Local Buildings Audits
A Guidance Note for Dioceses
Church Commissioners
October 2008
CONTENTS
Subject
1.
Introduction
Reviewing activities
Recommendation 40 of the Toyne Report
2.
5.1
5.2
5.3
Commissioning Body
The Diocesan Synod or the DMPC
Resourcing the audit
Submitting the report
Reviewing progress on the implementation of recommendations
7.
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
When might an audit be appropriate?
Matters to be reviewed
Financial issues
A rolling programme
6.
3.1
3.2
Who this note is for
Dioceses wishing to carry out buildings audits
Responding to change
How local buildings audits can help
The local congregation
Advantages of a Diocesan audit
5.
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Guidance
Discussing your plans with or visiting other dioceses
Where to get relevant advice
4.
1.1
1.2
Why have an Audit?
To consider the role of buildings in the Church’s mission
Scope for wider use of buildings
The main reasons for carrying out a local buildings audit
How these notes can help
3.
Section
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
The Audit Group
Who should be part of it
Membership
Getting the balance of membership right
Appointing a secretary
Procedure
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
8.
Setting Objectives
Terms of reference
Keeping an open mind
Realistic expectations
Interim reports
Reviewing the programme
9.
Gathering Information
Collecting and collating information
A profile for the Diocese
Consulting interested parties
Timing of consultations
When the future of a church is in doubt
An Innovative approach
Legislation, consultations, feasibility, and finance
10.
11.1
11.2
11.3
11.4
11.5
11.6
Possible Outcomes
Some possible outcomes
If a church is no longer fulfilling a role
Pastoral reorganisation
Future provision for churches closed for regular public worship
The financial burden
Churches as sacred spaces
13.
10.1
10.2
Responding to the options presented by the Audit Group
The Commissioning Body’s initial response
Meetings with those affected by recommendations
The impact of the recommendations on existing pastoral strategy
The statutory processes
The proposed timescale
Revising the report
12.
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7
Preparing the Draft Audit Report
Analysing information, reviewing objectives
Interim report
11.
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
12.1
12.2
12.3
12.4
12.5
12.6
What happens next?
Diocese to consider response to recommendations
Keeping recommendations under review
Useful Contacts
13.1
13.2
Annexes
1.
2..
3.
4.
Extract from “A Measure for Measures: In mission and ministry
Flowchart
Terms of Reference template
Questionnaire template
Guidance Note for Dioceses on carrying out Local Buildings Audits
1.
Introduction
1.1
Any organisation will wish to review its activities from time to time to ensure that they
are relevant and appropriate and properly resourced. Such reviews also provide an
opportunity to consider innovative approaches to working and rationalising resources
to meet changing needs. Strategic reviews of church buildings in a particular locality will
always be integral to any ongoing review of the arrangements for the provision and
deployment of church buildings as resources for mission and community outreach
(including the ecumenical dimension).
1.2
Recommendation 40 of the Toyne Report on the review of the Dioceses, Pastoral and
related Measures 1 proposed that:The [Pastoral Measure] Code of Practice should provide guidance to assist dioceses
who wish to carry out local building audits.
A copy of the relevant extract from the Report is attached to this note as Annex 1.
2.
Why have an audit?
2.1
Every church building was designed for a purpose – to be a centre for the Church’s
mission and worship and to demonstrate God’s love for the world. Many have become
buildings of historic and architectural importance which are valued by worshippers and
non-worshippers alike. The purpose of an audit is to help you to decide the place of
buildings in carrying out the Church’s mission, while being objective about both the
buildings themselves and the activities they cater for. It is vital to make sure that your
proposals fit with both sets of requirements or they simply will not work.
2.2
Most buildings have scope for wider use for their community or network. Often this
can be the key to a sustainable future.
2.3
Among the main reasons for carrying out a local buildings audit are:






1
to identify areas of opportunity for mission and outreach
to consider whether the location of existing church buildings is suitable for
delivering future mission initiatives
to consider the wider potential of church buildings to serve the community around
them
to help to make the best use of buildings as assets
to ensure the consultation process is as wide-ranging as possible in order to secure
a measure of agreement to proposals for changing or developing the way in which
church buildings are used
to agree a process for implementing recommendations about the future provision
and use of church buildings and other parochial property.
“A Measure for Measures: In mission and ministry” (GS 1528) © The Archbishops’ Council 2004
2.4
The notes which follow are not intended to be exhaustive but it is hoped that they will
provide a framework to help this process, i.e. to help assess the significance of churches
and other parochial building(s) and the needs of the community around them. This
should help you to clarify what initiatives you can best take to develop mission and
outreach to the community whilst continuing to meet the needs of regular worshippers.
Note: For the purpose of this note churches are defined as “buildings” not
people; “other parochial buildings” include church halls, parsonage houses,
team vicars’ houses.
3. Guidance
3.1
If you are thinking about undertaking a local buildings audit, either as a discrete exercise
or as part of a wider-ranging review of diocesan strategy for mission and outreach, you
may find it helpful to discuss your plans with or visit dioceses where similar exercises
have resulted in exciting and innovative outreach developments within the wider
community.
3.2
There are a number of individuals and organisations that can advise on carrying out an
audit and will run workshops for the people likely to be involved. Guidance on some
aspects of this process is available on www.churchcare.co.uk website, which includes
details of grant-making bodies that may be able to assist in funding parts of a review or
feasibility studies.
4.
Who this Note is for
4.1
There are a number of different ways of approaching an audit depending on its scope
and scale. This note is relevant to dioceses wishing to carry out buildings audits working
through archdeaconries or rural deaneries. Usually this will be an element of a widerranging review of the provision of worship and mission or in the context of a review of
the churches. The flow chart at Annex 2 provides a possible template for carrying out
an audit.
Note: A separate guidance note is available for those wishing to carry out a
smaller-scale, e.g. benefice, parish or deanery audit.
4.2
It has for a long time been the role of the Diocesan Pastoral Committee (DMPC) to
advise the Bishop on the “provision for the cure of souls” in the diocese, which includes
the type and number of buildings to provide for worship and mission. As a result of
changes in demography and mobility, the decreasing number of stipendiary clergy, the
changing shape of finances and the skills of church members, there is an increasing
awareness of the value of a broader approach to this task.
4.3
Those dioceses that have already begun work on local buildings audits have recognised
that this is but one part of the decision-making framework with regards to the provision
for the cure of souls. Indeed within the framework it is not the primary filter but rather
a part of the means of delivering a goal.
4.4
Although as the established Church we are required to consider the needs of the whole
community we must also have regard to the needs and abilities of the local
congregation.
4.5
Some advantages of a Diocesan audit are:





an approach which is more consistent and objective
a wider range of factors considered
outcomes which are better able to provide for the variety of needs
a framework for implementation following consultation
to remove the “surprise” from proposals for pastoral reorganisation.
5.
When might an audit be appropriate?
5.1
When you are considering some or all of the following (depending on the scale or scope
of the process):







5.2
looking ahead and developing a strategic plan for the next 5, 10 or 20 years
providing continuity of worship and community outreach while developing and
initiating change
a review of priorities for mission, outreach and evangelism
changing approaches to ministry
a review of clergy deployment and numbers
reassessing the needs of church buildings and other parochial buildings
exploring the possibilities for working ecumenically and ecumenical relationships.
These in themselves may be connected to financial issues such as:



the cost of funding and maintaining ministry being sustainable
identifying priority areas and targeting resources on areas of need and
opportunity
the cost of maintaining (or not) church and other parochial buildings (churches,
church halls).
5.3
This should not be regarded as a one-off process but should be part of a rolling
programme with regular reviews.
6.
Commissioning Body
6.1
The Diocesan Synod or the DMPC is likely to be the body that commissions a diocesan
audit. It will also set the Terms of Reference, define the theological framework for the
review and appoint the Chair and members of the Audit Group.
6.2
The Commissioning Body should consider, in conjunction with the Diocesan Board of
Finance (DBF), how the audit is to be resourced and agree a realistic budget for the
process including publication and dissemination of the final report. This should be
reviewed from time to time.
6.3
The Audit Group will submit its report to the Commissioning Body, which will be
responsible for deciding whether and how it should be disseminated.
6.4
The Commissioning Body will also be responsible for reviewing progress on the
implementation of the agreed recommendations arising from the report.
7.
The Audit Group
7.1
The Audit Group should reflect local circumstances and the scale or scope of the
exercise. It should draw in people with relevant expertise who will contribute positively
to the exercise. Local involvement and input is vital to the success of such an audit but
it is also important to involve external parties with knowledge and experience of dealing
with the issues likely to arise and to advise on the feasibility of emerging options.
7.2
Membership could be drawn from some or all of the following groups (depending on the
scale or scope of the exercise):Church
archdeacon(s), rural deans, clerical and lay representatives of
deanery synods, other parochial clergy or lay members, diocesan
advisers, representatives of other Christian churches, DMPC
nominee.
Conservation and English Heritage, Local Planning Authorities, Diocesan Advisory
planning
Committee representatives.
7.3
Getting the balance of membership of the Audit Group right will be vital – large enough
to cover all areas of interest/expertise but small enough to be manageable and enable
collaborative working and a unified approach to the task. The Audit Group may find it
more effective to set up smaller sub-groups to tackle discrete areas of the audit ideally
with some cross-membership to ensure a cohesive approach and to avoid duplication of
effort. The Audit Group should have power to co-opt members with relevant
knowledge or expertise to assist or advise on specific issues not covered by the existing
membership.
7.4
The diocese should appoint the Secretary to the Audit Group and provide the
appropriate resources to enable the Secretary to discharge his or her functions.
7.5
The Audit Group should have power to regulate its own procedure and it should ensure
that all meetings are properly constituted and minuted.
8.
Setting Objectives
8.1
As mentioned in paragraph 6.1 the Commissioning Body should provide the “Terms of
Reference” for the Audit Group and these should set the deadline for delivery of the
report. An example of possible Terms of Reference is contained in Annex 3 as a guide;
the actual terms will, of course, need to be tailored to reflect the scale and scope of the
audit.
8.2
The Audit Group will no doubt wish to establish its own processes relating to the
Terms of Reference. An audit will be more productive if the Group does not have
preconceived ideas about a particular outcome. Fresh ideas and initiatives may emerge
during consultations that could lead to a radical re-think, for instance about the way
buildings are used, and could facilitate the continuing use of a church building that might
previously have been considered for closure.
8.3
The diocese and the Audit Group should be realistic about what the audit will achieve
and how long it might take to produce the final report. Setting objectives that are too
narrowly defined may constrain the Audit Group from considering more innovative
proposals. Similarly, it is important to set a realistic time-frame for the delivery of
different stages of the exercise e.g. preparation of the report, consultation, review,
decision-making and implementation. The size of the task will impact on the timescale.
8.4
The Audit Group should keep the momentum going by making interim reports of its
work to the Commissioning Body. These could usefully highlight emerging and
innovative ideas; similarly they could alert the Commissioning Body to any particular
problems that might impact on the Audit Group’s ability to deliver the objectives or
meet the deadlines set out in the Terms of Reference.
8.5
The audit group will need to review its programme from time to time, including the
timescale, to check that it is still relevant and realistic, and be ready to adapt the
programme in the light of emerging ideas and changing circumstances.
9.
Gathering Information
9.1
A vital initial part of the buildings audit process will be collecting and collating
information about the churches and other parochial buildings under review, the
communities in which they are located and other relevant matters. Annex 4 suggests a
template for gathering information. This can be downloaded from the Church of
England website at http://www.churchofengland.org/clergy-officeholders/pastoralandclosedchurches/commonresources/lbas.aspx.
9.2
The Audit Group will need to obtain relevant information that enables it to build up a
profile for the diocese on a wide range of factors. In part this will depend on the scale
and scope of the review. The profile should include reference to age profiling,
employment and deprivation indices; transport networks and journey times; how many
hours people spend at work; the Geographical Information System (GIS); regional spatial
strategies, development land policies and information on conservation areas; ethnic
make up; as well as information on the buildings of other denominations and the
possibility of church sharing and church schools. To avoid duplication of effort the
Audit Group should ask parishes or deaneries for any information they already hold that
could be relevant to the audit.
9.3
In addition to collating factual information to build up a diocesan profile the Audit
Group should also consult others with an interest in the future of the buildings within
the wider community. As well as the obvious consultees such as diocesan and parochial
clergy and parochial representatives, the Audit Group may find it helpful to consult
and/or meet representatives of some or all of the following on the basis of its initial
thoughts and how their forward plans would affect the outcome of a strategic audit:




relevant diocesan committees
other Christian denominations
other faiths
Church Buildings Council









9.4
local government representatives, councillors
English Heritage
Regional Government Office
local amenity group(s)
other community representatives
social services
health and education providers
other voluntary groups
regional cultural consortium
The Audit Group should consider carefully the timing and nature of its consultations.
Initially these will be fact-finding exercises. However, as possible options begin to
emerge, the Group may wish to carry out further consultations with parishes, local
groups and other stakeholders on specific proposals. The Group should make it clear
that these are preliminary proposals only and that it would be up to the Commissioning
Body to decide whether or not to implement them.
9.5
If, during the course of the consultation exercise, the Audit Group feels that the future
of a particular church or group of churches as places of regular worship may be in doubt
the DMPC should, at the earliest opportunity, invite the Church Buildings Council to
prepare reports on all those church buildings. The purpose of these reports is to
identify the historic interest and architectural quality of these buildings, their contents
and any special features of attached churchyard. They will help to inform discussions
about the buildings but do not imply a commitment to a particular course of action.
The most recent Quinquennial Inspection Report will need to be consulted for each
building together with an up to date estimate of the cost of essential repairs.
9.6
By adopting an open-minded approach to the review process, and its outcome, the
Audit Group will be able to think innovatively about the use potential of church and
other parochial buildings (including halls and other church land if appropriate) in
providing for worship and mission. Consideration of the wider or extended use of
church buildings may need to be related to any diocesan strategy for developing mission
and outreach.
9.7
As the Audit Group’s ideas begin to take shape it will need to consider other matters
such as whether the implementation of recommendations would fall under the Pastoral
Measure, faculty jurisdiction and/or civil legislation. Consideration should be given to
the role and policies of the civil authorities in any development, including the Highways
Authority/ies, and the consents required to realise the Group’s vision. The Audit
Group should adjust its timescale for delivering the recommendations to take account
of the necessary consultations and applications for relevant consents. Questions relating
to feasibility and finance will also need to be addressed.
10.
Preparing the Draft Audit Report
10.1
The Audit Group should collate and analyse all the information obtained and use the
results to review the objectives set at the outset of the audit or as subsequently revised.
10.2
The Audit Group should prepare an interim report summarising its findings and any
financial implications setting out possible options for consideration by the
Commissioning Body.
11.
Responding to the options presented by the Audit Group
11.1
The Commissioning Body will wish to satisfy itself that the report meets the Terms of
Reference and then form an initial view on the options presented by the Audit Group.
It will then need to consider its response, including the need to obtain further
information, before deciding whether and how the report and the Commissioning
Body’s conclusions should be disseminated.
11.2
The Commissioning Body may wish to organise meetings with those likely to be most
closely affected by the recommendations to discuss their response to the report and, in
particular, to consider and address any concerns they may have. Those likely to be
involved in these meetings are:






the appropriate diocesan committee(s)
deanery representatives
parochial clergy
parochial church council(s)
local planning authority
other groups as appropriate
11.3
In the light of the report and further consultation the DMPC will need to consider the
impact of the recommendations on the existing diocesan pastoral strategy and what
further consultations may be needed to gain acceptance. It should also consider what
the financial implications are to the diocese of adopting some or all of the
recommendations.
11.4
The Commissioning Body will need be clear about the statutory processes that may
need to be completed in pursuing the various options recommended by the Audit
Group. Where recommendations for pastoral reorganisation fall within the ambit of the
Pastoral Measure the process requires further consultations with the statutory
interested parties e.g. incumbents, patrons, PCCs, priests-in-charge, archdeacons, rural
deans and, where the closure of a church for regular public worship is proposed, the
Local Planning Authority, English Heritage and the Joint Committee of National Amenity
Societies. Where the changes are subject require a faculty, provision must be made for
the completion of the appropriate consultations and application.
11.5
Although one of the aims of the audit is to remove the element of surprise from
proposals for pastoral reorganisation this does not mean that some will not be
contested. The proposed timescale for delivering the recommendations should,
therefore, allow for the completion of these statutory procedures, including the
consideration by the Church Commissioners of any representations against the
proposals. An allowance should also be made for the time it will take to obtain any
other consents that may be required or the response to grant applications.
11.6
Following these and any other appropriate consultations, and in the light of the
responses received, the Commissioning Body will need to consider possible revisions to
the report. It should then make the final report available to the interested parties as
before ensuring that there is a proper audit trail of all consultations carried out during
the review.
12.
Possible Outcomes
12.1
Some possible outcomes of this audit, depending on the scale or scope of the review,
and the potential for church buildings to respond to the diocese’s mission and outreach
strategies could be:







a different structure for the deployment of clergy across the diocese
sustaining/enhancing existing forms of liturgy
developing new patterns of mission and ministry
providing opportunities/training for parishes wishing to cater for wider community
use of their buildings
identifying areas of need and opportunity where a church presence is needed
rationalising buildings in areas of over supply
discussing the future of church buildings no longer required for regular public
worship.
12.2
Having considered the options mentioned above, which are not intended to be
definitive, you should be in a position to make a reasoned assessment of any church(es)
that are no longer capable of fulfilling a role in providing for worship and mission even
after all options have been considered. If a church falls into this category you should
convene meetings with the various church and secular interested parties to discuss
possible options for the future of the building before taking any steps to close it for
regular public worship – see paragraph 11.4.
12.3
Pastoral reorganisation, including the closure of a church for regular public worship,
requires the DMPC to ascertain the views of the statutory interested parties before
submitting the Bishop’s proposals to the Church Commissioners. The Commissioners’
role is to issue a draft pastoral scheme based on the proposals and serve statutory
notices on the statutory interested parties. They also place a public notice in a local
newspaper. Anyone may make written representations to the Commissioners for or
against the draft scheme and the Commissioners have a duty to consider any objections
received. Schemes that do not attract objections will automatically proceed. Where
objections are received representors may attend and speak at the Commissioners’
Committee meeting when the case is considered. If the Committee decides that the
scheme should proceed those who made objections may seek leave to appeal against
that decision to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
12.4
Where a suitable alternative use has been found before a church is closed the pastoral
scheme may also make provision for its appropriation and disposal for the new use. A
pastoral scheme may also provide for the replacement of one church by another church
or unconsecrated place of worship; in these cases all of the proceeds arising from the
disposal of the old church may be used towards the cost of providing the new one.
Further information about the process can be found at http://www.ccpastoral.org.
12.5
You should bear in mind that closing a building for regular public worship does not
relieve the Church of a financial burden; it transfers it from the parochial church council
to the DBF unless a use or other solution is available at the point of closure. Where
there is a lengthy use-seeking period, the cost to the diocese could be substantial, even
with the help available from the Temporary Maintenance Account. Where a building is
not maintained properly, there is a financial risk as its value will reduce and there is also
the reputational risk to the Church if it is allowed to deteriorate.
12.6
There will, of course, be churches, which continue to witness to the Christian faith and
where any new developments will be inadmissible and unacceptable, either because of
location or sensitivity of historic fabric, and closure inappropriate. Such churches should
be valued for what they are, as “ sacred spaces” set aside for worship. These churches
are vital to the Church’s ministry providing a quiet place for worship, meditation and
reflection, available to regular worshippers and other visitors alike.
13
What happens next?
13.1
This will depend to a large extent on the recommendations agreed in the light of the
report. For dioceses it may be part of a larger process that could affect the deployment
of clergy and which may have to be debated by the Diocesan Synod. It would fall to the
DMPC to take forward any pastoral reorganisation that was felt to be appropriate in the
light of the report – see paragraphs 12.4-5.
13.2
The commissioning body should keep the implementation of the report’s
recommendations under review.
Church Commissioners
October 2008
USEFUL CONTACTS
Diocesan Secretaries’ Liaison Group
English Heritage Regional Office
Local Government Association
Regional Assembly (as regional planning authority)
Regional Development Agencies
Government Regional Offices
Geographical Information System
Joint Committee of National Amenity Societies
ANNEX 1
Extract from “A Measure for Measure: In mission and ministry” 2
Facilitating strategic reviews of church building needs
Recommendation 40
The Code of Practice [to the Pastoral Measure] should provide guidance to assist
dioceses who wish to carry out local buildings audits.
4.14
Closure for regular public worship is usually pursued as a “bottom up” process at the
request of an individual parish but the Measure enables a more strategic review of
building needs as part of the DMPC’s general oversight of provision for the cure of souls
in the diocese as a whole. Strategic reviews of church buildings in a particular locality
are still fairly unusual, although, for example, some dioceses have in the context of
deanery plans reviewed the provision and deployment of church buildings as resources
for mission (including the ecumenical dimension). Potential obstacles to undertaking
wider needs reviews include lack of resources, local opinion, blight, concerns at the
length of the process, and the DBF’s responsibility for the care and maintenance of any
churches subsequently closed until their future is settled.
4.15
For such a process to stand the test of time it needs to be built on local involvement but
we have considered the case for a national dimension, for example requiring diocesan
strategy plans to be prepared with reference to national guidance on the provision and
deployment of church buildings. On balance we feel this would be unhelpful and that
the subject is more appropriate for the Code of Practice than the legislation itself. The
Code might include guidance on buildings audits, developing on the experience of
exercises such as that recently carried out jointly by the diocese of Manchester and
English Heritage. The current work of the Church Heritage Forum3 already referred to
is similarly likely to lead to further recommendation in this area.
GS 1528 © Archbishops’ Council 2004
“Building Faith in our future” © Archbishops’ Council 2004
2
3
Diocesan Audits
ANNEX 2
Circumstances where an audit is appropriate
Consult/visit dioceses that have carried out similar
exercises. Obtain professional advice and guidance
Commissioning Body sets up Audit Group, provides the
terms of reference and sets realistic targets
Decide upon the mechanics for undertaking the audit –
draw on people with relevant expertise, consider setting
up sub-groups
‘Audit group’ establishes programme for delivering
different stages of process
Gather information. Consider asking parishes to
complete the form in Annex 4. Collect factual
information about the building(s), location(s) and needs
of the particular area. Consult user groups and others in
the community
If the future of a/a group of church(es) is/are in doubt
invite the CBC to prepare reports
Audit Group collects and analyses all information
obtained, reviews objectives, and prepares a report
summarising findings and options
Commissioning Body to consider its response to the
options recommended and how report is to be
publicised
Commissioning Body to organise meetings with those
likely to be affected by the recommendations
Commissioning Body to be aware of any relevant
statutory/legislative procedures
Make any further revisions to the report prior to
circulation to interested parties
Think innovatively about possible outcomes e.g.
adaptations to buildings, encouraging wider use,
establishing links. Consider the need to relate to any
diocesan wide mission and outreach strategies
ANNEX 3
Terms of Reference for Diocesan Buildings Audit
Background
The “commissioning body” recognises that:
 the people of God are the principal agents of mission: buildings either support and enhance or
hinder and undermine that mission.
 parochial, deanery and diocesan resources are finite and these resources need to be targeted to
encourage as many parishes as possible to thrive
 how we deal with our material resources certainly reflects something of the way we perceive
God. For example, the fact that consecrated Church buildings “belong” to God and are held in
trust by human beings should remind us that whatever our personal investment in a Church
building and no matter how much we like it or are attached to it, it can never be “ours” or
“mine”.
Scope of Audit
All of the Church buildings within the Diocese (Deanery of …) will be included. The aim is to identify a
number of different groups of Church buildings based on the mission needs of the Church, including
 those that are “fit for purpose” and provide – or could provide within the available resources – a
suitable venue for Christian worship, outreach and mission
 those that are in a poor state of repair or not fit for purpose and which the parish is unlikely to be
able to bring into a fit state within 3-5 years given the available resources
 those from which withdrawal is likely to compromise the Church’s mission
 those from which withdrawal need not compromise the Church’s mission, provided that suitable
alternative provision for worship is made.
In arriving at its recommendations the Audit Group will take account of:
1. each building’s fitness for purpose as a place of worship and/or centre of mission and outreach, and
the costs of adapting it to improve its fitness;
2. whether or not each building is strategically located in terms of mission and outreach, including its
proximity to other Anglican buildings and to the places of worship and other buildings of our
ecumenical partners
3. the building’s current state of repair and the cost of bringing it into a good state of repair
4. the costs of running the building so that it is adequately heated, lit, insured, cleaned and maintained
5. the building’s contribution to community life through its use as a community facility
6. the building’s contribution to the wider community through its presence as a building
7. whether or not withdrawal and closure would compromise or benefit the Church’s mission.
Membership and Timescale
The Audit will be led by a group comprising of the Archdeacons, etc, with a chair appointed by the
commissioning body
or
The Audit will be carried out by a group within each deanery comprising of the Area Dean, Lay Chair
and a representative from each parish.
The group will give an interim report to the “commissioning body” within 6 months of the
commencement date and a final report 3 months later.
ANNEX 4
LOCAL BUILDINGS AUDIT
1
PARISH
MISSION AND OUTREACH
2
3
4
5
6
Number of people on
electoral role
Services: Please list
the number of
services that take
place on each day.
Number of Clergy
(including NSMs and
retired clergy who
regularly take
services).
Number of Lay
Readers
How many people in
total usually attend a
service on Sundays?
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
Under
Fives
5 - 12
13 – 18
Adults
Under
Fives
5 - 12
13 – 18
Adults
7
How many people in
total usually attend the
services held on other
days?
8
Use of the Church Building for Purposes Other Than Services
Who uses it?
What do they use it for?
How often do they use it?
9
Is the church open to
visitors (apart from
services)?
Yes/N
o
10
How often is the church
Annually
Comments:
Monthly
Weekly
Never
Other
used for concerts/other
cultural or social
events?
11
Is the parish part of a
wider grouping?
12
Is it a multi-parish
benefice? If so, please
give details
What other forms of
mission/outreach are
engaged in? Please list.
13
14
15
What plans does the
parish have for
extending outreach
work?
(a) Does the Parish
share buildings/acts of
worship with other
Christian
denominations?
(b)Is there a formal
sharing agreement?
Comments:
Team
Group
Other (please specify)
Examples might include: Alpha, home groups, working with
the disadvantaged…
Yes/N
o
If yes, with which bodies?
Please list below.
Where?
How
frequently?
Where?
How
frequently?
Yes/
No
If yes, with which bodies?
Please list below.
16
LEP
Is the parish likely to be
affected by any
developments that
could result in an
(i)
increase or reduction in
the population within
the next 10 years? If so, (ii)
what is the likely
impact on (i) the parish,
and (ii) the church?
CHURCH
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Name of the church
Location of the church
Date of construction (if
known)
Architect (if known)
Is the church listed
under the Town and
Country Planning Act?
Does
the
church
contain
important
contents? If yes please
list these on a separate
sheet
Is the church of
archaeological
importance?
When was the last
Quinquennial
Inspection Report?
Please attach a copy
Has a Statement of
Need/Significance been
prepared?
Attach a copy (or if the
church is listed or in a
conservation area a
conservation plan)
What sort of condition
is the church building
in?
If applicable, what is
the current repair cost
for the church?
(urgent/within the next
5 years)
(a) Is it a dual-purpose
building?
(b) What non-worship
facilities are available
within the church
building? Please list.
Yes/No
If you answered yes, please attach a copy of the
listing notice.
Yes/No
Yes/No/
Don’t know
Comments:
Yes/No
Good
Fair
Poor
Yes/No
Examples might include: meeting rooms, kitchens, toilets, etc
PARISH LAND
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Is there a churchyard
Yes/No
attached to the church?
Only answer Questions 30 – 32 if you answered yes for Question 29
Is the churchyard a
site of archaeological
Yes/No
significance?
Does the churchyard
Yes/No
contain any burials?
If yes to Question 30,
The churchyard
Over 50 yrs Between 50
In the last
how long ago was the
is still open for
ago
& 25 yrs ago
25 yrs
last burial?
burials
Who maintains the
churchyard?
Are there any listed
memorials and/or...
…tombstones/chests on
parish land? If yes,
please list
Is there a War
memorial?
Is any unburied land
available for reuse/development?
Yes/No
Yes/No
Comments:
Yes/No
OTHER PAROCHIAL BUILDINGS
37
Please list the number
and location of
parsonage houses.
Please include what
facilities are available
and by whom the
house(s) are used.
38
Please list the number
and location of
parochial houses.
Please include what
facilities are available
and by whom the
house(s) are used.
39
Please fill in the following information about the church hall (if applicable), if there is
more than one church hall then please give answers to the questions asked below on a
separate piece of paper:
Location of the church
hall
Date of construction
A
B
C
Facilities available in
the hall (please list)
D
Who uses the hall and
how often?
E
What is the current
state of repair of the
hall? Is a survey report
available?
User
Comments:
Frequency
F
What is the estimated
cost of repair (if
applicable)
OTHER CHURCH-OWNED PROPERTY
40
41
42
Is there any
immediately adjacent
land in church
ownership? (Please list)
Are there any facilities
available for use by the
parish? (Please list)
Please list (if
applicable) any
buildings used by the
parish but owned by
other Christian bodies
FINANCIAL MATTERS
43
What is the annual
income from use of the
church and church
hall(s)? (Please list)
Venue
Annual Income
44
Are there any other
regular sources of
income e.g. collections,
covenants, trust funds?
What is the annual
income from these
sources? (Please list)
Source
Annual Income
45
Please list annual
outgoings under the
following categories:
46
What funds are
available to meet the
outgoings?
What funds are
available for
quinquennial repairs to
buildings?
Grants applied for:
47
48
The church
What for?
The church hall
Body applied
to
ACCESS AND LEGAL ISSUES
49
How is access to the
church and other
buildings obtained? Is
any part of access over
third party land? Have
rights of access been
granted by deed? If yes,
What are the details of
these rights? Please list
50
Are church and hall
buildings compliant
with the Disability
Discrimination Act? If
no, could they be made
so?
Has there been a
51
Yes/No
Yes/
Comments:
Other parish costs
Amou
nt
asked
for
Successful?
disability audit?
52
As far as is known are
there any restrictions
on the title?
53
Are any [parts of]
buildings subject to
restrictive covenants or
a reverter? If yes,
please list
54
Is the churchyard
subject to an Open
Spaces Act agreement?
Are there any other
issues that might hinder
extension/alternative
use?
55
No
Yes/
No
Yes/No
Yes/No
Comments:
Comments:
Comments:
LOCATION AND LOCAL DEMOGRAPHICS
56
57
Population of the
parish
Type of location
58
Please comment on the
availability of parking
59
Please comment on the
availability of public
transport
60
Please comment on the
availability of
community transport
61
Please comment on the
sociological make-up of
the area
Urban
Sub-Urban
Rural
Seaside
62
Please list other
denominations and/or
faiths that are
represented in the area
63
Please list any schools
in the area
64
Please list any health
providers/community
service providers in the
area
65
Please list any other
community buildings in
the area
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
66
Additional comments
from the Parochial
Church Council(s)
67
Additional comments
from other regular
users of any or all of
the church buildings
68
Additional comments
from the District
Church Council(s)
69
Additional comments
from the Deanery
Synod(s)
70
Additional comments
from the wider
community