The CIF costed options appraisal: what every 2027 to 2028 bid must now include

By Grayling Thomas Architects · October 2026

A CIF options appraisal is the document in which a school sets out the realistic ways it could meet the need it is bidding for, prices each one, weighs the benefits and risks, and explains why its preferred option is the most appropriate and cost-effective. In the new round it is compulsory. The Department for Education (DfE) lists it under its New requirements for CIF 2027-28, and the wording is direct: "All applications must include a bespoke, costed options appraisal that is unique to your project. This forms part of the assessment and will be scored." A bid without one may be disqualified.

This article explains what the DfE asks the appraisal to show, how it is scored, how it fits with the feasibility study and the cost evidence, and the ways it commonly falls short. For the round as a whole, including the deadlines, see the practice's guide to the key dates and rule changes for this CIF round.

For how the options appraisal sits within the fund as a whole, from eligibility to scoring, see the practice's complete guide to CIF funding for schools.

What does the DfE want an options appraisal to show?

The core requirement is set out in the DfE's CIF 2027-28 information for applicants. The appraisal "must demonstrate that alternative solutions have been considered and evaluated, including the costs, benefits and risks associated with each option." Applicants "must clearly explain the rationale for their preferred option and how it represents the most appropriate and cost-effective solution to address the identified need."

In practice that means several genuine options, each with its own price, its own benefits and its own risks, followed by a reasoned choice. The guidance adds some specific expectations:

• An open mind. "Consider all your options with an open mind, and don't present a preferred option as the only way forward."

• Cheaper alternatives. "Show that lower-cost options have been considered, and, if not chosen, this is justified."

• A do-nothing option. The DfE asks applicants to "Always present a "do nothing" option", showing what the negative impact would be, "particularly when trying to demonstrate urgent need."

• Quantified benefits. Top marks go to "a bespoke, detailed, costed options appraisal with quantified benefits that supports the solution provided."

• Sustainable options. "For all projects, where applicable, the options appraisal should include a sustainable and/or net zero-carbon solution."

Scale matters too. "Where the project is a small project, there should be an appropriately scaled options appraisal to support the solution." A boiler replacement does not need the depth of a new teaching block, but it still needs real alternatives and real prices.

For condition projects the guidance connects the appraisal to the survey: applicants should provide "a realistic, costed options appraisal which provides genuine options for consideration", setting out a clear scope and demonstrating value for money.

How is the options appraisal scored?

The appraisal is assessed inside project planning. The DfE says "Project planning accounts for 20 points from a total of 100 for all projects and consists of three sub-criteria: appropriateness of solution (demonstrated through a bespoke, detailed, costed options appraisal), timescales and delivery plan."

The appraisal is therefore the evidence for one of the three planning sub-criteria, appropriateness of solution. To score well there, "the highest need should be prioritised" and the solution "should demonstrate value for money."

The guidance is equally clear about what scores badly. "Applications that provide generic appraisals lacking detail and costs will score low in this section." Low marks also follow "where low-priority issues are included and where there is no evidence that lower cost options have been considered and justifiably rejected."

Two failures go further than a low score. "If no options appraisal is included, your application may be disqualified." And "Applications may be disqualified where it is identified that the same costed options appraisal has been used in more than one application." A trust bidding for several schools should not copy one appraisal across them, even where the problems look alike: the DfE may disqualify it.

Fitting the options appraisal with the feasibility study and cost evidence

The options appraisal, the feasibility study and the cost evidence are three separate pieces of evidence, but they have to tell one story.

A feasibility study, in the DfE's words, "looks at whether a project is viable and helps identify the best option for delivery." The guidance says you should carry one out "where your project may be considered complex with multiple options, regardless of value", and that it should confirm "that the preferred option will provide the best chance of success and value for money." Where a feasibility study exists, the appraisal can be its distilled conclusion: the options it tested, what each would cost, and the reasons one came out ahead.

The cost evidence then prices the chosen option in detail. The DfE asks applicants to show costings "clearly and in as much detail as possible", and notes that "multiple tenders or formal quotes are more certain than estimates." If the preferred option in the appraisal carries one figure and the cost plan another, the bid contradicts itself. The figures should come from the same scope of works.

Need sits underneath all of it. A good appraisal starts from the evidence of need, usually an independent condition survey, and every option it tests should answer that need. An option that solves a different problem, or adds low-priority works, weakens the case rather than strengthening it.

Before the bid goes in, our guide to what governors should check before approving a school building project sets out the questions trustees should ask of the options and the cost plan.

Where the options appraisal goes and the 50-page limit

The appraisal belongs in the project planning upload. The DfE's minimum uploads include "1 upload document for project planning, which includes your bespoke options appraisal (maximum 50 pages)".

The appraisal sits inside the single project planning upload, so it counts towards the same page limit as the programme, risk register, delivery plan and any feasibility study. The guidance says "supporting documentation for project need, project planning and project cost is limited to 50 pages per document. All supporting documentation must be formatted in Arial font, no smaller than size 11." It is blunt about overruns: "Any information submitted beyond the 50-page limit for a document will not be considered as part of the assessment."

Each document can be up to a maximum of 1MB and must not contain links to further documents. A long feasibility report pasted in whole can push the appraisal past the point an assessor will read. The usual answer is a concise appraisal near the front of the planning document, with the supporting detail summarised rather than attached in full.

The application form also comes first. For CIF 2027-28, the application form is the main source of information for assessment purposes and must contain full details of the project. The appraisal supports what the form says; it does not replace it.

Common ways an options appraisal falls short

Read against the DfE's guidance, these are the ways an options appraisal can fall short.

• It is generic. A template with the school's name added, or a list of options that could apply to any building, is what the guidance means by "generic appraisals lacking detail and costs".

• It is not bespoke to the project. The guidance warns that "Duplicated risk registers, surveys, costed options appraisals and other such information will not assist schools in competing for funding with other applicants", and that it could, in some circumstances, lead to disqualification.

• It is not costed. Options described in words with no prices, or one priced option alongside unpriced alternatives, does not meet the requirement for a costed appraisal.

• The answer is fixed in advance. An appraisal that presents the preferred option as the only way forward, with token alternatives, invites the low score the DfE describes.

• No do-nothing option, or no cheaper option. Both are named expectations, and the absence of lower-cost options "considered and justifiably rejected" costs marks.

• It does not match the rest of the bid. A preferred option that differs from the cost plan, the programme or the survey findings undermines all three.

• It is lost in a long document. Anything past the page limit is not considered, so an appraisal on the final pages of an overlong upload may not be read at all.

None of these needs a large document to fix. It needs an appraisal written for this school, this building and this need, priced on a consistent basis and argued honestly.

Related guides

• CIF 2027 to 2028: key dates, rule changes and what to prepare by 15 December

• The CIF application for 2027 to 2028: a section-by-section walkthrough

• School condition surveyors: what the role covers in a CIF bid and how to choose one

• From school condition assessment to a five-year plan: turning survey findings into costed priorities

Grayling Thomas Architects and CIF options appraisals

We are a RIBA Chartered Practice that designs and delivers school buildings, and on CIF projects we work as lead consultant and architect. Grayling Thomas Architects was CIF bid writer, lead consultant and architect for Dorothy Goodman School in Hinckley, a new building for an existing special school, funded through the Condition Improvement Fund.

We work with the school to prepare the evidence, the design options and the costed options appraisal together, so the options tested, the preferred design and the cost plan agree. The practice also carries out school condition surveys, which give a school a clear picture of its buildings before any options are drawn up. The accounting officer (or, for a sixth-form college or VA school, a member of the senior management team) remains responsible for the application, and the DfE is clear that technical advisers cannot apply on your behalf.

If the school has yet to appoint the team that will prepare the appraisal, our guide on how to choose an architect for a school capital project covers what to look for.

Our CIF funding page explains how we work on Condition Improvement Fund projects. To talk about a project for this round, use our CIF enquiry form.