SRI core methodology

For each technical domain (d), smart-ready services $$(S_{i,d})$$ shall be defined by Member States, as part of a smart-ready catalogues, including their related functionality levels $$(FL(S_{i,d}))$$, and corresponding individual scores for each impact criterion $$(I_{ic}(FL(S_{i,d})))$$. The smart-ready catalogues shall reflect the state of art of smart-ready technologies, which may be different among building types. Hence, several smart-ready catalogues may exist. The smart-ready service catalogue shall define the maximum score of each technical domain for each impact criterion $$(I_{max}(d,ic))$$.

Member States shall define the respective weighting factors $$(W_{d,ic})$$ characterising the influence of each technical domain (d) on each impact criterion (ἰc). Such factors ought to be expressed as a percentage, the sum of which ought to be 100% for each impact criterion. Weighting factors may be different between building types. As a result, it is possible to obtain the smart readiness score for each impact criterion $$(SR_{ic})$$.

Member States shall define the respective weighting factors $$(W_{f,ic})$$ of relevant impact criteria (ἰc) within each key functionality (ƒ), which enables to obtain smart readiness scores $$(SR_{f})$$ along the three key functionalities. Next, the weighting factor $$(W_{f})$$ indicate the influence of each key functionality (ƒ) in the total smart readiness score $$(SR)$$. Ultimately, the ratio between the smart readiness of the building or building unit compared to the maximum smart readiness that it could reach results in the smart readiness rating. The ratio yields a rating based on the seven-class scale: 90-100%; 80-90%; 65-80%; 50-65%; 35-50%; 20-35%; <20%, ranging from highest to lowest smart readiness.