKA Cost (€) Justification National travel: Local travel to working meeting - 1 person/1 day/return trip/EUR 60 eur (car fuel reimbursement, EUR 0,3 eur / km x Travel & subsistence 6,000 € 200 km) 100 Trips International travel to working meeting - 1 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 1000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 1 person, accommodation Travel & subsistence 6,000 € EUR 400 /2 days/1 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 1 person) x 6 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € N/A Other goods, works and services 5,000 € Publishing fees (1-2 articles), participation fees for thematic conferences and events (1-2 events). Financial support to third parties - € N/A Land purchase - € N/A Total 17,000 € 6 - ICOMOS Cost (€) Justification International travel to working meeting - 2 person/2 days/return trip/EUR 2000 (incl. Plane ticket EUR 500 / 2 person, accommodation Travel & subsistence 18,000 € EUR 400 /2 days/2 person, per diem EUR100/2 days/ 2 person) x 9 trips Equipment (incl. infrastructure) - € Other goods, works and services 5,056 € Media cost (printed publications to introduce the project at international events)  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 EU/Nordic seminar: (room rent EUR 1500/2 day meeting/ 30 persons, facilitation 1500 EUR, catering and coffee breaks EUR 2000/2 Other goods, works and services 20,000 € day meeting/ 30 persons, translation service 1000, equipment rent 1000, broadcasting and dissemination material 2000 eur, transport 1000 eur in total EUR 10000/meeting) in Estonia, 1 meeting/EUR 10000 x 2 meetings Financial support to third parties - € Land purchase - € Total 43,056 € Proposal Info Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Proposal ID Call for Proposal Topic Type of Action SEP-210903447 LIFE-2022-CET LIFE-2022-CET-HOMERENO LIFE-PJG LIFE Programme – Application Forms (Part C – KPI) Horizontal KPIs for all LIFE applicants (Mandatory to report on all the KPIs of this section). Innovation Governance Plans & strategies Is your project proposal developing, Is your project proposal improving Is you project proposal implementing demonstrating and promoting governance through enhancing key plans or strategies? innovative techniques and capacities of public and private actors approaches? and the involvement of civil society? Yes No Yes Yes No No Catalytic effect - Financial Catalytic effect - Spatial Catalytic effect - Thematic Will your project trigger additional Will the results of your project be Will the results of your project be investments? replicated beyond its intended replicated (transferred) beyond its geographical scope? intended thematic scope? Yes No Yes Yes No No Catalytic effect - Societal Rio markers for climate, biodiversity and air quality Will your project : Please indicate if your proposal: a) Contribute to the development of new or existing national • Has climate change/ biodiversity/ air quality as their legislation, policies, regulations, incentives and voluntary primary objective commitments? • Has climate change/ biodiversity/ air quality as their b) Achieve a step-change in more effective compliance with secondary objective and provide substantial contributions to and enforcement of Union environmental and climate these objectives legislation and/or in policy implementation? • Does not contribute significantly to climate change/ c) Achieve a step-change in awareness and support of biodiversity/ air quality environmental and climate matters? Climate change d) Establish a new macroregional or national model of cooperation (networking)? Primary Objective Yes Biodiversity No Not contributing Air quality Not contributing Clean Energy Transition – Specific KPIs (Please report on KPIs you consider relevant). Primary Energy Savings Please enter the Primary Energy Savings in GWh/year triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 1 10 GWh/year Submitted 06-10-2023 16:19:24 LIFECETKPI v3 Page 1  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Final Energy Savings Please enter the Final Energy Savings in GWh/year triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 1.2 12 GWh/year Renewable Energy generation Please enter the Renewable Energy generation in GWh/year triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 0.2 2 GWh/year GHG emissions Please enter the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in tons of CO2 equivalent per year (tCO2eq/year) triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 128 1,200 tCO2eq/year Investments in sustainable energy Please enter the amount of cumulative invstments in sustainable energy triggered by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 1.6 16 mEUR Legislation And policy Please enter the number of legislation, policies or strategies created/adapted [to include sustainable energy issues] at any governance levels due to the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 10 12 Number of documents Innovation Uptake 1 Please enter the number of products (goods or services), processes and methods launched into the market by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 1 1 Number of products / processes / methods Innovation Uptake 2 Please enter the number of real life implementation sites carried out by the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 5 50 Number of real life implementation sites Skills Please enter the number of market stakeholders trained with increased skills and competencies on energy issues due to the project Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 100 200 Number of people trained Communication Please enter the number of stakeholders reached through media and events during the project Submitted 06-10-2023 16:19:24 LIFECETKPI v3 Page 2  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 30,000 100,000 Number of people Employment Please enter the number of jobs created in FTE Project-End Value 5 years beyond Project-End Value Unit 5 15 FTE Submitted 06-10-2023 16:19:24 LIFECETKPI v3 Page 3  Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET LIFE Ref. Associated with document MGAAres(2023)7198820 — Multi & Mono:-v1.0 23/10/2023 ANNEX 2 ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR THE ACTION Estimated eligible1 costs (per budget category) Estimated EU contribution2 Direct costs Indirect costs EU contribution to eligible costs Maximum B. Total costs Maximum EU Requested EU grant amount6 A. Personnel costs Subcontracting C. Purchase costs D. Other cost categories E. Indirect costs 3 Funding rate %4 contribution5 contribution costs A.1 Employees A.4 SME owners A.5 Volunteers B. Subcontracting C.1 Travel and C.2 Equipment C.3 Other goods, D.1 Financial D.2 Land E. Indirect costs (or equivalent) and natural person subsistence works and support to third purchase beneficiaries services parties A.2 Natural persons under direct contract A.3 Seconded persons Forms of funding Actual costs Unit costs7 Unit costs7 Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Flat-rate costs8 e = flat-rate * (a1 f=a+b+ a1 a3 a4 b c1 c2 c3 d1a d2 + a3 + b + c1 + U g = f * U% h m c+d+e c2 + c3 + d1a) 1 - KUM 170 515.00 0.00 0.00 30 000.00 16 800.00 0.00 51 900.00 0.00 0.00 18 845.05 288 060.05 95 273 657.05 273 657.05 273 657.05 2 - MKA 142 830.00 0.00 0.00 175 000.00 13 800.00 0.00 98 600.00 0.00 0.00 30 116.10 460 346.10 95 437 328.80 437 328.80 437 328.80 3 - KLIM 114 758.40 0.00 0.00 53 529.00 6 000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 200.12 186 487.52 95 177 163.14 177 163.14 177 163.14 4 - TalTech 233 787.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 200.00 0.00 5 000.00 0.00 0.00 17 429.15 266 416.95 95 253 096.10 253 096.10 253 096.10 5 - EKA 154 940.40 0.00 0.00 30 000.00 12 000.00 0.00 5 000.00 0.00 0.00 14 135.83 216 076.23 95 205 272.42 205 272.42 205 272.42 6 - ICOMOS 29 436.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18 000.00 0.00 25 056.00 0.00 0.00 5 074.44 77 566.44 95 73 688.12 73 688.12 73 688.12 Σ consortium 846 267.60 0.00 0.00 288 529.00 76 800.00 0.00 185 556.00 0.00 0.00 97 800.69 1 494 953.29 1 420 205.63 1 420 205.63 1 420 205.63 1 See Article 6 for the eligibility conditions. All amounts must be expressed in EUR (see Article 21 for the conversion rules). 2 The consortium remains free to decide on a different internal distribution of the EU funding (via the consortium agreement; see Article 7). 3 Indirect costs already covered by an operating grant (received under any EU funding programme) are ineligible (see Article 6.3). Therefore, a beneficiary/affiliated entity that receives an operating grant during the action duration cannot declare indirect costs for the year(s)/reporting period(s) covered by the operating grant, unless they can demonstrate that the operating grant does not cover any costs of the action. This requires specific accounting tools. Please immediately contact us via the EU Funding & Tenders Portal for details. 4 See Data Sheet for the funding rate(s). 5 This is the theoretical amount of the EU contribution to costs, if the reimbursement rate is applied to all the budgeted costs. This theoretical amount is then capped by the 'maximum grant amount'. 6 The 'maximum grant amount' is the maximum grant amount decided by the EU. It normally corresponds to the requested grant, but may be lower. 7 See Annex 2a 'Additional information on the estimated budget' for the details (units, cost per unit). 8 See Data Sheet for the flat-rate. Page 1 of 1  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 2a ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON UNIT COSTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS SME owners/natural person beneficiaries without salary See Additional information on unit costs and contributions (Annex 2a and 2b) Volunteers See Additional information on unit costs and contributions (Annex 2a and 2b) 1 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES MUINSUSKAITSEAMET (MKA), PIC 951666710, established in PIKK 2 HARJU COUNTY, TALLINN 10123, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-951666710_75_210--] Marilin Mihkelson with ECAS id n00d04il signed in the Participant Portal on 24/10/2023 at 17:23:34 (transaction id SigId-125136-maSA 83pev9XfaIDIbgzxf09tUVMPPG7jJ0L9tsnDpzyExq0CAptVGUOhupcc WZu53BzKPF33F1SrJb5XXmN2DqG-rS0vSrmBGYCO0EbOlpezak-lRxa t1crW88UzfzG5Jzzf4rNMUsXEI7iR1TeLjbN5gB3yiL6DQAzPbahVvfBss ybHQtX9ZuO7JpAKPEqQWY3YOH). Timestamp by third party at 2023.10.24 17:23:38 CEST 1 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES KLIIMAMINISTEERIUM (KLIM), PIC 941609750, established in SUUR-AMEERIKA 1, TALLINN 10122, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-941609750_75_210--] Keit Kasemets with ECAS id n00diivg signed in the Participant Portal on 24/10/2023 at 09:55:25 (transaction id SigId-114291-lPCdOkXM2 Bu55mWuzTnMENhNtwwhybVZ4MJxjdbIXbkcOCsyYzVR718nrPfNjw zkzjWd8lTjZIMpOeNq13UvKLa-rS0vSrmBGYCO0EbOlpezak-jLGqiVh GBBp1CsobjbuQTqsVqo6ZZXt9tm2dPdU0twf27BnaD20x9eA4IfOtd7 0xTqMThxdxKVdbEFogp9fhHW). Timestamp by third party at 2023.10.24 09:55:30 CEST 2 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL (TalTech), PIC 999842536, established in EHITAJATE TEE 5, TALLINN 19086, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-999842536_75_210--] Marika LUNDEN with ECAS id nlundema signed in the Participant Portal on 30/10/2023 at 08:29:04 (transaction id SigId-17814-q16rfD wcQyu6dRrfhshNEzTxrqMgRzVt3M8nePkWEivWkBKLuaDnDAXXuzjj anUxzwyzrX7m17qJwKq0R7N6zNAG-yntOf97TTHq8M15dN9Vn3i-1P rd1LXNRxeOBCeioid8I7kHA6EKKja5heJQhkg44p8E4c0lBXMBLUWBl 3SzWRqVdgjtXXY2zTpEywpLEVAcy5). Timestamp by third party at 2023.10.30 08:29:09 CET 3 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES EESTI KUNSTIAKADEEMIA (EKA), PIC 955368327, established in POHJA PST 7, TALLINN 10412, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-955368327_75_210--] Mart KALM with ECAS id nkalmmar signed in the Participant Portal on 24/10/2023 at 09:46:08 (transaction id SigId-114066-CNbW2pQq GAgqBNxpS5wA9ofzUiOkuITbIxXD9qxkyov5uYw0xzvT9kgYmzyMNz Z8rUdwkee2YPJyzxsYnd3wX8S-rS0vSrmBGYCO0EbOlpezak-azq5jb6 A3I2RLlzGLDbCGVqXJduNtsH2DCi0pHzQCj3n2JzJgRUzNoybDAr4Tx WM2QhCWKWu915RN4uHQDGj9CJ). Timestamp by third party at 2023.10.24 09:46:17 CEST 4 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES MITTETULUNDUSUHING EESTI ICOMOS (ICOMOS), PIC 884437465, established in PIKK TN 46, TALLINN 10133, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-884437465_75_210--] Elo Lutsepp with ECAS id n00784j7 signed in the Participant Portal on 25/10/2023 at 09:08:58 (transaction id SigId-129598-J22iv8g0zm 8xCsdbRLc3PAMfHUzjQt6zYGWmUzfzn34g88PfIQ5zaPS0q3kzjnYra s8B9Oa1P1lmJxCBW5nkcpky-rS0vSrmBGYCO0EbOlpezak-Ncl8Bcjq 0GxuWUmXLjtzYHszSX06bprSsEc5VQpUYWue4LPtVjVgOXQYSknbP dmPmXBqBzgW2brwE01J9HCura0). Timestamp by third party at 2023.10.25 09:09:02 CEST 5  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 4 LIFE MGA — MULTI + MONO FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR [PARTICIPANT NAME] FOR REPORTING PERIOD [NUMBER] 1 2 Eligible costs (per budget category) EU contribution Revenues Direct costs Indirect costs EU contribution to eligible costs Total requested EU Income generated by the Total costs Requested EU contribution action A. Personnel costs B. Subcontracting costs C. Purchase costs D. Other cost categories 2 3 4 E. Indirect costs Funding rate % Maximum EU contribution contribution A.4 SME owners and C.3 Other goods, works and D.X Financial support to third A.1 Employees (or equivalent) natural person A.5 Volunteers B. Subcontracting C.1 Travel and subsistence C.2 Equipment D.2 Land purchase E. Indirect costs services parties beneficiaries A.2 Natural persons under direct contract A.3 Seconded persons Forms of funding Actual costs 5 5 Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs 6 Unit costs Unit costs Flat-rate costs e= f= a1 a3 a4 b c1 c2 c3 d1a d2 flat-rate * (a1 + a3 + b + c1 + c2 U g = f*U% h m (i) n a+b+c+d+e + c3 + d1a) XX – [short name beneficiary/affiliated entity] The beneficiary/affiliated entity hereby confirms that: The information provided is complete, reliable and true. The costs and contributions declared are eligible (see Article 6). The costs and contributions can be substantiated by adequate records and supporting documentation that will be produced upon request or in the context of checks, reviews, audits and investigations (see Articles 19, 20 and 25). For the last reporting period: that all the revenues have been declared (see Article 22). i Please declare all eligible costs and contributions, even if they exceed the amounts indicated in the estimated budget (see Annex 2). Only amounts that were declared in your individual financial statements can be taken into account lateron, in order to replace costs/contributions that are found to be ineligible. 1 See Article 6 for the eligibility conditions. All amounts must be expressed in EUR (see Article 21 for the conversion rules). 2 If you have also received an EU operating grant during this reporting period, you cannot claim indirect costs - unless you can demonstrate that the operating grant does not cover any costs of the action. This requires specific accounting tools. Please contact us immediately via the Funding & Tenders Portal for details. 3 See Data Sheet for the reimbursement rate(s). 4 This is the theoretical amount of EU contribution to costs that the system calculates automatically (by multiplying the reimbursement rates by the costs declared). The amount you request (in the column 'requested EU contribution') may be less. 5 See Annex 2a 'Additional information on the estimated budget' for the details (units, cost per unit). 6 See Data Sheet for the flat-rate.  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 ANNEX 5 SPECIFIC RULES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) — BACKGROUND AND RESULTS — ACCESS RIGHTS AND RIGHTS OF USE (— ARTICLE 16) Rights of use of the granting authority on results for information, communication, dissemination and publicity purposes The granting authority also has the right to exploit non-sensitive results of the action for information, communication, dissemination and publicity purposes, using any of the following modes: - use for its own purposes (in particular, making them available to persons working for the granting authority or any other EU service (including institutions, bodies, offices, agencies, etc.) or EU Member State institution or body; copying or reproducing them in whole or in part, in unlimited numbers; and communication through press information services) - distribution to the public in hard copies, in electronic or digital format, on the internet including social networks, as a downloadable or non-downloadable file - editing or redrafting (including shortening, summarising, changing, correcting, cutting, inserting elements (e.g. meta-data, legends or other graphic, visual, audio or text elements extracting parts (e.g. audio or video files), dividing into parts or use in a compilation - translation (including inserting subtitles/dubbing) in all official languages of EU - storage in paper, electronic or other form - archiving in line with applicable document-management rules - the right to authorise third parties to act on its behalf or sub-license to third parties, including if there is licensed background, any of the rights or modes of exploitation set out in this provision - processing, analysing, aggregating the results and producing derivative works - disseminating the results in widely accessible databases or indexes (such as through ‘open access’ or ‘open data’ portals or similar repositories, whether free of charge or not. The beneficiaries must ensure these rights of use for the whole duration they are protected by industrial or intellectual property rights. If results are subject to moral rights or third party rights (including intellectual property rights or rights of natural persons on their image and voice), the beneficiaries must ensure that they 1  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 comply with their obligations under this Agreement (in particular, by obtaining the necessary licences and authorisations from the rights holders concerned). COMMUNICATION, DISSEMINATION AND VISIBILITY (— ARTICLE 17) Communication and dissemination plan The beneficiaries must provide a detailed communication and dissemination plan, setting out the objectives, key messaging, target audiences, communication channels, social media plan, planned budget and relevant indicators for monitoring and evaluation. Additional communication and dissemination activities The beneficiaries must engage in the following additional communication and dissemination activities: - present the project (including project summary, coordinator contact details, list of participants, European flag and funding statement and special logo and project results) on the beneficiaries’ websites or social media accounts - for actions involving equipment, infrastructure or works, display as soon as the work on the action starts a printed or electronic sign of appropriate size, with European flag and funding statement and special logo - upload the public project results to the LIFE Project Results platform, available through the Funding & Tenders Portal . Special logos Communication activities and infrastructure, equipment or major results funded by the grant must moreover display the following logo: - the LIFE Programme logo and - for projects in Natura 2000 sites or contributing to the integrity of Natura 2020 network: the Natura 2000 logo 2  Associated with document Ref. Ares(2023)7198820 - 23/10/2023 SPECIFIC RULES FOR CARRYING OUT THE ACTION (— ARTICLE 18) Durability Unless exempted by the granting authority, beneficiaries of Standard Action Projects, Strategic Nature Projects and Strategic Integrated Projects must commit to continue to use and maintain after the end of the action equipment bought and eligible at full costs, for activities pursuing the action’s objectives. Such equipment must be used for these purposes — for at least five years after the end of the action (see Data Sheet, Point 1) or until the end of its economic lifespan (i.e. until it has been fully depreciated) — whichever is earlier. Specific rules for blending operations When implementing blending operations, the beneficiaries acknowledge and accept that: - the grant depends on the approved financing from the Implementing Partner and/or public or private investors for the project - they must inform the granting authority both about the approval for financing and the financial close — within 15 days - the payment deadline for the first prefinancing is automatically suspended until the granting authority is informed about the approval for financing - both actions will be managed and monitored in parallel and in close coordination with the Implementing Partner, in particular: - all information, data and documents (including the due diligence by the Implementing Partner and the signed agreement) may be exchanged and may be relied on for the management of the other action (if needed) - issues in one action may impact the other (e.g. suspension or termination in one action may lead to suspension also of the other action; termination of the grant will normally suspend and exit from further financing and vice versa, etc.) - the granting authority may disclose confidential information also to the Implementing Partner. 3  Digitally sealed by the European Commission Date: 2023.10.23 12:50:36 CEST This electronic receipt is a digitally signed version of the document submitted by your organisation. Both the content of the document and a set of metadata have been digitally sealed. This digital signature mechanism, using a public-private key pair mechanism, uniquely binds this eReceipt to the modules of the Funding & Tenders Portal of the European Commission, to the transaction for which it was generated and ensures its full integrity. Therefore a complete digitally signed trail of the transaction is available both for your organisation and for the issuer of the eReceipt. Any attempt to modify the content will lead to a break of the integrity of the electronic signature, which can be verified at any time by clicking on the eReceipt validation symbol. More info about eReceipts can be found in the FAQ page of the Funding & Tenders Portal. (https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/support/faq) Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES MUINSUSKAITSEAMET (MKA), PIC 951666710, established in PIKK 2 HARJU COUNTY, TALLINN 10123, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-951666710_75_210--] 1 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES KLIIMAMINISTEERIUM (KLIM), PIC 941609750, established in SUUR-AMEERIKA 1, TALLINN 10122, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-941609750_75_210--] 2 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES TALLINNA TEHNIKAÜLIKOOL (TalTech), PIC 999842536, established in EHITAJATE TEE 5, TALLINN 19086, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-999842536_75_210--] 3 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES EESTI KUNSTIAKADEEMIA (EKA), PIC 955368327, established in POHJA PST 7, TALLINN 10412, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-955368327_75_210--] 4 Grant Agreement number: 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME — LIFE-2022-CET ANNEX 3 ACCESSION FORM FOR BENEFICIARIES MITTETULUNDUSUHING EESTI ICOMOS (ICOMOS), PIC 884437465, established in PIKK TN 46, TALLINN 10133, Estonia, hereby agrees to become beneficiary in Agreement No 101120831 — LIFE22-CET-LIFEheritageHOME (‘the Agreement’) between KULTUURIMINISTEERIUM (KUM) and the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) (‘EU executive agency’ or ‘granting authority’), under the powers delegated by the European Commission (‘European Commission’), and mandates the coordinator to submit and sign in its name and on its behalf any amendments to the Agreement, in accordance with Article 39. By signing this accession form, the beneficiary accepts the grant and agrees to implement it in accordance with the Agreement, with all the obligations and terms and conditions it sets out. SIGNATURE For the beneficiary [--TGSMark#signature-884437465_75_210--] 5