Upload
raymond-britton-cox
View
220
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
School Condition Assessment Briefing14 March 2013
• Methodology
• Results analysis
• Policy issues
• Proposed approach
• Communication plan
Presentation Outline
2
3
• Common methodology has been used to assess
o current performance of school facilities
o threshold level of performance: 3.25
• Assessment is undertaken at an element level; 17 per building, 17 building services and 17 site infrastructure elements
• Element assessments are aggregated to provide average building and campus assessments
Methodology
4
Results Analysis
Poor <1.50
Worn 1.50-2.49
Fair2.50-3.49
Good 3.50-4.49
Excellent 4.50+
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
Average Building Rating: Core [red] & Non-Core [blue] Buildings
• TVLC - full analysis• Condition assessment | Functionality | Sufficiency
• How funding is usedo Capital versus maintenanceo Central pools of funding versus SRP allocations
• Assurance about how well facilities are being managedo School based planningo Ongoing rolling audits
• School capabilityo Training for principalso More efficient communication with the Department
• Excess facilities – average school has 5 over entitlement classrooms
5
Policy Issues
Proposed approach
SRP Funding Direct
to Schools; $48m
Planned Main-ten-
ance; $30m
Emergency Maintenance; $5m
Maintenance Funding
Proposed approach
7
Capital Pool Maintenance Pool
2013 Budget $20.0m $31.5m
General policy Buildings or major elements of a building are being replaced
Buildings or any elements are being repaired
Buildings included Rated 1.00 to 2.00 orLarger budget
2.01 to 3.25 andSmaller budget
• Each school will be providedo A document explaining the rating for each element and
building in the schoolo Access to an online guide to interpret assessment datao Access to follow up Q&A forumso Access to an online help line
• Use the information to prioritise maintenance work• Over time further funding will be provided to supplement SRP
maintenance funding for poor and worn entitlement facilities• Prepare a ‘NSP style’ plan for further funding provided
Proposed approach
8
Proposed approach
9
Click here to view all available online training materials (including videos)
Proposed approach
10
Project Value <$25,000 $25,000-$200,000 $200,000+
Minor Capital Works Major Capital Works
Procurement 1 quote 3 quotes Tender
Contracting party School School* DEECD
Project management 3 options: school led, DEECD led or joint led
* Projects over $50,000 will required DEECD approval before contract is agreed.
Funding When plan approved
As per resourcing agreement
As per tender documents
1. Announcement by Minister for Education February
• Circular explaining key milestones
2. High level briefings to peak bodies and regional February/principal forums March
• VASSP & VPA Forums
• Regional Director Forums
3. Release of condition assessment information to each school, including access to an on-line guide by term 2
4. Q&A forums run for schools April / May
• possibly through 60+ principal networks
Communication plan
11
Key Messages
12
Schools with buildings <3.25 & receiving $
Schools with buildings <3.25 but not receiving $
Schools with all buildings >=3.25
Generic Messages
• Future maintenance structure: SRP, Planned & Emergency• SRP Maintenance funding unchanged• Planned maintenance will be prioritised based on ratings
Specific Messages
• School is on 2013 program
• Next steps‒ Review overall
maintenance plan‒ Verify entitle-
ment buildings‒ Nominate /
appoint PjM‒ Prepare plan of
projects for buildings on program for DEECD approval
• School is not on 2013 program
• School will be prioritised on future program
• Next steps‒ Review overall
maintenance plan‒ No specific
reporting required to DEECD
• School won’t receive funding from planned maintenance program
• Next steps‒ Review overall
maintenance plan‒ No specific
reporting required to DEECD