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