The in-use variant addresses a building that is already occupied and operating rather than a proposed design. It separates what the asset itself allows from how well that asset is being managed.
BREEAM, a registered trade mark of BRE, includes an In-Use assessment for buildings that are already occupied and operating. The scheme examines the performance of an existing asset rather than assessing a proposed design for a new building. It provides a structured way to distinguish the characteristics and performance of the asset from the way that asset is managed.
An existing building presents a different sustainability question from a new development. Its form, structure, facade, principal systems and location may already be fixed, while actual operation, maintenance and management practices are visible. An In-Use assessment is intended to work with that reality rather than judge the property as though it were still at design stage.
The assessment can draw on information about the asset and evidence from its operation. This creates an opportunity to examine what is present, how it performs and how it is managed. The focus is not simply whether a design once promised a particular outcome, but how the occupied building is functioning within the defined assessment period and boundary.
The result remains a structured scheme rating rather than a building condition survey or a legal compliance audit. It does not replace fire, structural, environmental, occupational or other statutory duties. It also does not eliminate the need for specialist investigation where a particular defect, complaint or risk requires deeper examination.
The In-Use approach separates asset performance from management performance. This distinction recognises that the physical building and the practices used to operate it are related but not identical. A well-designed asset can perform poorly if it is badly managed, while careful management can improve the performance of an older or constrained building.
Asset performance concerns the building and its installed characteristics within the applicable assessment scope. Management performance concerns the policies, procedures, controls, maintenance arrangements, monitoring and operational decisions that influence how the asset is used. Keeping the two areas distinct helps an owner understand whether improvement depends mainly on physical intervention, management change or both.
The separation also improves portfolio decision-making. An owner may discover that several buildings share similar management weaknesses even though their physical characteristics differ. Alternatively, the same management system may produce different outcomes because one asset has inefficient systems, poor controls or a more difficult building form. The assessment can make those patterns more visible.
The New Construction standard is designed for projects moving through design and construction. It assesses decisions and evidence associated with delivering a new building. An occupied asset does not usually have the same opportunity to revisit site selection, orientation, structure or original system design.
Using a new-construction framework for an existing portfolio would therefore ask the wrong question. It could place emphasis on evidence that no longer exists or on design choices that cannot reasonably be changed. The In-Use variant instead starts from the current asset and its operational context.
This does not mean that refurbishment is irrelevant. An existing building may later undergo substantial improvement works, in which case a Refurbishment and Fit-Out assessment may be appropriate for the defined project scope. The In-Use assessment addresses the operating asset, while the refurbishment route addresses works that change it.
BRE states that the general rating sequence includes Pass, Good, Very Good, Excellent and Outstanding. The In-Use scheme adds Acceptable below Pass. The certificate presents the rating using stars.
The additional band reflects the different purpose and performance range of an existing-asset assessment. Existing buildings vary widely in age, condition, system type, management maturity and opportunities for improvement. The In-Use scale provides a classified outcome below Pass within that particular variant.
Acceptable should not be inserted into a New Construction rating scale. The rating names and benchmarks must always be tied to the applicable standard and version. The published percentage bands from the UK New Construction 2014 non-domestic manual belong to that specific method and should not be assumed to govern an In-Use assessment.
An In-Use assessment can provide a structured baseline for an owner that wants to improve an existing asset. The rating and supporting category results can indicate where performance is relatively strong and where further work may be justified.
A baseline is more useful when it is connected to evidence and a defined boundary. It allows later decisions to distinguish between physical upgrades, control changes, maintenance improvements, management procedures and occupant-related measures. Without that structure, sustainability plans can become lists of unrelated actions with no clear assessment context.
The baseline should not be treated as a permanent description. Buildings and management systems change. Refurbishment, tenant turnover, control adjustments, maintenance failures and new operating patterns can alter performance. A point-in-time certificate needs to be read with its assessment date and scope.
An owner of an existing UAE portfolio may need a consistent method for comparing assets that were designed at different times and under different standards. The In-Use route can provide a common assessment structure while still recognising the individual characteristics of each building.
This is useful where the owner is considering investment priorities. One asset may need improvements to central plant or controls, while another may have a stronger physical base but weaker management processes. Separating asset and management performance helps prevent capital expenditure from being treated as the answer to every problem.
The UAE context can also make operational performance particularly important. Cooling, ventilation, water use, maintenance quality, control settings and operating schedules can materially affect building outcomes. An assessment of an occupied property can examine those realities in a way that a design-stage new-construction assessment cannot.
A portfolio assessment strategy benefits from consistency in scope, version and evidence. If buildings are assessed under different versions or boundaries, the resulting ratings may not be directly comparable. A useful programme should therefore define what is being assessed and how the results will be interpreted.
Country context also matters. UAE projects use the international standards directly because BRE lists no Gulf or UAE National Scheme Operator. The absence of a national operator does not remove local context from the assessment. Country weighting arrangements and local evidence remain relevant, while mandatory UAE requirements continue to apply separately.
A portfolio owner should avoid presenting the rating distribution as a verified UAE or Middle Eastern benchmark unless suitable regional evidence exists. The scheme can compare assets within a controlled portfolio programme, but that internal comparison is not the same as a published regional market percentile.
The framework is broad rather than concentrated on one operational subject. BRE describes categories including Management, Water, Energy, Transport, Health and wellbeing, Resources, Resilience, Land use and ecology, Pollution, Materials, Waste and Innovation, although the exact set differs by standard and version.
For an existing building, some categories may be influenced by fixed asset characteristics, while others may be more responsive to management intervention. Energy performance may depend on plant efficiency and controls. Water performance may involve installed fittings, leaks and operating practices. Health and wellbeing can involve building systems, maintenance and occupant conditions.
The overall rating is an aggregate across the applicable weighted categories. A strong total can therefore coexist with weaker performance in one area. Where a portfolio decision depends on a specific subject, the category evidence should be examined rather than inferred from the headline rating.
An existing asset can provide operational records that are unavailable at early design stage. Metering data, maintenance records, management procedures, monitoring information and evidence of actual practices can all help describe how the building is being run, subject to the requirements of the applicable technical manual.
Operational evidence has limits. Data quality, reporting boundaries, changes in occupancy and incomplete records can affect interpretation. The presence of a policy does not necessarily prove effective implementation, while a period of unusual operation may not represent normal conditions.
The licensed assessor reviews the evidence against the selected method. Formal certification follows quality assurance rather than relying on an owner's self-declared score. The certificate therefore reflects the assessed evidence accepted through the scheme process at that time.
The most useful interpretation separates three questions. The first is what the asset itself allows or constrains. The second is how well the building is managed. The third is which improvements are practical within the owner's objectives, budget, leases and planned works.
Some actions may be operational and relatively direct, such as improving controls, maintenance planning or monitoring. Others may require physical investment or coordination with tenants. Major works may be better addressed through a separate refurbishment assessment if the project scope justifies it.
The rating should support prioritisation rather than become the only objective. A measure may be necessary for safety, legal compliance, resilience or business continuity even where its effect on the rating is limited. Conversely, a credit opportunity should not displace a more urgent building need merely because it contributes to the assessment.
An In-Use certificate states the rating achieved for a defined existing asset, scope, standard, version and assessment point. It can show how the asset and its management performed under the applicable method, and it can provide a common structure for portfolio review.
It does not certify that the building will continue to perform unchanged. It does not guarantee the absence of indoor environmental complaints, system defects or management failures. It also does not replace the local mandatory framework applying to the property.
For an existing UAE portfolio, the In-Use route is appropriate because it assesses buildings as operating assets rather than unbuilt designs. Its separation of asset and management performance helps identify the character of the problem, while the additional Acceptable band reflects the rating structure used for this particular variant.
Concerns the building and its installed characteristics within the applicable assessment scope, much of which may already be fixed.
Concerns the policies, procedures, controls, maintenance arrangements, monitoring and operational decisions that influence how the asset is used.
Keeping the two distinct helps an owner see whether improvement depends mainly on physical intervention, management change or both.
The scheme is voluntary everywhere it is used, and in the UAE it is a secondary instrument. New buildings in Dubai are governed by Al Sa'fat, Dubai Municipality's green building system, whose Silver tier is the mandatory baseline, and buildings in Abu Dhabi are governed by the Estidama Pearl Building Rating System. Those are the local instruments and a voluntary international assessment does not replace either of them or discharge any obligation under them. A separate resource covers the local requirements in detail.
That standard assesses decisions and evidence associated with delivering a new building. An occupied asset does not usually have the same opportunity to revisit site selection, orientation, structure or original system design, so the question would be the wrong one.
The In-Use scheme adds Acceptable below Pass. It provides an additional classified band at the lower end of that particular scale, reflecting the wide variation in age, condition, system type and management maturity across existing buildings.
No. The scheme can compare assets within a controlled portfolio programme, but that internal comparison is not the same as a published regional market percentile, and no verified UAE or Middle Eastern distribution has been established.
This is an independent information resource. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or connected to BRE. BREEAM and BRE are the trademarks of their respective owners and are used here only to identify the scheme described.