Open Day for Education Framework Teams Agenda OpeningEamonn Boylan Framework Update Don Bryson Building Schools for the FutureIan Glaister Allan

Open Day for Education Framework Teams

Agenda Opening Eamonn Boylan Framework Update Don Bryson Building Schools for the Future Ian Glaister

Allan Seaborn

Dave Carty Guidance through the PQQ John Finlay Reality check Nigel Curry Procurement Strategy John Lorimer Questions Don Bryson Coffee and informal questions


Strategic Objectives

Eamonn Boylan

MCC DEPUTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE


Historical Review of Procurement

Don Bryson

MCC Deputy Property Development Manager

Historical Review of Procurement

Our Vision

Our Vision

through:- Improved design Less waste and duplication Improved delivery More certainty of costs Better life cycle costs

Vision

how:- through Partnership

all parties involved in the process integrated team from the outset supply chain and sub-contractor involvement risk/reward sharing continuous value engineering Member and community involvement

OPEN : FRANK : HONEST

Vision

leading to:- Better educational results Greater inclusion within the community Better safety and environmental performance Reduced demand on future school budgets by

addressing whole life cycle costings at inception


Ian Glaister

Assistant Chief Education Officer

Manchester’s Vision for Education

Manchester’s Vision for EducationGreater Manchester

Manchester’s Vision for EducationThe Department


School Population

Primary 41,424

Secondary 23,904

Special 1,546

Pre School 28,479

Educational Premises

139 Primary Schools

23 High Schools

20 Special Schools

40 Children Centres

26 Adult Education

45 Other Services

The Department


Types of Construction

49 Clasp 29 Traditional

> 2 Storey 32 Traditional

< 2 Storey 47 Framed

> 2 Storey 21 Framed

< 2 Storey

The Department

Manchester’s Vision for EducationThe Department

Types of Construction

49 Clasp

29 Traditional

> 2 Storey

32 Traditional

< 2 Storey

47 Framed

> 2 Storey

21 Framed

< 2 Storey

Age

7 Pre 1900

27 1900 – 1930

45 1930 – 1960

64 1960 – 1990

9 1990 –

Issues for Schools

Behaviour

Transforming secondary

education

Low history of achievement

Deprivation

External pressures

Poor environment

Issues for LEAs

Raising attainment

Inclusion

Special educational needs

Workforce agenda

ICT

Community

The Department


Education development

plan

Excellence in cities

Transforming secondary

education

Domains of influence

Developing and

sustaining high standards

in primary phase

Retention and

commitment of

staff

The effective use

of ICT

Special

educational needs

How we achieve the vision



Allan SeabornHead of Planning and Property

Dave CartyHead of Corporate Property


Review of School PlacesSchool Organisation Plan and BSF

Key Aims of Education Planning

Factors Affecting Planning

Primary Position Secondary Position Special Position Building Schools For

The Future

Principal Aims

Ensure proper availability and distribution of places in high quality and well maintained schools

Ensure that all education building stock is developed and maintained to the highest standards for the benefits of all users

Key Activities – Planning and Property

Ensure that the number of school places is adequate to meet demand and offers real choice for parents

Provide safe and environmentally friendly premises for teachers and pupils to operate in

Contribute to the inclusion agenda, including community use

Contribute to City’s regeneration strategy

Contribute to City’s crime & disorder strategy through effective security

Falling birth rate

Redevelopment versus regeneration

Pupil loss & gain

Transience

Asylum seekers & refugees

Success of higher education institutions

Change in population types

Fewer RC, more non-RC

Factors Affecting Planning - Local

External Influences

Aspirations of other agencies Sure Start, NEM, EAZ,

Urban Splash CE / RC diocesan

authorities

(Review of parishes) Aspirations of other faith

communities

External Influences

External Influences

HMI / OFSTED recommendations Tied in to inspection / standards agenda

School capacity measurement New net capacity Capital funding tie-in Only bid once per year

Some LEAs reducing surplus capacity

Other LEAs increasing capacity to take Manchester children

Parental Preference

Schools in any LEA

Standards Reputation Transport

School types Specialist Grammar Independent City Academy Denominationa

l Single sex/co-

educational

Inclusion Agenda

Statutory changes to admissions policies

RC places opened up

Co-ordinated admission – multiple places

Growth and Decline

4 Planning Districts

Primary Position

North >>> Mixture of shortages/surpluses

East >>> Mainly surpluses

(but one new school required)

Center/South >>> Tight with some shortages

Wythenshawe >>> Mainly Surpluses

RC >>> Surpluses

Secondary Position

All Existing Schools Retained

New school in East

New school in North

Special Position

Retain specialist schools

Close MLD, EBD, VI

Move to greater Inclusion


Details of the Selection Process

John Finlay

MCC TECHNICAL CORPORATE SERVICES

Details of the Selection Process

The Framework Management Team The Consultation Process Overview of Selection Process Scoring Mechanism Detailed Review of Questionnaire Programme of Events

Management of the Framework

Core Team 5 members from within the Council Carry out detailed reviews of bids Manage the implementation of the Framework Agreement Manage review of performance (KPI’s)

Full “Buildings for the Future” Framework/PFI Team Yet to be finalised but will include Council Members and Head

Teachers Review and approve findings of the Core Team

Executive Members Group Final Approval on behalf of Manchester City Council

Wider Stakeholders Actively consulted and informed from outset

MCC’s Core ObjectiveTo enhance the delivery of Manchester City Council’s regeneration objectives by achieving educational excellence for all, through a transparent and continuously improving process for design and delivery of quality learning facilities


• Reduce Uncertainty• Deliver Best Value• Harness Innovation• Reduce Red Tape• Involve key stake-holders in design process from outset


• Improve training, re-population & quality of life• Focus schools at centre of community• Widen educational perspectives of community• Contribute to MCC’s long-term strategy


•Provide opportunities for all• Improve environment for learning & working through better design• Change cultures and aspirations


Primary ObjectivesPrimary Objectives

Deliver an effective design & delivery process


Raise educational standards for all


Contribute to neighbourhood

renewal


renewal

Sh

ort-te

rm

Lo

ng-t

erm















renewal


renewal

Sh

ort-te

rm

Lo

ng-t

erm







renewal


renewal

Sh

ort-te

rm

Lo

ng-t

erm

Framework Objectives

2-Stage Selection Process To appoint Constructor Teams to design and

construct or construct education related projects over a 3-5 year period

1st Stage – Pre-Qualification Objective review of Pre-Qualification Questionnaires by Core

Team Produce a short-list of between 10 and 12 Teams for informal

interview Produce a short-list of between 6 and 8 Teams for progression

to 2nd stage 2nd Stage – Final Selection

Detailed analysis of bids including Team presentations, interviews, site & office visits

Select between 2 and 5 Teams for final negotiation

Scoring Mechanism Pre-Qualification Stage – look for evidence that the

Teams have the experience, financial and technical capability to undertake the work

Quality Criteria Weighting

Part B – Quality & Experience Delivery Team Design Team Interview

55%

20%

20%

Part C – Statutory Requirements 5%

Scoring Mechanism Final Selection Stage – look for evidence of the

Teams’ abilities to deliver the Framework Objectives

Evaluation Criteria Weighting

Quality Assessment Submission Documents Presentation & Interview Overall consistency

x Reality Check Factor

25%

35%

10%

0 to 1

Quality Score 70%

Financial Proposal 30%

Cost Score 30%

Detailed Review of Documents

Part A – Identity of Applicant Part B – Quality & Experience Evaluation Part C – Statutory Requirements Part D – Financial Evaluation Part E – Declaration

Part A – Identity of Applicant

Not Assessed

A1,2,3 – Name & address A4,5,6 – Details of lead contact A7-13 – Name & details of lead organisation A14,15 – Details of contractual commitments

Part B – Quality & Experience Evaluation

B1 PROFESSIONAL RESOURCE CAPABILITY

B1.1 - Provide details of the structure, roles and relationships of your Design Team.

Please include the following: Organisational chart identifying roles and relationships Names, addresses & contact details (including key S/Cs) Practice backgrounds & profiles Relevant qualifications, skills and experience of the key

personnel No word limit 2½% of marks



B1.2 - Provide examples (3 max.) of relevant projects you have undertaken within the last 3 years, which demonstrate your ability to undertake education related works and/or adopt collaborative ways of working.

Include evidence of the team members/organisations working together on such projects and a list of references and their contact details.

6 pages max. 5% of marks



B1.3 - Explain your approach to the design of schools. In your response you may include, but are not limited to, the following topics:

Design philosophy Team dynamics Systems and processes Stakeholder communication

Word limit – 1500 words 7½% of marks



B1.4 – Raising Education Standards & Neighbourhood Renewal - Explain how your approach to the design and construction of schools has improved educational standards and contributed to the neighbourhood renewal of projects you have undertaken




B1.5 – Explain your approach to major High School extensions and alterations with particular reference to continued delivery and minimum disturbance to the education provision.


B 1.2, B1.3, B1.4 and B1.5 should only be addressed by the lead designer

Lead design teams must only be linked to a single constructor

Part B – Quality & Experience

Evaluation


B2 CONSTRUCTOR RESOURCE CAPABILITY

B2.1 - Provide details of the structure, roles and relationships of your Constructor Team and any key sub-contractors and/or suppliers. Please include the following: Organisational chart identifying roles and relationshipsNames, addresses & contact details (including key S/Cs) Company backgrounds & profiles Relevant qualifications, skills and experience of the key

personnel No word limit 5% of marks



B2.2 - Provide examples (3 max.) of relevant projects you have undertaken within the last 3 years, which demonstrate your ability to undertake education related works and/or adopt collaborative ways of working.

Include evidence of the team members/organisations working together on such projects and a list of references and their contact details.

6 pages max. 10% of marks


B2 CONSTRUCTOR RESOURCE CAPABILITY B2.3 - Service Delivery Manchester City Council are looking for this Framework Agreement

to improve the certainty of projects in terms of time, cost and quality by adopting the Government’s Rethinking Construction agenda. Explain your approach to project management, covering the following topics with appropriate supporting evidence: Procedures for monitoring, measuring and improving performance Measures for managing value and risk Policy towards people management including training of staff Evidence of a collaborative working culture, throughout the team Commitment to open book accountability Communications strategy

Word limit – 2000 words 20% of marks



B2.4 -Raising Education Standards & Neighbourhood Renewal Explain how your approach to the design and construction of

schools has improved educational standards and contributed to the neighbourhood renewal of projects you have undertaken.




B2.5 – Explain your approach to major High School extensions and alterations with particular reference to continued delivery and minimum disturbance to the education provision




B2.6 – Explain your approach to the service and provision of an extended maintenance agreement for the fabric and infrastructure

Word limit – 500 words Zero marks (proposal for discussion)



B2.7 – The Council are concerned about the volume of Construction work taking place within the City’s curtilage. Whilst this is welcomed its impact on the ability of constructor teams to deliver cannot be ignored. Given the desired schedule of projects as indicated on the outline delivery programme (Appendix A), indicate how the supply chain can be secured to ensure delivery


Part C – Statutory Requirements C1 HEALTH AND SAFETY

C1.1 - Please provide a copy of your Health and Safety Policy as required by Section 2(3) of the Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act 1974. This should contain details of:

i. Any fatal accidents to any employees, sub-contractors whilst working for you, or members of the public in connection with your work in the last 5 years

ii. Any prosecutions or notices served on you by the Health and Safety Executive or the Environmental Health Services of a Local Authority under the Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act 1974 or other relevant Health and Safety legislation

Notes: For non-UK based applicants, it is permissible to give details of equivalent health and safety policies operated by you based on your own national legislation.

Pass/Fail

Part C – Statutory Requirements C1 HEALTH AND SAFETY

C1.2 - Explain your approach to implementing your Health and Safety Policies and procedures including:

i. Conveyance of procedures to staff/employees ii. The induction and/or safety training employees will receive before

undertaking work tasks iii. Procedures for the reporting and recording of accidents,

occupational ill health and dangerous occurrences iv. Procedures for ensuring the Health and Safety of members of the

public


Part C – Statutory Requirements

C2 EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES

C2.1 - Please provide a copy of your Equal Opportunities Policy. Pass/Fail

Part C – Statutory Requirements C2 EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES

C2.2 - Please confirm that all organisations within your Constructor Team comply with the following legislation:

i. Disability Discrimination Act 1995 ii. Sex Discrimination Act 1975 iii. Equal Pay Act 1975 iv. Race Relations Act 1976 v. Commission for Racial Equality’s Code of Practice for Employment,

1983 Notes: For non-UK based applicants, it is permissible to give details of

equivalent equal opportunities policies operated by you based on your own national legislation.

Pass/Fail

Part C – Statutory Requirements C2 EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES

C2.3 - Training & Apprenticeship Schemes Manchester City Council wishes to encourage the training and skill

building of the local labour force. Explain your approach to training and recruitment. You should provide relevant examples of any recruitment advertisements or other literature in support of your description.

3 pages max. (including supporting information) 2½% of marks

Part C – Statutory Requirements C3 ELIGIBILITY

C3.1 - Have any of the organisations within your Constructor Team been subject to the following at any time?

i. Entered into a state of bankruptcy, insolvency, compulsory winding up, administration, composition with creditors or any analogous state or subject to relevant proceedings

ii. Committed an act of grave misconduct in the course of business iii. Had outstanding obligations relating to the payment of taxes iv. Had outstanding obligations relating to social security contributions Notes: For non-UK based applicants, it is permissible to give details of

equivalent obligations relating to the payment of taxes and/or social security contributions based on your own national legislation.

Pass/Fail

Part C – Statutory Requirements C4 QUALITY MANAGEMENT

C4.1 - Please provide details of any quality management accreditation, such as ISO 9000 or its equivalent. If you do not have ISO or other recognised quality accreditation, please show how your firm has an effective, auditable quality management system in place.

1 page max. Pass/Fail

Part D – Financial Evaluation

D1 – Details of person responsible for financial matters D2 – Copies of audited accounts for last 3 years D3 – Financial Summary sheets of key financial ratios for each

consortium member. D4 – Statement of turnover if accounts are more than 10 months old D5 – Details of any outstanding claims or litigation D6 – Copies of insurance certificates for each consortium member Pass/Fail

Part E - Checklist

Not Assessed E1 CHECKLIST Before returning the questionnaire, please ensure that you have: a. Answered all the questions b. Enclosed all relevant documents, having first marked them clearly

with the name of the candidate and the number of the question to which they apply:

c. Signed the declaration in section E2.

Please check that you have enclosed any documents that you have mentioned in your submission.

Part E - ChecklistObligatory

E2 DECLARATION PLEASE READ AND SIGN THE DECLARATION BELOW I/We apply to be considered to be appointed as a constructor under a

framework agreement with Manchester City Council for design and construction or construction of education related premises in Manchester.

I/We certify that the information supplied is accurate to the best of my/our knowledge and that I/we accept the conditions and undertakings requested in the questionnaire. I/We understand that false information could result in my/our exclusion from consideration for this or any other contract with Manchester City Council.

I/We also understand that it is a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment to give or offer any gift or consideration whatsoever as an inducement or reward to any servant of a Public Body.

Programme of Events

2004Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Open Day 21-Nov

Deadline for PQQs 9-Dec

Issue Invitations (estimated) 30-Jan

Deadline for Submissions (est) 19-Mar

Final Selection Process (est) Apr

Final Negotiations (est) May

Commence Framework (est) June

2003Activity Dates

Concluding Remarks

Looking for Teams that will be able to work with us collaboratively to deliver the Framework Objectives

Flexible and responsive Supply Chain Efficient use of resources Make your responses clear and concise Provide evidence to support your statements Submissions to include 1 hard copy & 1 soft copy

Open Day for EducationFramework Teams

Rethinking ConstructionCatalyst for MCC Framework

Nigel Curry

Centre for Construction Innovation

Rethinking Construction

… for the UK construction industry to realise maximum value for all clients, end users and stakeholders and exceed

their expectations through the consistent delivery of world class products and services.

Our vision is …

Key Reports Latham 1994 – Constructing the Team

Integrated teams Non-adversarial approach – partnering People, process and technology – people and process

centred Egan 1998 – Rethinking Construction

Culture, process and performance Best practice – demonstration projects

Egan 2002 – Accelerating Change Same issues as Rethinking Construction but focus on Integrated supply chains Non-adversarial procurement approaches Targets and measurement

Rethinking Construction

Rethinking Construction – published by John Egan in 1998 – sometimes called the Egan Report

Research into the UK construction industry Found that the industry was

Adversarial – a lot of conflict between all parties in projects Unproductive and low in innovation Unprofitable Poor procurement by clients – lowest price Fragmentation of project delivery teams Huge room for improvement

Too many Contractors chasing too little work created a very competitive market

The Contractor’s tender price is the figure to beat the opposition - NOT the price for building the job

The procurement processes used by the industry often allow the Design Team time to prepare an outline design which requires completion during the construction phase.

Current traditional contractual arrangements do not facilitate the delivery of Best Value

The State Of Our Industry

The Business Arrangement Breaks Down And . .

Contracts overrun on time and money

Final accounts last for 2 - 3 years after the job has finished . . . and more !!

The industry and professionals have a terrible image

Expensive “one-off” relationships occur

The industry is wasteful and inefficient - and everybody seems to accept it !

The lawyers and barristers are the only ones who make any money

Nobody enjoys going to work

The Carrot ?

1995 Sir Michael Latham’s review of the construction industry in 1994 concluded that real cost savings of up to 30% could be made.

The Stick……

“Achieving Excellence” Targets had to be met by March 2002

Housing Grants conditional on Rethinking by 2003

Beverley Hughes warned that Local Authorities need to be Best Value compliant, and funding will become conditional by 2004

“Better Public Buildings Report” - the writing on the wall for the Crown Estate and Grant assistance

What has this got to do with us?

Latham argued that public sector clients …

“should deliberately set out to use their spending power not only to obtain value for money for a particular project but also to assist the productivity and competitiveness of the construction industry, and thereby obtain better value for money in the long-term”

… MCC Framework aspires to deliver this


Achieving Excellence - the Government response to Egan 1999 requires all government clients …

to work with industry to reduce waste in all aspects of construction procurement

to enter into co-operative relationships with their supplier to ensure a mutually productive environment

to ensure an integrated supply chain

… MCC Framework aspires to deliver this


OGC – Peter Gershon March 2003 …

It is government policy that all public procurement should be based on value for money, having due regard to propriety and regularity.

Value for money is defined as the optimum combination of whole life costs and quality to meet the customer’s requirements.

It is not the same as initial purchase price.

… MCC Framework acknowledges this

Influences on Manchester CC

Rethinking Construction and the Government Client

Local authority and government clients are being directed to follow Rethinking Construction in procurement guidelines from the Office of Government Commerce

Best Value – to drive improvement in the delivery of public services

Achieving Excellence – move towards partnering, performance measurement and culture change

Issues of public accountability Public sector clients want benefit from Rethinking Construction

approach

Rethinking Construction - Recommendations

Look to how to improve this situation Expressed a model for how things need to change 5 Drivers, 4 Processes, 7 Performance – The 5-4-7 Model

What does this mean? Basically is a three stage model Enables us to think about what we do and how we do it

Drivers

The values that drive what we do

Drivers

The values that drive what we do

Processes

How we do it

Processes

How we do it

Improvements

How well we are doing it

Improvements

How well we are doing it

What is it Worth?

Manchester City Council – Education Department - 100 million spend over 5 years

Rethinking Construction Annual Targets for Improvement:

Capital Cost down 10% - £110m of work done for £100m – Client gets “extra” £10m worth of buildings?

Time reduced by 10% - approx £1m saving on prelims over 3yrs?

Defects reduced by 20% - approx £1m saving over 5 yrs?

Turnover & Profitability up by 10% - profit up by £???

Accidents reduced by 20% - everybody is happy

Productivity up by 10% - everybody is happy

Predictability up by 20% - everybody is happy

Quality Driven Agenda

“The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot – it can’t be done.

If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something

for the risk you run…..

and….

if you do that you will have enough to pay for something

better.”

John Ruskin (1819 – 1900)

Business Fact

“The most successful enterprises do not fragment their operations – they work back from the customer’s needs and focus on the product and the value it delivers to the customer.

The process and the production team are then integrated to deliver value to the customer efficiently and eliminate waste in all forms.”

… MCC seek to emulate this

Learning from others…..

… Sharing Best Practice

Why should we do this?

Rethinking Construction is about Culture Change Better Processes Measurement and Improvement

Clients are being driven to embrace RC by central government

Contractors therefore must embrace RC or they won’t get the work from local government clients

Partnering is a key tool to change the way we work

What do we get from doing this?

Partnering gives us a chance to concentrate on the project rather than the contract

Partnering enables projects to benefit from Team Skills and Competencies:-

Life cycle costing Risk Management Buildability Value Engineering Value Management Design Excellence


MCC Procurement Strategy

John Lorimer

MCC CAPITAL PROGRAMME DIRECTOR


Supports Manchester Community Strategy Driven by best value and government

guidelines Embraces current collaborative working

arrangements Must deliver more for less Current frameworks


Need to understand costs Early involvement with providers Local hotspots and skills shortage More certain in delivery Working with the supply chain Continuous improvement

Final Thoughts Demonstrate an understanding of our need Work as a team Clear responses, no waffle please

Open Day for EducationFramework Teams


Question and Answer Session
