The introduction of PAS:6463 in 2022 should have been a watershed moment for neuro-inclusive design, but while the standard has gained traction in architectural circles, uptake has varied significantly by sector. Rebecca Jilks, Part 2 Architectural Assistant and an MArch graduate specialising in neuro-inclusive design, and Ross Pirie, our Eltham Studio Lead and Senior Architect, discuss the barriers faced by neurodivergent people interacting with the built environment, and how integrating neuroinclusivity from an early project stage can lead to better designs.

A row of bright shopfronts in a bustling high street with a busy café nearby. To some, this scene will evoke positive or neutral thoughts – for others, it represents a day of masking, overstimulation and anxiety as each sense becomes overwhelmed. This can be draining in itself, but to make matters worse, on many occasions there’s no escape.

This is the reality of many neurodivergent individuals, and it’s one that Rebecca Jilks, Part 2 Architectural Assistant at Baily Garner sought to cast a spotlight on with her final project in the Master of Architecture course at the University of Sheffield.

“I wanted to use my own lived experience and those of other neurodivergent individuals to really demonstrate how the built environment can impact our day-to-day lives,” she said. “There isn’t really much teaching in this area beyond what’s required to meet accessibility regulations, so I wanted to spread awareness around how Neurodivergent people interact with different spaces, and showcase some of the simple considerations that can make them more inclusive.”

Rebecca achieved this through her illustrated storybook Dede is Autistic, as well as her own architectural design for a neuroinclusive safe space in Sheffield City Centre, where Dede’s journey takes place.

The neuro-divergent experience

Although the scope of Rebecca’s project is mainly the experience of people with Autism Spectrum Condition (ASC), neurodivergence encompasses far more than that and the other commonly mentioned condition, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). What’s more, a growing body of evidence supports the idea that neurodivergence extends beyond formal diagnoses to include people with subclinical traits or undiagnosed differences in cognition, sensory processing, or behaviour. This means the oft-cited statistic that 15-20% of the world’s population is neurodivergent is likely a significant underestimate. Speaking on a podcast by Around the Table titled ‘Designing for All: Neuro-Architecture and inclusive space’, one of the leading practitioners in the field of neuroinclusive design and technical author of PAS:6463, Jean Hewitt, said she believes the true prevalence could be as high as 40%.

Rebecca uses Dede is Autistic to demonstrate some of the sensory processing differences of Autistic people, which broadly fall into the categories ‘hypersensitive’ and ‘hyposensitive’ – the former describes a low tolerance for certain stimuli, while the latter denotes the opposite. Although her project mostly focuses on hypersensitivity, with examples like a noisy bus ride with the pungent aroma of cheese and onion crisps filling up Dede’s sensory cup, profiles of hyper- and hyposensitivity can vary significantly from person to person.

“I’m hypersensitive to noise, so it can often feel like I’m hearing everything at once in a noisy environment, but for taste, I’m more hyposensitive, so I really like spice and food that’s really strong,” Rebecca says. “There’s also context to consider,” she adds. “My levels of sensitivity can really change throughout the day depending on how much downtime I’ve had and how relaxed I am.”

That last point hits on something important – levels of sensitivity can vary significantly depending on a range of factors, including mood, and that’s true for both neurodivergent and neurotypical people. During acute stress or anxiety, the nervous system becomes hyperactive, which can heighten external senses. During perimenopause and menopause, fluctuations and declines in oestrogen and progesterone can significantly affect how the brain processes sensory input. At the other end of the spectrum, adolescents going through puberty often have lower sensory thresholds, making ordinary stimuli feel overwhelming.

The salient fact behind this discussion is that while we should design spaces that are inclusive to Neurodivergent individuals, much like the way accessibility ramps are used by parents with strollers, incorporating neuro-inclusivity makes buildings less stressful and more enjoyable for everyone.

What are the barriers to adopting neuroinclusive design?

The introduction of PAS:6463 in 2022 was a milestone for neuroinclusive design. The new standard provided those commissioning and carrying out work on the built environment with a 148-page guide to designing neuroinclusive spaces, but in the experience of Ross Pirie, Studio Lead and Senior Architect at Baily Garner, many clients just aren’t aware of it.

“The guidance was released fairly recently, so there aren’t many elements of the industry which are up to speed with it, and accessibility specialists still mainly focus on physical constraints,” he says. “The only clients we see with an understanding of this area are those with a vested interest due to the demographic they serve, like schools with a high number of students with SEN needs.”

Taken in conjunction with a general lack of understanding, the other barrier Ross believes is standing in the way of clients prioritising neuroinclusive design is the cost uplift associated with it. “Cost is practically the number one concern for clients across every scheme, and even more so in the public sector, where Baily Garner conducts most of its design work,” Ross adds.

How do we overcome barriers to adoption?

Both Rebecca and Ross agree that the most effective way to overcome cost as a barrier is to integrate neuro-inclusivity as a priority from the very start of the design process, much like our sector already does with sustainability.

They liken this to the way much of the industry includes sustainability ambitions within the briefing stage of a project, ensuring that they’re captured and costed early to avoid making expensive, last-minute changes closer to the start of construction.

“These can be really simple things like avoiding a dramatic sensory difference when transitioning from one environment to another. An example would be going from a quiet space in a school into a loud dining hall with lots of smells,” Rebecca adds.

“Having windows or transparent doors in place to give a preview of the next environment can prepare a Neurodivergent individual for that transition.”

This example hits on an important aspect of designing spaces around neurodivergence, and that’s the ability to maintain control while navigating a building. Alongside zoning, control as a design principle is the answer to the common question of how architects can design spaces for different neurodivergent needs, as Rebecca explains:

“Control is so important to allow people to shape their sensory experience based on how stimulated they are,” she says. “By creating zones that stimulate the senses to different degrees but making sure the transitions are predictable, we give neurodivergent individuals control over what they encounter.”

She adds that the principle of control can shape other elements too, like opting for dimmer switches over traditional lighting or including several seating options with a variety of materials and finishes.

Stakeholder engagement

While architectural designers like Rebecca are important for raising awareness of neuroinclusive design among client and design teams, she believes it’s critical to include as many Neurodivergent voices as possible in the conversation through targeted stakeholder engagement.

This isn’t as straightforward as it sounds however; in order to understand the needs of Neurodivergent building users, the process of engagement itself must be tailored so that events aren’t overwhelming to the senses like a busy afternoon in Sheffield City Centre.

Neuro-inclusive elements make designs better

Given how early we are in the journey to creating neuroinclusive spaces, sharing best practice will be key to crafting designs that create control, sanctuary and delight, and Rebecca is keen to emphasise that neither neuro-inclusivity, sustainability nor wellbeing should be considered in a vacuum.

“Connections to nature are calming both for stress and overstimulation, while temperature control has sustainability and sensory benefits,” she says. “Considering all these aspects together is just good design practice. We shouldn’t think of neuro-inclusivity as a problem to solve, but an opportunity to improve spaces.”

More understanding of the multitude of Neurodivergent needs can only lead to better designs, and it’s the job of studios like Baily Garner Architects to help clients understand how a seemingly insignificant change like a dimmable light can make a big difference to a significant portion of building users.

To learn more about how the built environment can impact Neurodivergent lives, read Rebecca’s storybook, ‘Dede is Autistic’

We are finally here. The plan has been released, and on the whole, it seems a considered push to stabilise, reassure and innovate our sector, which is always welcome.

Some of our collective opinions are as follows, and while sounding negative in places should be considered in-line with the general positivity brought about by the plan. There appear to be more pro’s than con’s so here are our thoughts:

Decarbonisation and Electrification – Risks in the rush

The plan, as expected, appears to prioritise electrification and on-site generation and storage (heat pumps, solar PV and batteries) as a route to reducing household energy bills, marking a shift away from the historic insulation-first sequencing of retrofit programmes under the likes of SHDF/SHF, HUG, ECO and GBIS. The underlying aim is clearly to accelerate the transition away from combustion-based fossil fueled heating while still enabling fabric improvements as appropriate. However, whenever large-scale investment is mobilised at pace, there is a risk (based on previous, recent sector experience) that holistic, dwelling-led decision-making falls down the priority list. Concerns remain around pre-existing building condition, interactions between measures, and the integration of retrofit within long-term asset management strategies, particularly in social housing. This brings the focus back to data quality, stock condition surveys, and the competence and skills needed to avoid rushing heat pumps and solar into homes that are poorly insulated or inadequately ventilated.

EPC C by 2030 – Surveys and cost caps

If EPC (and therefore, potential MEES compliance) shifts to a new methodology, organisations will need to re-test their retrofit pathways, as what constitutes “good” performance may differ significantly from current EPC outcomes. The sector will also face the practical reality of surveying virtually every rented property in the country. While the MEES consultation recognises some crossover and allows the use of existing valid EPCs, there will still be a requirement for millions of assessments over the next decade, alongside mechanisms to bring sub-C homes up to standard, likely subject to a cost cap for harder-to-treat properties. How this is implemented will have major implications for delivery capacity and prioritisation.

Financing – Is it just about the money?

Loan and “innovative finance” mechanisms have the potential to remove upfront cost barriers, but uptake will still depend on consumer confidence, installer capacity and running-cost signals, particularly the relationship between electricity and gas prices. Models such as equipment rental or shared-payback comfort plan and ESCO arrangements for solar and batteries are already being trialled and available and could support this transition, while zero- and low-interest loans may appeal to homeowners seeking energy autonomy without releasing capital. However, finance alone will not resolve the technical and behavioural dimensions of retrofit.

Fabric Last – The wrong signals?

A particular concern is that the policy narrative could be interpreted as signalling that insulation is now secondary, especially with the comments around wall insulation that could be construed as a permissible move away from EWI and IWI. While there is acknowledgement that fabric measures still have a role, the feeling that they are “no longer the prime objective” is potentially misleading. Insulation remains fundamental to reducing space-heat demand and ensuring that heat pumps operate efficiently and affordably. There is already evidence of installers and designers pursuing “quick-win” solar-only schemes, sometimes neglecting fabric or failing to comply with PAS 2035, which risks repeating the issues realised in the NAO report (which is acknowledged and referenced). It is, however, comforting to see that PAS 2035 has not been held as an issue and remains a requirement for funded retrofit projects. Installing a heat pump into a poorly insulated home, especially at current electricity prices, has potential to increase running costs and undermine confidence in low-carbon heating. Strong delivery governance and consumer protection through PAS2035, PAS 2030 and MCS therefore remain essential. While the plan broadly recognises the need for higher standards, this must be embedded in the structures through which funding is released and work is procured, rather than assumed to emerge organically from market growth – so the formation of a Warm Homes Agency specifically for this plan is welcome.

The Labour Market and Upskilling

Workforce capacity is another critical constraint, which is addressed as a chapter within the plan, with one particularly conspicuous absence. Although there is some funding for training and manufacturer support, there is little clarity on how the existing base of gas engineers and plumbers (estimated at well over 100,000) will be retrained at scale. The UK remains heavily dependent on a workforce geared toward rapid, often oversized boiler replacement. Without a credible, funded transition pathway for these practitioners, the ambition to scale heat pump deployment will be difficult to realise. Alongside this, broader public understanding of retrofit needs to improve. Heat pumps operate differently from gas boilers, and their performance is intrinsically linked to insulation, emitter sizing and controls. A national education effort, whether through formal education, public information campaigns or focused engagement, would help build acceptance of both the technology and the wider objectives of retrofit which improves thermal comfort and reducing energy use at the household level, while cutting carbon emissions at the national level. Language and messaging will be critical to get this correct.

Our Final Thoughts

Overall, the plan’s reliance on incentives rather than mandates may be politically easier, but it leaves open the question of whether it will be sufficient to deliver long-term decarbonisation without clearer phase-out signals for fossil fuel heating. The absence of such signals here does not mean they do not exist elsewhere (and these objectives have been widely publicised and scrutinised) but timing and coherence between policies will matter. At a secondary level, it would be very useful to see a national retrofit strategy with process maps and working examples so there is less guesswork (and accordingly risk) in getting this right.

In all, the increased funding and certainty for the sector is absolutely welcome but the transition cannot be driven by unmeasured, technology-led interventions. Decisions must remain data-led, quality assured and holistic, grounded in the realities of individual dwellings and the needs of their occupants, if the programme is to deliver durable, equitable and cost-effective outcomes.

On the whole, the above concerns are secondary issues in delivery and strategy. The fact the plan is in place at all is a monumental achievement in mainstream recognition and activity on an issue that has been largely ignored in years gone by. The plan unlocks a truly exciting period in retrofit and decarbonisation.

Damp and mould have long been recognised as a serious health risk in social housing, yet they remain one of the sector’s most stubborn and recurring challenges. In this episode of Making Housing Better, host Andy Cameron Smith is joined by our partner Lucy Mullineux and Ward Hadaway Simon Thirtle from to explore why the issue endures and what needs to change to deliver lasting improvement.

Listen on Spotify!

Listen on Apple Podcasts!

A key theme running throughout the conversation is the importance of accurate diagnosis. Lucy highlights how damp and mould cases are often treated without fully understanding the root cause. Assumptions, inconsistent investigation and limited diagnostic methods frequently lead to partial fixes and repeat problems. Without robust, evidence based diagnosis, remediation becomes a short term response rather than a long term solution.

Simon discusses how Awaab’s Law is raising expectations across the sector. While the current requirements focus on damp and mould and other emergency hazards, the legislation will expand over the next two years to cover a much wider range of risks, including: excess cold and heat, fire and electrical safety, structural issues and hygiene related hazards. This phased rollout reinforces the need for skilled assessment that considers not only the condition of a property but also the circumstances and vulnerabilities of residents.

Ultimately, the conversation makes clear that real progress relies on competence, collaboration and a strategic approach to asset management, with prevention at the heart of healthier homes.

Listen now!

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Practical steps for housing providers

• Strengthen frontline skills to improve triage and diagnostic accuracy.
• Follow immediate safety actions with full investigation to ensure long term solutions.
• Prepare early for the expanded scope of hazards under Awaab’s Law.
• Use asset data and planned investment to minimise repeat issues and improve resident health outcomes.

Originally published by Healthy Homes Hub: It’s Still With Us… Collaborating on Damp and Mould | Healthy Homes Hub: Improving Health Through Better Housing

This year marks a milestone for Baily Garner as we celebrate five decades of excellence, innovation, and collaboration in the construction industry.

To mark this golden milestone, we’re proud to unveil our special 50th anniversary logo, designed by our talented colleague and newest Architectural Assistant, Rebecca Jilks.

The emblem will feature prominently throughout the year to celebrate our growth from humble beginnings – when Brian Baily and Graham Garner founded Baily Garner as a building surveying business back in 1976 – to a multidisciplinary consultancy with nearly 300 employees and projects spread across the UK.

Managing Partner, Bradley Webster, commented: “This anniversary is not just about celebrating our past, it’s about embracing the future. We are proud of what we have achieved and excited about what lies ahead as we continue to grow the business.”

We will be hosting a series of events throughout 2026, including campaigns and initiatives that highlight Baily Garner’s journey and share our vision for future. As part of our celebrations, we will be fundraising for charities such as King’s Trust, ExtraCare, Demelza and Centrepoint.

Thank you to our clients, partners, and employees – all of which have been part of the Baily Garner story.

We look forward to sharing stories from our past and showcasing the incredible projects and people who shaped our success.

Here’s to the next 50 years!

A cross-party House of Lords Committee has warned the Government that “unacceptable” delays caused by the Building Safety Regulator’s (BSR) approval processes is leaving residents waiting for remediation of dangerous cladding in unsafe buildings and increasing costs for leaseholders.

Whilst welcoming the increased scrutiny the Building Safety Regulator has brought to the design, construction and management of buildings in the interest of safety, the Industry and Regulators Committee’s report The Building Safety Regulator: Building a better regulator, published today (Thursday 11 December) also warns that the delays mean the Government is in danger of missing its target to build 1.5 million homes by 2029.

After hearing from a range of witnesses including representatives of campaign groups and other organisations, developers, housing associations and regulators which work closely with the BSR, the Committee also found:

• The BSR has not given clear enough guidance on how applicants are supposed to demonstrate that their buildings are safe;
• Many applications are being rejected or delayed due to basic errors and applicants’ inability to evidence how they are considering elements of fire and structural safety, which reflects poorly on the construction industry;
• Many construction products do not have relevant product standards, leaving them entirely unregulated;
• Difficulties in local authority funding and the introduction of regulation have left an ageing workforce of building inspectors who are struggling to meet demand;
• Despite these skills shortages, smaller works such as bathroom renovations in high-rise buildings are being subject to the scrutiny of the BSR’s hard-pressed multidisciplinary teams (MDTs).

 
The report is calling on:

• The BSR to give greater guidance to its MDTs on how compliance with the Building Regulations should be evidenced and assessed to ensure greater consistency;
• The Government to remove smaller works from the BSR’s building control approval processes, or introduce a streamlined approval process for them;
• The BSR to allocate the same MDTs to similar buildings or projects built by the same organisation, which could improve efficiency and consistency;
• The Government to provide long-term funding for the training of new building and fire inspectors.

 
Chair of the Committee, Baroness Taylor of Bolton said: “The tragic loss of 72 lives at the Grenfell Tower fire laid bare the urgent need to reform building safety regulation in England, particularly for high-rise buildings. The introduction of the Building Safety Regulator was a necessary and welcome step. However, the scale of the delays caused by the BSR has stretched far beyond the regulator’s statutory timelines for building control decisions. This is unacceptable. We welcome that the Government and the BSR are now acting to try and make practical improvements, but this will not address the anxiety and frustration that residents and companies have experienced.

It does not improve safety to delay vital remediation and refurbishments, nor to deter the delivery of new housing in high-rise buildings. We expect to see further action from the Government and the BSR to ensure that construction projects in high-rise buildings can be brought forward more quickly, without compromising on vital safety improvements.”

Originally published: The Building Safety Regulator – Committees – UK Parliament