GRIP vs PACE: What Changed for Network Rail Projects

July 15, 2022

3 minute read

Nick Woodrow

Operations Director at Gather

In this article

Network Rail scrapped GRIP in favour of PACE back in 2021. If you're working on rail infrastructure projects, you've probably noticed the difference. Fewer stage gates. Faster decisions. Less waiting around for sign-offs that used to take weeks.

But what exactly changed? And more importantly, what does PACE mean for how you manage records, handle variations, and protect your commercial position on rail projects?

This guide breaks down the practical differences between the two frameworks, shows you what PACE looks like in action, and explains what it means for contractors working on Network Rail projects today.

The 30-Second Summary

GRIP had eight sequential stages with formal gate reviews between each one. Teams couldn't progress until they'd completed every requirement and received sign-off. This created rigour, but it also created delays.

PACE has four main phases that can overlap where it makes sense. Decision-making authority sits with project teams rather than requiring escalation through multiple management layers. The aim is to keep the control without the bureaucracy.

The result? The Dartmoor Railway Line went from concept to construction in eight weeks under PACE. Under GRIP, that process would have taken months.

GRIP: The Framework That Served Rail for 20 Years

Network Rail introduced GRIP (Governance for Railway Investment Projects) in 2000 to bring structure and risk management to rail infrastructure delivery. For two decades, it was the standard approach for any project enhancing or renewing the operational railway.

The Eight GRIP Stages

GRIP divided every project into eight distinct stages, each with specific deliverables and a formal gate review before progression:

Stage	Name	Purpose
1	Output Definition	Define the needs and requirements of the project
2	Feasibility	Assess whether outputs can be delivered economically
3	Option Selection	Evaluate options and select the preferred solution
4	Single Option Development	Develop outline design for the chosen option
5	Detailed Design	Complete detailed design and prepare for construction
6	Construction, Test and Commission	Build, test and commission the works
7	Scheme Hand Back	Hand back to operations and close out construction
8	Project Close Out	Complete final accounts and capture lessons learned

The approach was product-driven rather than process-driven. Each stage had an agreed set of deliverables that had to be completed before moving forward.

GRIP vs PACE comparison Network Rail — **© Network Rail**

The approach was product-driven rather than process-driven. Each stage had an agreed set of deliverables that had to be completed before moving forward.

What Each Gate Required

Before progressing through each gate, teams had to demonstrate they'd met specific requirements. This created thoroughness, but also created bottlenecks:

Gate	Key Requirements Before Progression	Typical Duration
Gate 1→2	Strategic fit confirmed, funding route identified, stakeholders mapped	4-8 weeks
Gate 2→3	Feasibility study complete, outline business case, initial risk assessment	8-16 weeks
Gate 3→4	Options appraised, preferred option selected, outline design started	12-24 weeks
Gate 4→5	Single option developed, land requirements confirmed, planning submissions	16-32 weeks
Gate 5→6	Detailed design complete, all approvals obtained, contracts awarded	20-40 weeks
Gate 6→7	Construction complete, testing done, safety certification obtained	Varies by scope
Gate 7→8	Operational handover complete, defects liability period started	4-12 weeks

Why GRIP Worked (Initially)

GRIP brought genuine benefits when it was introduced:

Risk Reduction: The staged approach caught problems early, before they became expensive to fix. Gate reviews provided assurance that projects were ready to progress.

Consistency: Every project followed the same framework. Teams moving between projects understood the process. Clients knew what to expect.

Governance: Clear accountability at each stage. Documented decision-making. Audit trails that stood up to scrutiny.

Where GRIP Started Causing Problems

Over time, the rigidity that provided control started creating different problems:

Sequential Bottlenecks: Teams couldn't work in parallel. Civil engineers waited for design sign-off. Procurement waited for civil. Every delay cascaded forward.

Escalation Overhead: Minor decisions required approval from multiple management tiers. A project manager couldn't approve a sensible change without escalating through layers of governance.

Disproportionate Process: A small footbridge required the same stage-gate rigour as a major station rebuild. The process didn't flex to match project complexity.

Time and Cost Creep: The bureaucracy added weeks to project timelines. Those weeks cost money. And the industry was under pressure to deliver more for less.

Mike Wright, Network Rail's Capital Investment Programme Director, summarised the problem: the goal was "to keep the rigour of GRIP but not control projects so excessively that we are adding extra time and cost to the delivery."

PACE: The Framework Built for Speed

PACE (Project Acceleration in a Controlled Environment) received Network Rail board approval in November 2020 and began rolling out to projects from January 2021.

It emerged from Project SPEED (Swift, Pragmatic and Efficient Enhancement Delivery), a joint initiative between the Department for Transport and Network Rail focused on cutting both the time and cost of project delivery.

The Four PACE Phases

PACE condenses the eight GRIP stages into four main phases:

Phase	Name	Purpose
0	Initiate	Initial project setup before formal phases begin
1	Strategic Development & Project Selection	Define requirements, assess feasibility, select approach
2	Project Design	Develop and complete design, prepare for delivery
3	Project Delivery	Construct, test, commission and hand back
4	Project Close	Complete closeout activities and capture lessons

The critical difference isn't just fewer phases. It's that these phases can overlap. Teams can work in parallel where it makes sense, rather than waiting for sequential handoffs.

The Philosophy Behind PACE

PACE isn't just GRIP with fewer stages. It's built on fundamentally different principles:

Principle	What It Means	How PACE Delivers It
Outcome-Focused	Measure success by results, not process followed	Reduced mandatory products, focus on value-adding deliverables
Accountability & Empowerment	Give teams authority, hold them accountable	Delegated decision-making, clear ownership at project level
Integrity & Trust	Trust professionals without excessive checking	Reduced approval layers, assurance proportionate to risk
Service Focus	Remember the end user – passengers and freight	Faster delivery means benefits realised sooner

Level of Control: Governance That Scales

One of PACE's most significant changes is tailoring governance to project complexity. Not every project needs the same level of oversight:

Level	Project Type	Governance Approach	Decision Authority
LoC 1	Simple renewals, like-for-like	Minimal documentation, streamlined approvals	Project Manager
LoC 2	Standard enhancements	Standard PACE products, phase readiness reviews	PM with Sponsor oversight
LoC 3	Complex, multiple interfaces	Full PACE product set, engineering milestone reviews	Sponsor with Investment Panel
LoC 4	Major programmes, high risk	Enhanced governance, independent assurance	Investment Panel / Board

This means a straightforward track renewal doesn't face the same governance burden as a major station rebuild. The controls match the risk.

What PACE Changed in Practice

Parallel Working: Different disciplines can progress simultaneously. Procurement can begin while detailed design continues. Construction planning doesn't wait for every drawing to be finalised.

Delegated Authority: Decision-making sits with project teams. Minor changes don't require escalation through multiple approval layers. The people closest to the work can make decisions about the work.

Tailored Controls: Project complexity determines the level of control required. Sponsors and project managers can tailor controls to match their project's risk profile.

Integrated Risk Management: Rather than treating risk assessment as a separate exercise at predetermined checkpoints, PACE embeds risk consideration throughout the project lifecycle.

Consistent Procurement: The framework creates more uniform procurement and contracting processes across civil, electrical, and mechanical works.

GRIP vs PACE: Side-by-Side Comparison

Aspect	GRIP	PACE
Structure	8 sequential stages	4 overlapping phases
Progression	Complete each stage before next	Phases can run in parallel
Decision-Making	Escalate through management tiers	Delegated to project teams
Governance	Same controls for all projects	Tailored to project complexity
Risk Management	Assessed at stage gates	Embedded throughout lifecycle
Procurement	Varied across disciplines	Consistent process
Philosophy	Control through rigid stages	Acceleration through flexibility
Status	Being phased out	Current standard (from 2021)

Where the Time Savings Come From

The comparison table shows what changed. This table shows how those changes translate into actual time savings:

Activity	GRIP Approach	PACE Approach	Time Saved
Feasibility to Design	Complete feasibility, gate review, then start	Begin outline design during feasibility	4-8 weeks
Design to Procurement	Complete all design before tendering	Early contractor involvement, design-build	8-16 weeks
Minor Design Changes	Escalate to gate review, formal change control	Project team decision within authority	2-6 weeks each
Risk Decisions	Formal review at each gate	Continuous, real-time decisions	Ongoing
Cross-Discipline Work	Each discipline completes before next starts	Disciplines work concurrently	12-24 weeks

Understanding PACE Milestones

While PACE has fewer phases than GRIP, it still has clear decision points. Understanding these milestones helps you plan your work and know when key decisions will be made:

Phase	Key Milestones	What Gets Decided
Initiate	Project Brief Approved	Should we progress? What Level of Control?
Strategic Development	Options Complete	Which option to develop further?
Strategic Development	Investment Authority	Is business case strong enough to commit?
Project Design	Design Freeze	Is design complete enough for construction?
Project Design	Construction Ready	All approvals, contracts, resources in place?
Project Delivery	Construction Complete	Is physical work finished and tested?
Project Delivery	Operational Handover	Can operations safely take control?
Project Close	Final Close	All accounts settled, lessons captured?

The critical difference from GRIP is that reaching these milestones doesn't require completing every preceding activity. If you can demonstrate readiness, you can progress, even if parallel workstreams are still ongoing.

PACE in Action: The Dartmoor Railway Line

The restoration of the Dartmoor Railway Line demonstrates what PACE makes possible.

The line between Exeter and Okehampton closed to regular passengers in 1972. For nearly 50 years, daily services didn't run. Then, in 2021, it became the first railway to reopen under the government's Restoring Your Railway programme.

The Timeline

February 2021: Project initiated using PACE approach
March 2021: £40.5 million government funding confirmed
April 2021: Construction begins (8 weeks from concept)
November 2021: Regular passenger services commence

From concept to construction in eight weeks. Under GRIP, the stage-gate process alone would have consumed months before any construction activity could begin.

What Made It Possible

The project team worked through feasibility and detailed design in parallel rather than sequentially. Issues were identified and resolved in real time through early collaboration, rather than discovered at formal gate reviews.

Christian Irwin, Network Rail's Industry Programme Director, led the project with PACE's emphasis on speed and delegation. Teams made decisions at project level rather than escalating through approval hierarchies.

The Results

The 11-mile stretch of line was transformed in nine months, completed under budget. The line now carries over 550,000 passenger journeys per year, far exceeding initial expectations.

This wasn't just faster delivery. It was proof that reducing bureaucratic overhead doesn't mean reducing rigour. The project delivered safely, on time, and under budget.

What PACE Means for Contractors

If you're working on Network Rail projects, PACE changes several things about how you'll operate:

Area	Under GRIP	Under PACE	What You Need to Do
Programme	Sequential activities, clear handoffs	Overlapping phases, concurrent work	Build programmes handling parallel dependencies
Changes	Formal submission, wait for gate	Faster turnaround, project-level decisions	Be ready to respond quickly
Documentation	Full product set regardless	Tailored to Level of Control	Understand your LoC requirements
Risk	Formal reviews at gates	Continuous, embedded in daily work	Capture and escalate risks real-time
Approvals	Multiple tiers, longer waits	Delegated authority, faster decisions	Know who can approve what
Records	Assemble for stage gate reviews	Maintain continuously	Contemporaneous capture more important

Faster Decision Cycles

With delegated authority, you'll get decisions faster. Changes that previously required weeks of escalation and approval can now be resolved at project level. This is good for programme but requires you to be ready to respond quickly.

Parallel Workstreams

You may find yourself working on detailed design while procurement is already underway. This requires better coordination and clearer communication about dependencies. Your programme management needs to handle overlapping activities rather than sequential handoffs.

Tailored Governance

The level of control will vary by project complexity. A simple renewal will have lighter governance than a major enhancement. Understanding where your project sits on this spectrum helps you pitch your approach appropriately.

The PACE Product Index

PACE organises its documentation requirements into eight themes. What's produced for each theme depends on your project's Level of Control:

Theme	What It Covers	Key Products
Manage Integration	Overall project management	Project Management Plan, Stakeholder Plan
Manage Scope	Defining and controlling inclusions	Requirements Spec, Scope Management Plan
Manage Time	Planning and scheduling	Project Schedule, Planning Management Plan
Manage Cost	Budgeting and cost control	Cost Plan, Cost Management Plan
Manage Risk	Identifying and mitigating risks	Risk Register, Risk Management Plan
Manage Quality	Meeting requirements	Quality Management Plan, Assurance Plan
Manage Resources	People, equipment, materials	Resource Plan, Organisation Chart
Manage Procurement	Contracts and suppliers	Procurement Strategy, Contract Plan

For LoC 1 projects, you might only need basic versions of key products. For LoC 4 projects, you'll need the full set with enhanced governance products. Understanding this early helps you plan your documentation effort appropriately.

Why Records Matter More Under PACE

This seems counterintuitive. Lighter governance should mean less documentation, right?

Actually, the opposite is true. Under GRIP, formal stage gates provided natural documentation checkpoints. Teams assembled evidence for reviews. The process enforced record-keeping.

Under PACE, those checkpoints are fewer and lighter. But the need for evidence doesn't disappear. It shifts from formal review packages to continuous contemporaneous recording.

PACE Characteristic	Why Records Are Critical	What to Capture
Parallel Workstreams	Multiple activities need clear audit trail	Date-stamped decisions, who made them, why
Delegated Decisions	Project-level decisions need evidence	Decision logs, supporting analysis
Continuous Risk	Ongoing decisions need documentation	Real-time risk registers, mitigation logs
Tailored Governance	Lighter process means records fill the gap	Evidence controls were followed
Faster Pace	Less time for retrospective documentation	Daily logs, progress photos, resources
NEC Requirements	CEs, early warnings still need substantiation	Contemporaneous evidence linked to events

If you're on an NEC contract (which most Network Rail projects are), your ability to substantiate compensation events, demonstrate defined costs, and support early warnings still depends entirely on the quality of your site records. PACE doesn't change that. It just means you can't rely on stage gates to force the discipline.

Which Framework Applies to Your Project?

Most new projects will use PACE by default. But there are scenarios where GRIP might still apply or where a transition makes sense:

Scenario	Framework	Rationale
New project starting 2024/25	PACE	Default for all new projects since 2021
Project started under GRIP, now Stage 5+	GRIP	Continue to avoid disruption
GRIP project at early stages	Transition to PACE	May benefit if significant work remains
Simple renewal or like-for-like	PACE (LoC 1)	Lightest governance, streamlined
Major programme (e.g., HS2 interface)	PACE (LoC 4)	Full framework with enhanced governance
Urgent / emergency works	PACE (expedited)	Flexibility allows acceleration

If you're joining a project mid-way, check which framework it's using. The documentation requirements, approval processes, and governance expectations differ significantly.

Common Challenges in the Transition

Teams moving from GRIP to PACE often encounter similar challenges. Knowing what to expect helps you prepare:

Challenge	What Happens	How to Address It
Old habits persist	Teams wait for approvals that aren't required	Clear communication of delegated authorities
Parallel coordination	Overlapping activities create confusion	Integrated planning, interface management
Documentation uncertainty	Teams unsure what's required for their LoC	Early LoC assessment, clear guidance
Moving too fast	Speed prioritised over rigour, issues missed	Continuous risk management, not just faster gates
Supply chain adjustment	Contractors still on GRIP expectations	Clear requirements, early engagement
Records gap	Less formal review = less documentation	Embed contemporaneous recording in processes

The most common failure mode is treating PACE like "GRIP but faster." The mindset shift matters as much as the process change. Delegated authority only works if people actually use it. Parallel working only saves time if teams coordinate effectively.

Key Takeaways

Eight weeks vs several months.

The Dartmoor Railway went from concept to construction in eight weeks under PACE. That timeline wasn't possible under GRIP.

Parallel working is the real change.

Teams working simultaneously rather than sequentially is where the time savings come from.

Delegated authority speeds everything up.

Decisions at project level eliminate weeks of waiting. But you need to respond quickly.

Lighter process doesn't mean lighter records.

Fast-moving projects with overlapping workstreams need even better records.

PACE is now the default.

New Network Rail projects use PACE unless there's a specific reason not to.

‍

Frequently Asked Questions

What is PACE in Network Rail?

PACE (Project Acceleration in a Controlled Environment) is Network Rail's current framework for managing infrastructure investment projects. It replaced GRIP in 2021 and focuses on faster delivery through parallel working, delegated decision-making, and governance tailored to project complexity.

What replaced GRIP?

GRIP was replaced by PACE, which was developed through Project SPEED (Swift, Pragmatic and Efficient Enhancement Delivery) and approved by the Network Rail board in November 2020. PACE has been applied to new projects since January 2021.

What are the PACE stages?

PACE has four main phases: Strategic Development and Project Selection, Project Design, Project Delivery, and Project Close. There's also an initial "Initiate" phase (Phase 0). Unlike GRIP's eight sequential stages, PACE phases can overlap where appropriate.

Is GRIP still used?

GRIP is being phased out. New projects use PACE unless there's a specific reason to continue with GRIP. Some legacy projects that started under GRIP may continue using that framework through to completion.

What is Project SPEED?

Project SPEED (Swift, Pragmatic and Efficient Enhancement Delivery) is a joint initiative between the Department for Transport and Network Rail that developed the PACE framework. It focuses on reducing both the time and cost of delivering rail infrastructure projects.

What is Level of Control in PACE?

Level of Control (LoC) is how PACE tailors governance to project complexity. LoC 1 is the lightest (simple renewals), while LoC 4 is the heaviest (major programmes requiring Board approval). This means simple projects don't face the same governance as complex programmes.

How does PACE affect contractors?

Contractors experience faster decision cycles, parallel workstreams, and tailored documentation. The main adjustment is being ready to respond quickly when decisions are made at project level. Contemporaneous records become more important, not less.

What was the Dartmoor Railway success?

The Dartmoor Railway (Exeter to Okehampton) was the first line reopened under Restoring Your Railway. Using PACE, it went from concept to construction in eight weeks. The 11-mile line was transformed in nine months, under budget, now carrying 550,000+ passengers per year.

Related Resources

‍

Key takeaways

1. Eight weeks, not eight months.The Dartmoor Railway went from concept to construction in eight weeks under PACE. Under GRIP, the stage-gate process alone would have taken months before any construction could start.

2. Parallel working is where the time comes from.The shift from eight stages to four phases matters less than the ability to overlap them. Civil, procurement, and design working concurrently rather than waiting for handoffs is the real change.

3. Decisions now happen at your level.Authority has been pushed down to project teams. That's good for speed, but it means you need to be ready to respond quickly when approvals come through. No more weeks of waiting.

4. Lighter process, heavier records.This catches people out. Fewer stage gates means fewer forced documentation checkpoints. But NEC contracts still need contemporaneous evidence for compensation events and defined costs. If you're not capturing records continuously, you're exposed.

5. Know your Level of Control.A simple renewal (LoC 1) has completely different governance requirements than a major programme (LoC 4). Understanding where your project sits determines what documentation you actually need to produce.

Related blogs you may like

Record Management

Daily Allocation Sheets: Construction's Most Underrated Document

Company News

Cosgrove & Drew partners with Gather to deliver detailed commercial management across complex mechanical engineering projects

Industry News

Why Every QS and Commercial Manager Needs to Know About the New RICS AI Rules

Stay ahead of the curve

Our monthly email newsletter keeps you up-to-date with best practices in project management, contech implementation and NEC4.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.