ES/S5/17/18/A
EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE
AGENDA
18th Meeting, 2017 (Session 5)
Wednesday 14 June 2017
The Committee will meet at 10.00 am in the Robert Burns Room (CR1).
1. Decision on taking business in private: The Committee will decide whether to take items 3 and 4 of this meeting in private.
The Committee will also decide whether to take items to review the evidence it hears on its school infrastructure inquiry at its meetings on 21 and 28 June 2017 in private.
Furthermore the Committee will decide whether to consider any future consideration of its draft report on teacher workforce planning in private.
2. School infrastructure: The Committee will take evidence from—
Professor John Cole;
Ian Mckee, RICS in Scotland;
Paul Mitchell, SBATC Registrar and Head of Employment Affairs, Scottish Building Federation;
Jim Thewliss, General Secretary, SLS (School Leaders Scotland);
Eileen Young, Head Teacher, Linwood High School and member of SLS.
3. Review of evidence: The Committee will review the evidence heard earlier on its school infrastructure inquiry.
4. Teacher workforce planning: The Committee will consider a draft report.
ES/S5/17/18/A
Roz Thomson Clerk to the Education and Skills Committee Room T3.40 The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh Tel: 85222 Email: [email protected] ES/S5/17/18/A
The papers for this meeting are as follows—
Agenda item 2
SPICe briefing paper ES/S5/17/18/1
School Infrastructure submissions pack ES/S5/17/18/2
Agenda item 4
Teacher Workforce Planning submissions pack ES/S5/17/18/3
PRIVATE PAPER ES/S5/17/18/4 (P)
Agenda item 2 ES/S5/17/18/1
14 June 2017
Education and Skills Committee
School Infrastructure
Introduction The Committee agreed to undertake an inquiry on school infrastructure in light of the incident at Oxgangs Primary School in January 2016 and the subsequent independent inquiry and report.
The Committee agreed to focus its inquiry on the inspection and remedial work of the school estate since January 2016 and the quality assurance practices for school building projects.
The inquiry is planned to take three weeks. This week, the Committee will hear from—
• Prof John Cole, chair of the independent inquiry into school closures, commissioned by the City of Edinburgh Council;
• Ian Mckee, RICS in Scotland;
• Paul Mitchell, SBATC Registrar and Head of Employment Affairs, Scottish Building Federation;
• Jim Thewliss, General Secretary, School Leaders Scotland (SLS);
• Eileen Young, Head Teacher, Linwood High School and member of SLS.
The Committee plans to hear from local government representatives next week followed by representatives from the Scottish Government and Scottish Futures Trust on 28 June.
The Committee has received a number of submissions on this inquiry and these are included in a separate paper.
1 Background School building programmes
Since 1999, a total of 979 schools have been either rebuilt or substantially refurbished, representing over a third (39%) of the entire current school estate1.
These projects have been funded through a combination of:
• traditional capital financing, where the project is funded upfront from the capital budget, through borrowing or through developer contributions
• revenue financing, where the private sector finances the upfront capital costs associated with a project and, on completion, continues to maintain and (in some cases) operate, the asset. Once operational, the public sector makes annual payments (“unitary charges”) to the private sector contractor to cover the capital costs, interest costs and maintenance/service charges. Such payments typically continue for 25- 30 years. The payments come out of public sector revenue budgets (as opposed to capital budgets)
Both Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and non-profit distributing (NPD) are forms of revenue financing, also referred to as ‘public private partnerships’ (PPP). (Further details on these funding methods are set out in the Annex.)
School buildings are the responsibility of local authorities, but since the late 1990s there have been Scottish Office/Executive/Government schemes to provide finance for specific projects and address the condition of the school estate. Due to pressures on capital budgets and the desire to progress these projects promptly, the Scottish Government led programmes have focused on revenue financing methods.
There have been three schemes: PPP1, PPP2 and Scotland's Schools for the Future (SSF): • PPP1 rebuilt and refurbished 74 schools with a total capital value of £535m. The programme ran from 1998 and was entirely revenue financed.
• PPP2 rebuilt and refurbished 213 schools with a total capital value of £2.8bn. The programme ran from 2001 and was entirely revenue financed.
• Scotland's Schools for the Future will, on completion, have rebuilt or refurbished 112 schools with a total capital value of £1.8bn. The programme was launched in 2009 and is due to complete in 2020. It is using both direct capital and revenue financing. Of the £1.8bn total
1 In 2016 there were 2,528 schools in Scotland
2 value, £1.1bn is being provided by the Scottish Government, with the remaining £0.7bn funded by individual local authorities.2
In addition to the Scottish Government led programmes, local authorities also progress their own plans for their school estate. In some areas there have been large scale programmes such as South Lanarkshire’s modernisation of their primary school estate which began in 2004, involving investment of £812m across 129 primary schools.
Since 1999, over 600 schools have been substantially refurbished or re-built under local authority plans outwith the Scottish Government led programmes of PFI and Scotland’s Schools for the Future (see table 1). Note that, because SSF uses a combination of capital and revenue funding, schools built under this programme are classified as ‘other’ in Table 1.
Table 1: Number of schools built or refurbished, Scotland of which: Scotland's PFI/NPD Other Total Schools for the Future 1999 to Mar 2007 120 208 328 - Apr 2007 to Mar 2016 168 483 651 28 of which: 2007-08 55 38 93 - 2008-09 44 62 106 - 2009-10 52 51 103 - 2010-11 9 46 55 - 2011-12 7 39 46 1 2012-13 1 59 60 5 2013-14 0 63 63 8 2014-15 0 81 81 5 2015-16 0 44 44 9 1999 to March 2016 288 691 979 Sources: Scottish Parliament S3W-9239, School Estates 2016 and Scottish Government
The majority of school rebuilding/refurbishment projects have been funded using direct capital investment. Less than a third of projects have been funded using PFI or NPD financing (288 out of 979 completions).
In the period between 1999 and March 2007 (covering the first two parliamentary sessions) a total of 328 schools were built or refurbished, 120 of these under PFI. Since then (last two parliamentary sessions), 651 schools were built or refurbished, of which 168 were financed using PFI/NPD. Of these 607, 28 have been delivered under the Scottish Government's “Scotland's Schools for the Future” programme. The number of PFI/NPD
2 Infrastructure Investment Plan 2015 - Progress Report for 2016
3 projects completed dropped substantially after 2009-10, although some SSF schools have used revenue financing in this period.
The Edinburgh schools incident In January 2016, part of an external wall at Oxgangs Primary School in Edinburgh collapsed. Following this incident, 17 schools in Edinburgh were closed due to safety concerns. All 17 schools had been built (at least in part) within the PPP1 school building programme and all involved the same special purpose vehicle – Edinburgh Schools Partnership Limited (ESP). The affected schools had been constructed over the period 2000-2005, but involved a range of different main contractors and sub-contractors. A secure unit and a community centre were also closed due to similar concerns.
The problems identified related to wall ties, wall head restraints, bed joint reinforcement and fire stopping. In a report to its Policy and Resources Committee (included in its written submission), Dundee City Council describes the construction techniques involved:
“Wall ties provide stability to cavity walls as they connect inner and outer leafs together so that they act as one single structural element. These are typically stainless steel bars installed at a predefined quantity in walls and importantly must be embedded a minimum of 50mm into both inner and outer leafs of the wall.
Wall head restraints are stainless steel ties used to connect the top of the cavity wall back to the structural frame to allow wind loads to be transferred to the principal structure.
Bed joint reinforcement comprises stainless steel wire bedded in masonry joints and is used to improve the stiffness of masonry walls and assist in wind load resistance.
Fire stopping is a system used to seal openings and joints in fire resistant floors or walls, preventing the spread of smoke and fire into other areas of the building.”
The Dundee City Council report goes on to note:
“The Inquiry determined that the wall at Oxgangs Primary School failed as a result of inadequate wall tie embedment in the original construction. A contributory reason for this was that the inner leaf of the cavity wall was constructed in advance of the outer leaf. Normally, both leafs are constructed together which allows adjustments and tolerance in wall tie installation. Had the wall been built correctly, the structural design was considered adequate to resist the wind loadings and would not have failed.
Inspections at the other Edinburgh Schools highlighted similar construction issues and observed areas of missing head restraint, bed
4 joint reinforcement and under-embedded wall ties. Although the inspection concentrated on the components required for integrity of cavity wall construction, a common thread of deficient fire-stopping was also noted during these inspections.”
Remedial works were undertaken at the 17 Edinburgh schools during the first half of 2016. The cost of these works was borne by ESP.
THEME 1 Independent Inquiry into the Construction of Edinburgh Schools Members may wish to explore with the panel:
• City of Edinburgh’s, other local authorities, and the Scottish Government’s response to the incident.
• Whether measures taken were successful in minimising disruption to pupils’ education
• How the balance between minimising risk to pupils and avoiding disruption to education can be appropriately assessed.
Following the closure of Edinburgh’s schools and the problems identified, the City of Edinburgh Council (CEC) launched an independent inquiry, led by Professor John Cole CBE. The inquiry began in May 2016 and the report was published in February 2017.
The inquiry’s remit covered eight areas:
• The rationale for the Council entering into the PPP1 contract for schools and the effect this financing arrangement may have had on the construction process; • The contractual arrangements between the ESP and CEC; • The reason(s) for, and necessity of, the school closures, including a review of the reasons for the Oxgangs Primary School wall collapse; • The role of the Council with regard to the quality assurance of the construction of the buildings; • The management and maintenance of the buildings since construction, including advising on whether the current defects should have been found earlier; • The management of the contract by the relevant parties since construction; and the quality of the contract undertaken. • CEC's handling of the incident from January 2016 to the reopening of the schools in Summer 2016; and • Advice and recommendations on any specific or wider lessons learned
5 The remainder of this paper summarises the main issues of relevance for the Committee’s inquiry arising from the Edinburgh schools report (the ‘Cole report’) and from evidence received in submissions to the Committee in relation to its current inquiry. A number of wider issues that may be of relevance to the Committee’s inquiry are also highlighted.
City of Edinburgh Council’s response to the incident Immediately following the wall collapse at Oxgangs school, the school was closed but re-opened after three days. Visual inspections of other PPP1 schools were undertaken, but no concerns were raised.
Following this initial response, further survey work was undertaken which provided further information on the nature of the problem, resulting in concerns that similar issues could affect other schools. This led to Oxgangs school being closed again on 16 March 2016, along with the subsequent closure of 16 other schools in Edinburgh that had been built under the PPP1 programme.
In total, over 8,000 pupils were affected by the closures, including primary and secondary school pupils, children with additional support needs and nursery children. Schools re-opened at various dates between late May 2016 and early August 2016.
The Cole report praised CEC’s response to the initial wall collapse at Oxgangs school, in terms of:
• The promptness of its response
• The appropriateness of the response, in the light of information available both immediately following the Oxgangs incident and once further survey work became available
• The speed with which alternative accommodation was found for pupils affected
• Communication with parents
In respect of the impact on education, the inquiry concluded that:
“It is difficult to determine and it will subsequently be difficult to prove whether the closure and decant of the schools has had any longer-term negative impact on the educational attainment of the pupils affected. However, on the basis of the evidence provided, the Inquiry is of the view that any negative impact is likely to have been of a limited nature and that these may have been offset in certain instances by some unexpected positive impacts of the experience.” (para 12.6.11)
6 THEME 2 Use of PPP financing
The Committee may wish to explore:
o Whether the panel agree with the Cole report’s conclusions that the financing method itself was not the reason for the faults in construction that were identified.
The Edinburgh schools inquiry considered whether the use of PPP financing had had any bearing on the level of defective construction uncovered at the Edinburgh schools. The report concluded that:
“…while the financing method was not responsible for the defective construction, aspects of the way in which the PPP methodology was implemented on these projects did increase the risk of poor quality design and construction.” (para 3.1.12)
In particular, the report highlighted a:
“… lack of properly resourced and structured independent scrutiny of the construction and an over-reliance on the part of the City of Edinburgh Council, without adequate evidence, that others in the project structure would comprehensively fulfil this essential role.” (para 7.6.8)
However, the report also noted that:
“There is no reason why properly managed privately financed public sector buildings should not be capable of delivering buildings constructed to a very high standard, if best practice approaches to ensuring the quality of design and construction are properly incorporated. There does however need to be a greater understanding amongst clients and those advising them as to what does represent best practice in this regard.” (para 3.1.14)
In its submission to the Committee, UNISON said:
“While UNISON opposed PPP schemes from the outset, we accept the findings in the report that PPP was not in itself the cause of the problems found. Problems like those identified can occur with any construction project which is why proper regulation and adequate funding for those tasked with ensuring the regulations are met are so crucial.”
The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) supported the use of PPP as a “credible alternative finance model” which “allow the public sector to harness the project delivery expertise, efficiency and experience of the private sector” but noted that:
7 “..it has become apparent during the Edinburgh schools inquiry that both sides of the PPP/PFI contract had cut corners to save money. This was not good practice, and future arrangements will need to be put in place to ensure this does not happen.”
THEME 3 Scrutiny and quality assurance of projects Although the Cole report concluded that the PPP methodology was not of itself the cause of the problems in the Edinburgh schools, it found that:
“…there were fundamental and widespread failures of the quality assurance processes of the various contractors and sub-contractors, who built or oversaw the building of the PPP1 schools.” (para 3.4.2)
A number of issues in relation to scrutiny and quality assurance have been raised both in the Cole report and in submissions to the Committee. These are explored below.
Contractual arrangements
Members may wish to explore:
• whether contractual arrangements have developed since PPP1 and whether there is better quality assurance
• the degree to which schools and communities can or ought to influence the contractual arrangements.
The independent report concluded that contractual arrangements between ESP and CEC were adequate, but could have been strengthened to provide additional assurance to the Council. However, the report authors did not feel that different contractual arrangements would have prevented the problems occurring.
The Scottish Building Federation highlighted an inherent risk in PPP projects that:
“…the supervision of construction is something that is outsourced to the project delivery team on trust – and largely on the basis of self- certification.
…a lack of independent supervision and assessment at each and every stage of the construction process may have been a principal contributing factor to the poor construction practices leading to those structural defects that subsequently emerged.”
In its submission, the Institution of Structural Engineers argued for contracts which focus on build quality, advocating:
8 “Stronger client bodies with contracts which reward good quality of build and punish poor quality. Contractors must not be allowed to report on build quality to verifiers of construction on their own construction projects.”
Local authority as “intelligent client”
Members may wish to consider:
• Whether the panel would agree with the Cole reports conclusion that quality assurance procedures were inadequate in the PPP1 programme and whether this continues to be the case
• Whether scrutiny and quality assurance arrangements are different in projects financed through direct capital methods
o If so, are the arrangements better and/or adequate? • The role of Clerks of Works and the importance of this role to the quality of building works
• The extent of use of Clerks of Works across local authorities in relation to privately financed projects
The Cole report recommended that public sector bodies act as “intelligent customers” and that they should maintain, or have assured access to, a level of expertise and resources that enables them to undertake this role. In their submissions to the Committee, the Scottish Building Federation (SBF) and the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland (ADES) welcomed this recommendation.
The Cole report considered that clearer definition of the responsibilities of the Independent Certifier in relation to inspection of construction would have been helpful. The report highlighted a range of approaches and differences in responsibilities, such that the reliance that could be placed on the Availability Certificates issued by the Independent Certifiers was not clear. ADES noted that there should be clearer guidance on expectations in relation to Independent Certification.
The Cole report highlighted the inadequacy of the Independent Certifier role in the PPP1 projects and noted the potential valuable role of a Clerk of Works. Some local authorities had retained Clerks of Works in their privately financed schools projects and felt that this had been beneficial. CEC did not take this approach with its PPP1 projects and the report authors felt that this was probably the case for “a significant majority” of public sector clients undertaking PPP projects.
The report noted that:
9 “While the presence of Clerks of Works cannot guarantee the absence of defects in building construction, there is no doubt in the view of the inquiry that the use of experienced and properly resourced high quality Clerks of Works results in a much greater likelihood of defective work being identified before it is closed in. Secondly, the inquiry is also of the opinion that the awareness by site operatives of the presence of Clerks of Works on site can impact positively on their approach to the quality of their work.” (para 3.4.10)
The report authors concluded that the widespread nature of the same defective construction technique and the identification of other issues, in particular fire-stopping, demonstrated that “an appropriate level of independent scrutiny was missing” and concluded that:
“It is incumbent upon the construction industry to develop and promulgate best practice methods that can be relied upon to provide the necessary level of assurance in relation to those areas of construction that become quickly closed-up to inspection, the failure of which could impact on the safety of the users of buildings.” (para 3.8.7)
In their submission to the Committee’s inquiry, the Scottish Building Federation commented:
“Arguably, to avoid a repeat of such cases in future, we have suggested that the procuring authority must assume a much more proactive approach in independently supervising and assessing construction. This will require the commitment of additional resources to building standards and, potentially, the appointment of a dedicated Clerk of Works or similar to carry out regular on-site assessment throughout the period of construction. The additional cost of carrying out this work may be something that needs to be incorporated into future PPP tenders.”
UNISON also noted that:
“A Clerk of Works is a vital role and needs to be undertaken whether the project is funded by the public purse or private companies. This is the person who should be on site checking that all work is carried out to the correct standards. Some members go as far as suggesting that there should be legislation to make this role compulsory on any building job above a certain size. UNISON believes that this has reasonable merit and should be further investigated.”
A number of local authorities that responded to the Committee’s call for evidence (e.g. Glasgow, Clackmannanshire, Argyll and Bute, Orkney and Dundee) made reference to the use of Clerks of Works in construction projects, although it is not in all cases clear whether this would have been the case at the time of the PPP1 programme, or whether changes have been implemented since then. In addition, it is not clear whether the numbers of Clerks of Works available is commensurate to the number of projects underway at any time.
10 In its submission, Clackmannanshire Council commented:
“Staffing reductions and an increased externalisation of work is likely to impact on the internal quality assurance methodologies previously used.”
Building Standards process
Members may wish to explore the view that an over-reliance has been placed on the building standards process as an indicator of quality. The Cole report concluded that there was an over-reliance on the statutory Building Standards process as an indicator of the quality of construction. The authors noted that it was not reasonable to expect the type of failures uncovered in the Edinburgh school buildings to be identified by building inspectors, given the nature of the building standards inspections and their frequency. In its own submission to the Committee, Local Authority Building Standards Scotland (LABSS) noted that:
“The Building Standards [system] has no remit to control quality assurance practices in the construction of a building….
It is not intended to provide protection to a client in a contract with a builder.
The inspections do not provide a system to control work on site, that is a matter for the contracts and arrangements put in place between the client and builder.”
UNISON also noted that:
“Investing in resources in building standards teams while important will not in itself prevent the problems raised in the report from re-occurring; there isn’t sufficient oversight of the day to day building work as it is being done.”
Committee members should also be aware that the Local Government and Communities Committee is currently undertaking an inquiry on Building Regulations in Scotland.
11 Cost considerations
Members may wish to consider:
• The extent to which cost factors may have driven decisions about scrutiny and inspection arrangements
o the extent to which this remains a factor
o the extent to which this affects capital funded projects as well as revenue-financed projects
The Cole report noted that a desire to control costs was as a factor influencing decisions around inspection and scrutiny arrangements “rather than a serious assessment of the risks of not providing for adequate independent scrutiny.” Reflecting these concerns, the report concluded that:
“The procurers of buildings need to consider whether the drive for faster, lower cost construction may be being achieved to the detriment of its quality and safety.” (para 3.8.18)
THEME 4 Skills and training issues
Members may wish to consider whether enough is being done to tackle the skills issues identified by the Cole report and in other submissions
• Are the courses and qualifications available of an adequate standard?
• Does the nature of employment contracts have an impact on recruitment, retention and skills development?
The Cole report, along with a number of written submissions, highlights issues relating to skills and training in the construction industry. Both Professor Cole and others note that the problems identified were not associated with individual contractors or sub-contractors, but appeared to reflect widespread quality issues within the bricklaying industry. Accordingly, the Cole report recommended that:
“…the construction industry should re-examine its approach to recruitment, training, selection and appointment of brick-laying subcontractors, means of remuneration, vetting of qualifications and competence, supervision and quality assurance of bricklayers.” (p240)
12 In his written evidence, Professor Cole reiterates the lack of apprenticeship opportunities, skills deficiencies within the industry, recruitment difficulties, the short-term nature of contracts and payment mechanisms as factors contributing to poor workmanship in the construction sector, specifically in relation to the construction of external walls.
RICS refers to a “chronic skills shortage” in the construction sector. They also highlighted the loss of skilled staff in building standards team as a result of retirement and reductions in budgets, combined with a limited flow of new graduates and trainees into the profession.
The Federation of Master Builders (FMB) notes that none of the bricklaying sub-contractors named in relation to the Edinburgh schools defects were FMB members. They also refer to skills shortages in the construction industry, an ageing workforce and a poor image, threatening the future capacity of the industry. They stress the need to maintain high quality apprenticeships, although noting that the apprenticeships available in Scotland are well- perceived and attract higher levels of recruitment than in England as a result.
The FMB welcomes the recommendations made in the Cole report regarding apprenticeships, namely:
“The appropriate authorities should undertake a review of the current level of provision of training in these areas, and any others considered relevant, to ensure that the construction industry has access to an adequate properly trained and qualified resource in each of these areas.” (Recommendation 6.1)
“In relation to the training of bricklayers, the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) should review with the industry the effectiveness of current apprenticeship arrangements in meeting the objective of developing a highly skilled bricklaying workforce.
The current apprenticeship course and skills tests should also be reviewed to ensure that there is sufficient focus on understanding the function of and the practical installation of brickwork accessories.” (Recommendation 6.2)
The Scottish Building Federation’s submission refers to work it is undertaking with the Scottish Building Apprenticeship and Training Council to review existing arrangements but notes concerns in relation to the SQA’s recently published assessment strategy for the SVQ Level 3 craft apprenticeship qualifications (which would include bricklaying). Particular concerns relate to the perceived inadequacy of skills testing arrangements and the collation of portfolios of evidence from the workplace. These concerns are also noted in the FMB’s submission.
13 THEME 5 Adequacy of subsequent inspection and remedial works undertaken Members may wish to explore:
• Whether inspection activity in relation to the specific problems identified in Edinburgh is considered to be adequate across the entire school estate in Scotland
• Whether there remains the possibility that similar problems to those identified in Edinburgh remain in other school buildings
• Whether inspection activity has been focused on the PPP1 schools and the extent to which other schools have been included in the inspection activity (i.e. older/younger schools and/or those financed using capital financing methods)
• Whether inspection activity has been focused on issues identified at the Edinburgh schools (wall ties, header ties, bed joint reinforcement, fire-stopping) and whether there is a risk that other major defects exist which have not been identified
• The likelihood that similar issues might affect non-school buildings both within the education estate e.g. colleges, but also beyond e.g. hospitals, health centres, community centres
The independent inquiry began while the remedial works were still underway and did not comment specifically on the adequacy or otherwise of these works. Nor did the inquiry comment on any subsequent inspection and remedial work outside Edinburgh or beyond the school estate.
Following the Edinburgh schools incident, the Scottish Government asked all local authorities to undertake a review of their school buildings and this resulted in remedial work at a number of other schools. The BBC issued Freedom of Information requests to all local authorities asking for details of remedial works involving wall ties, header ties (wall head restraints), bed joint reinforcement or other significant structural issues undertaken to PPP schools and any further planned work. Table 2 summarises the responses. Fifteen local authorities have carried out remedial works.
Table 2: Responses to BBC FoI requests Local Authority Remedial Additional details works carried out? Aberdeen No Aberdeenshire No (but Work on five unspecified schools planned) that is non-emergency.
14 Local Authority Remedial Additional details works carried out? Angus Yes (more Work on wall and header ties on planned) four schools has been carried out (Burnside, Strathmore, Forfar and Whitehills academies). Work on wall and header ties is still required on Woodlands primary. Argyll and Bute Yes Wall and header ties for five schools. (Oban Primary, Lochgilphead joint campus, Dunoon Grammar, Rothesay Joint campus and Hermitage Academy). City of Edinburgh No Clackmannanshire Yes Minor bulge in wall at Alloa. Reinforcement work at Lornshill. Comhairle nan Eilean Siar No Dumfries and Galloway No Dundee City Yes Work done at St Andrew’s Primary, Craigowl Primary and Grove Academy. East Ayrshire No East Dumbartonshire No East Lothian Yes Remediation to rectify inconsistent embedment, remediation to ensure embedment of wall ties, installation of additional header ties, windposts tied to inner leaf, installation of additional windposts. Work done at Dunbar grammar, Knox Academy, North Berwick High and Preston Lodge High. East Renfrewshire Yes Work at St Ninian’s and Mearns Primary Falkirk No Fife Yes Wall ties work. One masonry panel at Fair Isle Primary and two masonry panels on Oakley. Glasgow City Yes Minor wall and header ties work at 22 schools. Highland Yes Blockwork damage to unspecified school and wall tie concerns at Ardnamurchan high, the latter issue remains unresolved. Inverclyde Yes Two primary and two secondary schools required minor remedial works including inserting wall ties at three of the schools. Also work done at Inverclyde Academy. Midlothian Yes Minor remedial work and
15 Local Authority Remedial Additional details works carried out? Tynewater Primary Moray No North Ayrshire No North Lanarkshire Yes Design and build work at one school. Orkney No Perth and Kinross No Renfrewshire No Scottish Borders No Shetland No South Ayrshire No South Lanarkshire Yes Blockwork rebuilt at Duncanrig High Stirling Yes Wall head restraint supports completed at St Modan’s and Wallace High. Helical wall ties, wallhead restraints and tying to vertical steel members at Balfron High. West Dunbartonshire No West Lothian Yes Armadale Academy, Bathgate Academy and Deans Community High School had wall ties installed. Source: BBC
The Cole report also noted that the wall tie defects uncovered in the Edinburgh schools were not outwardly visible and could only be identified through more intrusive survey work. It is not clear whether all schools have undertaken intrusive surveys. For example, Clackmannanshire Council’s submission refers only to visual inspections. Professor Cole’s written evidence to the Committee also comments:
“It was…evident from the responses provided by the various Authorities that the level of investigation that they or their private sector partners had carried out on their buildings, as a result of the information they had been provided with following the Oxgangs School incident, varied significantly from simple desk-top reviews to purely visual inspections to more intrusive inspections.”
Likelihood of wider issues In relation to potential problems beyond the school estate, the Cole report noted that:
“It would…be naïve to suggest that this is a problem only relating to the construction of schools and that contractors apply a better standard of quality assurance on other building types. If these defects are present in school buildings, there is also a likelihood that they are present with
16 similar frequency in other buildings that contain large masonry panels or where masonry panels are required to be tied back to a structural frame.” (para 3.8.5)
Professor Cole’s written submission also notes that the defects identified in the Edinburgh schools were “non-building-type-specific” and “liable to occur with the same frequency in other building types”.
THEME 6 Ongoing maintenance
Members may wish to explore:
• Whether the panel would agree with the inquiry’s view that Council-owned schools do not benefit from the same level of maintenance expenditure
• How schools report faults in council-owned and PPP schools and the differences in how they are dealt with.
• Whether there is sufficient follow up activity when a specific construction defect is identified to ensure that it is not present in other buildings across the public sector estate, given that similar issues to that which caused the Oxgangs wall collapse had been previously identified
Local authorities are responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the school estate. In the case of privately financed schools, unitary charges cover maintenance and are covered by the contract between the local authority and the SPV, agreed at the outset of the project. However, in the case of schools built through traditional capital financing methods, the ongoing maintenance is determined by the local authority. The inquiry into the Edinburgh schools commented that this “lack of obligation in relation to Council-owned schools” meant that these schools did not “receive the same level of budgetary allowance from the City of Edinburgh Council for their maintenance.”
On the other hand, the report noted some concerns over the extent to which proactive maintenance work forms part of the ongoing inspection work of ESP. In relation to fire-stopping concerns, the report noted:
“Given that, for some considerable time, there has been relatively widespread knowledge within the PFI industry that defective fire- stopping had been discovered to be a potentially problematic issue in PPP schools and hospitals, it is surprising that ESP had not taken a more proactive approach at an earlier stage to establish the condition of fire-stopping in the PPP1 schools.” (para 3.4.29)
17 Also, in relation to the specific defects identified at Oxgangs, the report noted that these had been previously identified in other schools, although it seems that no wider action was taken:
“Similar defects have been identified across other school buildings in Scotland. Some of these, predating the collapse in Edinburgh, also resulted in the collapse of brickwork panels.” (para 3.8.3)
Nicola Hudson Senior Researcher Financial Scrutiny Unit, SPICe 8 June 2017
Note: Committee briefing papers are provided by SPICe for the use of Scottish Parliament committees and clerking staff. They provide focused information or respond to specific questions or areas of interest to committees and are not intended to offer comprehensive coverage of a subject area.
The Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP www.scottish.parliament.uk
18 ANNEX: Public Private Partnership funding The UK Government introduced its Private Finance Initiative (PFI) programme in 1992. PFI is a form of Public Private Partnership (PPP) financing used to support capital investment plans.
In PPP projects the public sector body has a contract with a ‘Special Purpose Vehicle’ (SPV). The SPV is set up by the companies in the successful consortium expressly for the purpose of delivering the project. In PFI and NPD school projects, the contract is to design, build, finance and maintain (DBFM) the school. Once the school is built, the local authority starts paying a ‘unitary charge’ to the SPV. This is a payment agreed at the start of the project and lasts for the length of the contract – usually 25-30 years and covers both the construction and maintenance costs.
The Scottish Government has provided financial support to local authorities in relation to unitary charge commitments for revenue financed schools, although the exact proportion met by the Scottish Government varies from project to project, depending on scope. For schools projects in the SSF programme, the Scottish Government is funding total construction related costs for secondary schools on a 67-33 basis with local authorities, while primary school projects are funded on a 50-50 basis. Local authorities are responsible for the elements of the unitary charge payment associated with hard facilities management and lifecycle costs, and the Scottish Government is responsible for other elements of the unitary charge payment (other than the unitary charge related to the local authorities’ share of total construction related costs where applicable).3
The original PFI programme has been subject to much criticism, largely relating to the perceived lack of value for money and profits made by contractors. As a result, the Scottish Government developed an alternative revenue funding model known as the ‘non profit distributing’ (NPD) model. The NPD model is a form of PPP, but places limits on the profits that can be made by private sector partners and requires that any surpluses beyond these agreed limits are returned to the public sector.
The Scottish Government has highlighted the use of NPD financing as a means of maintaining capital investment in the face of reductions to the Scottish Government’s capital budget. The NPD model was developed and introduced as an alternative to PFI in Scotland. The main NPD programme was launched in November 2010, but there were a few projects funded through NPD financing prior to this.
NPD shares many features with the PFI model that it replaced. NPD funded projects are similar to PFI projects in that:
• a private sector company is established to raise money to build a school on a Design, Build, Finance and Maintain (DBFM) basis
3 http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Government/Finance/18232/12308/NPDhubPipelinepayments
19 • the public sector pays a unitary charge over the lifetime of the contract
• the bulk of the money is raised by borrowing.
However, NPD differs from PFI in a number of respects:
• Private sector returns are capped; contractors and lenders are expected to earn a normal market rate of return as in any other form of privately-financed PPP deal but the NPD model aims to eliminate the uncapped equity returns associated with the traditional PFI model and limit these returns to a reasonable rate set in competition through an open procurement process compliant with EU rules
• There is enhanced stakeholder involvement in the management of projects
• There is no dividend bearing equity
Source: Scottish Futures Trust
In 2017-18, unitary charge payments in relation to revenue-financed school projects are expected to total £505m. On the basis of current plans, payments will peak at £605m in 2029-30, but this could change if further schools are financed using revenue financing. Of the £505m total for 2017-18, the majority (£426.8m or 84%) relates to PFI projects. Only £78.5m relates to NPD projects, although the balance will shift as payments on PFI projects start to reduce and payments associated with NPD projects increase over time.
In 2017-18, the Scottish Government will meet just under half of the costs associated with school unitary charges. Of the £505m total, the Scottish Government will provide support totalling £238m.
20 ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Agenda Item 2 ES/S5/17/18/2
EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE
Wednesday 14 June 2017
School infrastructure - submissions
Witness submissions
Professor John Cole Scottish Building Federation RICS in Scotland
Stakeholder submissions
Institution of Structural Engineers Local Authority Building Standards Scotland (LABSS) Federation of Master Builders UNISON Building Research Establishment EIS NHBC National Parent Forum of Scotland Association of Directors of Education in Scotland Scottish Government and Scottish Futures Trust Multivista
Local authorities’ submissions
Orkney Islands Council Argyll and Bute Council Glasgow City Council Dundee City Council Clackmannanshire Council Scottish Borders Council Angus Council East Lothian Council East Renfrewshire Council Fife Council Inverclyde Council South Lanarkshire Council Stirling Council West Dunbartonshire Council West Lothian Council
Submissions pack p1 B ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Education and Skills Committee School Infrastructure Submission from Prof John Cole CBE 6 June 2017 Brief Analysis of the Findings of the Report into the Construction of Edinburgh Schools for the Education and Skills Committee. 1. The Inquiry was commissioned by the City of Edinburgh Council (CEC). In undertaking this work, I enjoyed the full cooperation of the Council in relation to accessing all information and material that was available both in respect of the original construction of the 17 Edinburgh schools in 2002 -2005 and the remedial works undertaken between February 2016 and the end of January 2017.
2. However, the remit and authority of the Report was limited. Access to information relating to Authorities outside Edinburgh depended on the willingness of those Authorities to share relevant information. Some Authorities were extremely cooperative in sharing information, others were so to a lesser extent.
3. It was also evident from the responses provided by the various Authorities that the level of investigation that they or their Private Sector Partners had carried out on their buildings, as a result of the information they had been provided with following the Oxgangs School incident, varied significantly from simple desk-top reviews to purely visual inspections to more intrusive inspections.
4. In relation to the 17 Edinburgh schools, I can confirm, as I have in my report, that the remedial work undertaken in relation to the defective construction of brick panels was comprehensive, thorough and professional in its implementation. The Inquiry was satisfied as to its effectiveness in dealing with the external wall issues identified in the report.
5. In relation to other Council buildings in Edinburgh, the Inquiry recommended that CEC undertake a risk-based assessment and appropriate investigations of those buildings, including other school projects, that had used similar construction methodologies and that were built in relatively recent years. I have asked CEC for an update on these investigations and have been advised that they would hope to be in a position to provide such an update shortly.
6. There was widespread recurrence of the same range of fundamental faults impacting on the structural safety of the external walls across the 17 schools in Edinburgh despite the fact that they were constructed in 2 phases by 6 different main contractors, each using different firms of brick-laying sub-contractors, in turn using different squads of brick- layers. The report sets out very specifically the number and similarity of defects found across the 17 schools.
1 Submissions pack p2 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
7. These defects included;
the frequent omission or mispositioning of wall ties to such an extent that there was inadequate tying of the two leaves of the external walls together thus reducing the structural performance of the brick panels;
the omission in many cases of bed joint reinforcement layers shown on the engineer’s drawings, the proper inclusion of which was necessary to enable the wall panels to resist high winds as set down in the building codes
the omission in many cases of header ties and in some cases lateral ties which were required to tie the external walls back to the main structural frame of the building thus failing to provide the essential structural stability to the wall panels
variation beyond accepted tolerances in the width of the cavity between the leaves of the external walls thus exacerbating the lack of embedment of the wall ties and leading to in some cases no embedment of wall ties at all
the occasional omission of wind-posts, which would have been required to strengthen larger or inadequately supported smaller panels
8. Of great concern to the Inquiry was the factual evidence of multiple repetition of these defects by different firms. This evidence was provided in the reports of the structural investigations undertaken. There was no logical explanation other than to conclude that there was a considerable risk that this level of poor quality construction and supervision could equally be found to be present in the work of other construction companies across the Industry in Scotland, if not further afield in the UK, and therefore could be present in a significant number of projects built over recent years.
9. Additionally, up to that time the defective wall-construction had been largely seen by many external observers as pertaining specifically to the construction of schools, to which building type current investigations up to then had been largely restricted. However, the Inquiry concluded that the defects were non-building-type-specific, and were potentially liable to occur with the same frequency in other building types in which large masonry panels, which otherwise would be free-standing masonry panels, were required to be tied back to a structural frame. This arrangement would be a normal requirement in many other building types.
10. In light of the Inquiry’s concerns as to the potentially endemic nature and extent of these problems within the Industry, the Inquiry sought information from all Local Authorities in Scotland on the nature of any investigations, findings or incidents that would be relevant to the safety of external walls, particularly in relation to schools.
2 Submissions pack p3 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
11. Many of the reports of investigations undertaken by other Authorities in schools across Scotland provided evidence of the presence to greater or lesser degrees of the same underlying construction defects.
12. Evidence given to the Inquiry from experienced construction professionals also confirmed that these same building defects and quality issues were also regularly encountered in the non-school sectors they represented.
13. As the Inquiry Report confirms, there were at least 4 incidents involving the collapse of masonry panels in schools in Scotland during the 4 years prior to the collapse at Oxgangs School in Edinburgh. On the basis of the information provided to the Inquiry by the relevant Local Authorities, it was clear that the primary cause of these collapses was consistent with that which caused the collapse at the Oxgangs School.
14. Fortunately, none of these incidents resulted in injuries to persons, however, any such fall of heavy brick masonry panels from a building could easily have led to injuries including fatalities
15. The conclusion of the Inquiry was that there was potentially a major issue in relation to construction quality within the Industry that could impact on the safety of building users and the general public. It is important that the poor quality construction practices which have caused these failures are eradicated from the Industry.
16. The underlying causes of this lack of quality were seen as; poor workmanship at a tradesman level; inadequate supervision at a sub-contractor level; failure to have or implement adequate quality assurances processes at a contractor level; lack of site inspection by professional design team members; and inadequate independent scrutiny of the work of contractors by client representatives.
17. These particular failures were associated with an aspect of construction which is closed up and difficult to inspect after completion. During the period of the Inquiry it came to light that significant safety-related defects had also been discovered in the critical area of fire-stopping in the 17 schools, another aspect of the construction that would have been difficult to inspect after completion. This reinforced the concerns of the Inquiry as to the effectiveness of and reliance that can be placed on what has become a virtual self-certification by contractors of the quality of their own work.
3 Submissions pack p4 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
18. Factors contributing to the unacceptable level of occurrence of poor quality workmanship in relation to the construction of external walls were seen to include;
Reduced opportunities for longer-term apprenticeship positions with sufficient range of types of experience Lack of awareness by some tradesmen of the importance of brick accessories in ensuring the structural performance of wall panels Inability to recruit sufficient numbers of high-quality experienced bricklayers in times of demand Lack of assured continuity of employment as a bricklayer and impact of seasonal factor reducing the availability of skilled tradesmen in maintaining Scotland Loss of experience and skills in the Industry following major boom and bust cycles Inadequate checking by contractors of trade credentials of individual bricklayers appearing on site Payment mechanisms that encourage the maximisation of the number of bricks laid in a day by a bricklayer rather than ensuring the quality of brickwork and the proper incorporation of required brickwork accessories The potentially incomplete or confusing format of project information provided to individual bricklayers on site Lack of specific training by bricklayers in the fixing of accessories, such as that provided by manufacturers of brickwork accessories,
19. Factors contributing to occurrences of lack of supervision on site were seen to include;
Focus on reducing time and cost often to the detriment of quality Insufficient allocation of properly experienced/specialist resource by sub- contractors and contractors to supervision or regular inspection of work Increasing difficulty in finding experienced tradesmen to act in supervisory or quality assurance roles Design and Build contractors frequently not keen to appoint and pay for their design team to regularly inspect the works Potential conflict of interest for contractors over commercial impact of delay and cost of redoing any identified sub-standard work Difficulty in inspecting work that has been allowed to be closed up without inspection A misplaced over-reliance on the degree to which Contractors should be allowed to mark their own homework given the irrefutable evidence over
4 Submissions pack p5 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
many years of the importance of appropriate independent scrutiny or third-party certification of construction Quality assurance systems not implemented properly on site
20. Factors contributing to the increasing occurrences of lack of independent scrutiny by public sector clients of the work of contractors were seen to include;
The deskilling and increasing loss of in-house professional expertise in public bodies impacting on their ability to properly fulfil the essential role of intelligent customer The false economy of seeking to reduce the cost to the client of projects by reducing investment in resources and processes designed to protect the quality of projects Procurement models which have tended to prevent the design team from having a direct responsibility and duty to or relationship with the client thus failing to optimise their value as professionals in the pursuit and protection of the client’s objectives Public Sector clients being persuaded to reduce the possibility of their contributory negligence in the case of defective construction by becoming increasingly risk-averse and seeking through choice of procurement models to delegate all responsibility for the quality of construction to contractors. The use of inadequate and poorly defined contract conditions for the employment of Independent Certifiers which have been inappropriately interpreted by clients to provide certified assurance as to the quality of all aspects of the construction Lack of awareness or interest by clients in the terms of appointment and the scope of work of design teams when appointed directly by contractors, particularly in relation to the extent, if any, of site inspections they are required/allowed/paid to carry out. A naïve assumption that design team members appointed by and acting for a contractor are also necessarily acting in the best interests of the client and the project Increasing tendency for the failure of Public Bodies to do away with in- house clerks of works who would previously have carried out site inspections of their projects Failure to appoint external clerks of works to provide a properly resourced and appropriately experienced detailed independent scrutiny of the construction,
5 Submissions pack p6 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
21. Issues relating to skill shortages
Building Contractors giving evidence to the Inquiry repeatedly reported the increasing difficulty in the Industry in Scotland of recruiting / procuring high quality reliable and sufficiently experienced bricklayers A series of informed witnesses to the Inquiry reported the increasing difficulty in recruiting experienced clerks of works, when they were required, due to both the reduced opportunities in this occupation as a result of the diminution in the use of clerks of works by Public Bodies and as a direct result of the lack of availability of necessary training courses to provide routes to a recognised qualification in the profession
It was also reported to the Inquiry by several experienced witnesses that it was increasingly difficult to recruit experienced building inspectors with the requisite skills to undertake the duties required of Building Control Officers and that, similar to the plight of clerk of works, there was no longer the previous level of availability of structured training courses for this specialist and essential role.
Concern was also expressed to the Inquiry by a significant number of senior architects and engineers in relation to the increasingly prevalent choice of procurement models using the design and build approach and the already mentioned associated decreasing level of attendance on site by design team professionals due to their terms of appointment as set by contractors. This change from the more traditional arrangement was seen by many as contributing to a potentially damaging deskilling of younger members of the design professions by failing to provide them with the essential site experience to inform their construction knowledge and related design ability.
22. Essentially, to sum up, over recent decades the Government’s increasingly risk-averse approach to procurement has led to a situation whereby to a large degree there is no longer the necessary level of independent scrutiny of the work of building contractors and a currently misplaced over-reliance on the Industry policing itself. This gap has to be addressed.
23. Finally, on a positive note, I have been encouraged by the interest generated by the Report, by the widespread acknowledgement by sectors across the Industry of the issues identified and by a seemingly proactive response by Government bodies, other public sector bodies and significant elements of the construction industry in seeking to address these issues and the implementation of the recommendations of the Report.
6 Submissions pack p7 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Crichton House 4 Crichton’s Close Edinburgh EH8 8DT Tel. 0131 556 8866 James Dornan MSP Convener Education and Skills Committee T3.40 The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP
07 June 2017
Dear Mr Dornan,
Evidence request: School buildings across Scotland
I am writing in response to your recent request for evidence as part of a short inquiry being undertaken by the Education and Skills Committee on school buildings across Scotland.
As you will be aware, the Scottish Building Federation made an active contribution to the inquiry that led to the publication of Professor John Cole’s “Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Construction of Edinburgh Schools”.
Alongside its sister organisation the Scottish Building Apprenticeship and Training Council, the Scottish Building Federation remains actively involved in considering the full implications of the Edinburgh schools inquiry and Professor Cole’s concluding report for the future of the Scottish construction industry. In particular, we will be hosting two sessions in June with the direct involvement of Professor Cole. These are designed to raise awareness of the report and its conclusions and the associated implications for the industry. One of the sessions will be targeted at college lecturers while the other will be aimed at contractors.
Looking ahead, we are particularly keen to consider these implications as they relate to the future of apprenticeships and other training and development programmes in Scottish construction. This is an area where we feel SBF and SBATC can provide the greatest added value to the Education and Skills Committee’s current inquiry. On this basis, Paul Mitchell, SBATC Registrar and Head of Employment Affairs at the Scottish Building Federation is available to provide oral evidence to the committee on the 14th June.
I should make it clear that Paul’s main area of expertise will be skills and training as opposed to the implications of the inquiry for the school estate.
As a written contribution to the Committee’s inquiry, the following is a summary of the evidence previously submitted to the original Edinburgh schools inquiry, updated with some more recent observations.
In submitting evidence to the original inquiry, we were particularly concerned that its key focus should be to identify specific failures in process that led to the serious defects in construction of a
Submissions pack p8 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
number of schools built in Edinburgh between 2002 and 2005 under the Public Private Partnership programme (“PPP1”). We expressed concerns that the inquiry should not allow itself to be distracted by any wider debates around the merits or otherwise of public private partnership as a mechanism for financing large scale public infrastructure projects.
Indeed, since public private partnership is likely to continue to be one of the principal mechanisms for delivering such projects in the future, we argued that it would be helpful to explore examples of PPP projects implemented in other jurisdictions that have successfully delivered infrastructure projects without those structural defects that affected the Edinburgh schools that were the main focus of the inquiry. In so doing, we argued that the aim should be to determine how the processes followed in those cases differed from those that were followed in Edinburgh with the aim of pinpointing and eliminating bad practice and promoting best practice in the delivery of future projects, irrespective of how these are funded.
In procuring large scale projects of this nature through public private partnership, there has always been an inherent risk that the supervision of construction is something that is outsourced to the project delivery team on trust – and largely on the basis of self-certification. With projects of this size, this is a substantial risk for the procuring authority (which is ultimately responsible if anything goes wrong) to take. Our own analysis of the background information surrounding these particular cases suggests that a lack of independent supervision and assessment at each and every stage of the construction process may have been a principal contributing factor to the poor construction practices leading to those structural defects that subsequently emerged.
In the current climate of ongoing budgetary constraints, building standards departments within local government have suffered cuts, leading to a different model of service provision to that which existed previously. In this context, we argued that the inquiry should also explore to what extent a loss of in-house resource to support regular on-site assessment and supervision by the procuring authority may have contributed to the problem. Arguably, to avoid a repeat of such cases in future, we have suggested that the procuring authority must assume a much more proactive approach in independently supervising and assessing construction. This will require the commitment of additional resources to building standards and, potentially, the appointment of a dedicated Clerk of Works or similar to carry out regular on-site assessment throughout the period of construction. The additional cost of carrying out this work may be something that needs to be incorporated into future PPP tenders.
In light of the evidence submitted by SBF to the inquiry, we were particularly encouraged by the final report’s recommendations pertaining to procurement, which emphasised the importance of public authorities ensuring they have adequate expertise and resourcing to behave as an ‘intelligent customer’ – as well as highlighting the importance of independent scrutiny.
Beyond this, SBF believes that a more collaborative and less confrontational approach to procurement would further help to avoid a repeat of such poor practice in the future. In particular, contractors and procuring authorities should be encouraged to have a more frank and open discussion at the very start of the process about the true lifecycle cost of major building projects in order that expectations on both sides can be more effectively managed and met. Supported by CITB, the Scottish Building Federation is currently engaged in a project to develop a Collaborative Leadership Framework for the construction industry (CCLF) with the precise aim of addressing some of these issues.
Submissions pack p9 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Training and recruitment
SBF and SBATC has been particularly active in seeking to address those conclusions of the Cole report that relate to the future of training and recruitment within the construction industry. As we consider the report’s recommendations, we do so in the context of recent proposals for the future of training and apprenticeships in Scottish construction that could seriously hamper the fulfilment of those recommendations and that pose a major threat of deskilling within the industry.
We have noted in particular the Cole report’s recommendation that “the effectiveness of current apprenticeship arrangements in meeting the objective of developing a highly skilled bricklaying workforce” and the “current apprenticeship course and skills tests” should be reviewed.
A key purpose of the sessions being organised in June will be to explore precisely what changes may be needed in this area.
The Scottish Building Apprenticeship and Training Council was set up in 1934 and exists to regulate and monitor the working conditions, wages, recruitment and training of apprenticeships within the building industry throughout Scotland. To achieve this, it is composed of representatives from industry, trade federations, and trade unions. SBATC is therefore uniquely placed to comment on those recommendations of the Cole report relating to skills and apprenticeships.
An initial review of current training arrangements carried out by SBATC suggests that there may be a need in particular to place a greater emphasis in the content of bricklaying courses on the use of wall ties and the new types of ties now available.
The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) has recently published a consolidated assessment strategy associated with SVQ Level 3 craft apprenticeship qualifications (which include traditional crafts such as bricklaying). Regrettably, the industry was repeatedly denied the opportunity to contribute to the drafting of this strategy and has strong concerns that this document sets out inadequate arrangements for the delivery of ‘skills testing’ and collating portfolios of evidence from the workplace. SQA has also indicated its intention to pursue diluted SVQ Level 2 craft qualifications in future, which we believe would be a retrograde step.
We have a number of critical concerns about the new assessment strategy which have important implications for those conclusions and recommendations contained in the Cole report that relate to training and recruitment, specifically that the strategy as currently drafted could result in the following:
An erosion in the viability of the accepted time-served periods associated with craft apprenticeship qualifications. A weakening of the industry registration body’s ability to enact collectively bargained terms and conditions governing the employment of apprentices. A declining level of independent industry oversight of apprenticeship qualifications including an end to the practice of the industry appointing independent ‘skills test’ assessors. A diminution in the value of craft apprenticeship qualifications by allowing candidates to achieve the SVQ3 without undertaking a structured apprenticeship or completing college training.
Submissions pack p10 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
The introduction of diluted SVQ level 2 qualifications in the traditional craft occupations, narrowing the skills set of many trades, limiting career prospects and labour market flexibility and undermining the traditionally high quality of SVQ Level 3 qualifications. Concerns over the safety of construction workers and the public resulting from deskilling and the potential absence of appropriate health and safety training. Restrictions around the ability to simulate workplace conditions when submitting portfolio evidence, raising significant doubts over the ability of many apprentices to achieve their qualification.
We have raised these concerns directly with CITB, SQA and the Modern Apprenticeship Group. We think it is equally important that the Education and Skills Committee be made aware of these concerns given the potential implications for achieving key recommendations of the Cole report that relate to future training and recruitment within the construction industry.
In conclusion, the construction industry in Scotland has an unparalleled track record of delivering robust and meaningful craft qualifications through an apprenticeship model which leads to rewarding careers and a sustainable workforce comprising highly skilled tradespeople. For over 80 years, the construction industry has collectively and successfully shaped craft qualifications to reflect the industry’s needs and expectations.
Our concern is that the proposals put forward by SQA and CITB will inevitably jeopardise these overriding objectives and make it much more difficult to fulfil the recommendations of the Cole report.
SBATC and the Scottish Building Federation are currently seeking to arrange a meeting with the Minister for Employability and Training with a view to working collaboratively and constructively with the Scottish Government to address these issues of concern and to ensure we have a training and apprenticeship framework for the construction sector that is fit for the future.
I hope this letter provides useful input to the Committee’s inquiry. My colleague Paul Mitchell will look forward to expanding on some of the points raised when he appears before the Committee on the 14th June.
Yours sincerely,
Vaughan Hart Managing Director [email protected]
Submissions pack p11 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Education and Skills Committee Inquiry on School Buildings across Scotland
Submission from RICS in Scotland
June 2017
1. The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) is the principal body representing professionals employed in the land, property and construction sectors. In Scotland, the Institution represents over 11,800 members comprising chartered surveyors (MRICS or FRICS), Associate surveyors (AssocRICS), trainees and students.
2. Our members practice in sixteen land, property and construction markets and are employed in private practice, central and local government, public agencies, academic institutions, business organisations and non-governmental organisations.
3. As part of its Royal Charter, RICS has a commitment to provide advice to the government[s] of the day and, in doing so, has an obligation to bear in mind the public interest as well as the interests of its members.
4. RICS is therefore in a unique position to provide a balanced, apolitical perspective on issues of importance to the land, property and construction sectors.
5. This inquiry arises at a time when both the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament are considering how best to approach the issues around school building maintenance, and RICS welcomes this active engagement, and the opportunity to respond.
6. Whilst RICS does not comment on individual cases, we were concerned at the potential building safety issues with Edinburgh schools, and fully supported the investigation.
General Comments
7. It is imperative that political parties, across the political spectrum, work with the Scottish Government and the construction sector to regain the trust of the public, which was hampered by recent school building collapses and closures.
8. Property maintenance is an issue that encompasses all buildings, but is not as high on the Governmental and Parliamentary agendas as it should be.
9. All buildings have an attached risk, and it is a fundamental requirement of any property professional that all developments are constructed as safe as can be.
10. The construction industry participants should be more open, transparent and vocal on issues, and work with the Scottish Government in developing and implementing attainable solutions for collective good for the public, and not their vested interests.
Submissions pack p12 Back to Subs Menu
ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
11. Like the rest of the construction sector, RICS cannot comprehend how so many Edinburgh schools had flaws, and that concerning building snags were not escalated.
12. In the case of Edinburgh schools, there were a number of contributing factors that led to the building failures that occurred at the same time. Whether it was a lack of professionalism, skills, or experience; fear of whistle-blowing; a lack of supervision; or insufficient reporting mechanisms or protocols to escalate concerns.
13. As such, there are a number of sectoral elements that need to be considered.
Education (resource and skills)
14. It is imperative that any future system ensures that there are sufficient levels of skills and competencies on site that are adequate for the tasks at hand.
15. Unfortunately, the construction sector is within the midst of a chronic skills shortage, with the majority of building standards teams and service provision in local authorities is decreasing due to a combination of reduction in budgets and workforce.
16. Many experienced staff will retire in the next five to ten years, and very few graduate or other trainees are coming through the ranks.
17. Indeed, most Local Authorities, where Building Standards Surveyors are employed, are under severe financial constraints, and the fees received into departments are not ring fenced and spent on the training and development required.
18. As such, Building Standards require investment in both funds and staffing.
19. Furthermore, fewer higher education institutions are offering a building control / standards option to degrees in surveying.
20. Encouraging school-age students into built environment, and ensuring they receive adequate training and onsite experience has to be elevated in this Government administration’s agenda.
21. Indeed, this inquiry needs to explore an approach that ensures competency and onsite experience, and training on quality assurance systems of project managers.
Procurement
22. The public procurement strategies, and the drive for competition, push costs down, with quality of workmanship and levels of supervision often sacrificed.
23. These, together with aforementioned skills shortages and decline in numbers of experienced tradesman, impact greatly upon the outcome of projects generally, including the School Building programme.
Submissions pack p13 Back to Subs Menu
ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
24. As such, there is a need to ensure that any future Scottish procurement process is robust, with clients exhibiting sufficient experience and professional qualification.
25. However, a further, key problem of the procurement process is the visible reduction in the role of the professional consultants on site. It is often the case that a professional’s input to the building construction is of secondary importance to that of the builder or contractor. This needs to be addressed.
26. RICS believes that relegating the regulated, independent professional consultants to a subservient role has, on many occasions, reduced the quality of construction. This is prevalent in PFI/PPP and, more recently, Hub projects.
27. This has resulted in a carving up, and ultimately a reduction, of the professional services and responsibilities provided to the ultimate client. By thin slicing professional fees to reduce costs, the key services required to ensure important aspects of the project are either dangerously reduced, or passed over to the contractor; oversight of the construction phase is one example of the key services
28. Chartered surveyors are highly trained and one of the most regulated professions in the UK, and this ensures RICS professionals must follow very strict rules when surveying property and all phases of building and construction projects.
29. We therefore recommend that future procuring bodies request the use of regulated building surveyors and structural engineers when assessing and surveying school buildings to ensure future maintenance and building construction standards.
30. The parliamentary committee may wish to consider the introduction of licensing or quality mark schemes for builders. This could improve onsite skills and ethics, leading to an overall improvement in construction quality.
Finance
31. RICS in Scotland believes that Public Private Partnerships/Public Finance Initiatives (PPP/PFI) are a credible alternative finance model attracting capital investment into infrastructure projects.
32. PPP/ PFIs allow the public sector to harness the project delivery expertise, efficiency and experience of the private sector whilst ensuring further borrowing by the public sector is limited, if not avoided.
33. However, it has become apparent during the Edinburgh schools inquiry that both sides of the PPP/PFI contract had cut corners to save money. This was not good practice, and future arrangements will need to be put in place to ensure this does not happen.
34. The cost of the contract should not be based on the lowest tender.
Submissions pack p14 Back to Subs Menu
ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Leadership, Supervision and Inspection
35. It is important that future policy dictates who will provide leadership; who will regulate, monitor and enforce quality and standards: Government or industry.
36. The parliamentary committee may wish to consider the introduction of licensing or quality mark schemes for builders. This could improve onsite skills and ethics, leading to an overall improvement in construction quality.
37. This inquiry brings to the fore stand out issues: a failure of management and supervision; a passing of risk; and whether the contracts put cost and time issues above quality.
38. RICS understands that the Scottish Government is considering whether procedural regulations should specify a minimum requirement for the inspection of ongoing building works, to ensure compliance with building standards. The inspection of buildings being paramount to alleviating risk and promoting safety.
39. Whilst the introduction of procedural regulations could help advance these two notions, more detail and scrutiny on the application of procedural regulations will be required in advance of its introduction. This should include consideration of measures against developers who commence work without the verifier being informed.
40. Finally, any future amends to the system should ensure consistency within each Building Standards office, and ensure sufficient inspection protocol.
Submissions pack p15 Back to Subs Menu
ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
THE INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS SCOTTISH REGIONAL GROUP
Briefing note on failures in design and procurement highlighted by Edinburgh Schools and failures in other public buildings.
Independent site checking required Independent technical supervision of construction work is required by suitably qualified staff with verifiable competency. This should be applied to all key public buildings such as schools, hospitals and local government buildings.
Inspections to be risk based Risk based verification in place throughout the design and build process. Risks to be calibrated on the consequences of failure and risks to the public.
Contracts which focus on build quality Stronger client bodies with contracts which reward good quality of build and punish poor quality. Contractors must not be allowed to report on build quality to verifiers of construction on their own construction projects.
Communication not linked to commercial pressures. Open and full technical communication from site to client bodies.
Site training linked to verification of competency Improved training for site staff and designers and verification of competency.
Danger signs Fragmented design and construction with many packages of site work creating interfaces with unclear responsibility.
Critical Interfaces Wall and roof cladding fixings to secondary and primary structure. Glazing and fixings of glazing and windows. Fixing of ceilings and services to structural supports. Restraint of parapet walls. Head restraint to non-structural partitions. Potential for crowd loading in schools. Thinner construction materials and metal cladding creating issues of corrosion and durability. Buildability of multi-layered cladding systems and fixings. Co-ordination of bracing within cavities and cladding restraint ties and wall ties. All secondary structures not part of the primary frame: sports equipment, access structures, cladding panels, lighting rigs, stages, temporary seating structures, plant, tankage, lifting equipment and hoists.
For more information contact:
William M Crowe IStructE Committee Member
Submissions pack p16 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Local Authority Building Standards Scotland (LABSS)
Written Response to the Scottish Parliament’s Education and Skills Committee – Call for written evidence on school buildings across Scotland
May 2017
Submissions pack p17 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
The Education and Skills Committee short inquiry on school buildings across Scotland in the context of Professor Cole’s report into school closures.
LABSS have the undernoted comments in respect of the questions being raised in the letter of 15 May 2017 from James Dornan MSP Convener.
The questions effectively fall outwith the remit of the Building Standards system and the LABSS response tries to identify why this is the case under current legislation.
1. Inspection and remedial work of the current estate since January 2016 To what extent: • has the school estate been inspected; • have faults been identified; and • has remedial work been undertaken and the impact of this?
These questions cannot be answered by Building Standards but LABSS acknowledge that each Local Authority has been approached and consequently the relevant Local Authority property estate sections who have responsibility for the maintenance programme of existing school buildings should be able to provide this information.
Building Standards have no remit over existing buildings unless directed by the Scottish Government. No such direction is in place for existing school buildings. Only if existing buildings present a dangerous condition are other powers then available under the Building Act to remove the danger.
2. Quality Assurance Practices • How quality assurance is undertaken on current capital projects on the school estate; • whether the quality assurance of school capital projects has been reassessed since 2016; and • whether there are, or were, particular issues depending on the funding model and the lessons to be learned?
This question refers to the contract arrangements between the Local Authority responsible for procurement and the appointed developer.
The Building Standards has no remit to control quality assurance practices in the construction of a building.
The purpose of the building standards system is to protect the public interest. It is not intended to provide protection to a client in a contract with a builder. The system, therefore, does not so much control building as set out the essential standards to be met when building work or a conversion takes place, and only to the extent necessary to meet the building regulations. The system is pre-emptive, designed to check that
Submissions pack p18 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
the proposed building work meets the standards. Inspections during construction and on completion are to protect the public interest in terms of compliance with the building regulations and to discourage avoidance of the legislation. The inspections do not provide a system to control work on site, that is a matter for the contracts and arrangements put in place between the client and builder (1).
(1) Excerpts from the Scottish Building Standards Procedural Handbook 3rd Edition paragraphs 1.3.1 and 1.3.2
Notwithstanding the above limitations of the building standards system in relation to the questions being asked, LABSS are very aware of the lessons to be learned from the Cole Report and have circulated the report widely within the LABSS Membership.
LABSS are actively engaging with industry partners to increase awareness and to address the issues arising from the report.
Submissions pack p19 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
James Dornan MSP Convener, Education and Skills Committee The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP
2nd June 2017
Dear Mr Dornan
I write in response to the letter I received from you as Convener of The Education and Skills Committee regarding the inquiry on school buildings across Scotland. To help frame our reply, I will begin with a brief outline of our background and remit.
The Federation of Master Builders (FMB), is the largest trade association in the UK construction industry, representing thousands of firms in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We were established in 1941 to protect the interests of small and medium- sized (SME) construction firms and have championed continuous improvement in building standards for over 75 years.
To become an FMB member: a Master Builder, firms’ must-
Pass an independent inspection by the British Board of Agrement (BBA), an independent organisation accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service; Demonstrate a minimum of 12 months trading; Have appropriate public and employers’ liability insurance; Agree to abide by FMB’s Code of Practice; Pass rigorous credit and director checks.
As part of our ongoing commitment to evidence the objective quality of our Master Builder members, from 2015 all our members are now re-inspected every three years by the BBA. However, membership of the FMB is not mandatory and therefore there is nothing to stop unscrupulous and unprofessional builders operating in the marketplace.
School buildings across Scotland
Whilst some FMB members may have been involved in carrying out various remedial works to the school estate over the last year, the details haven’t been divulged to us. Therefore I am unable to pass comment here. Similarly I am unable to comment on whether the quality assurance of school capital projects has been re-assessed since 2016.
Looking back, we are solemnly reminded of the fact that no injuries or fatalities to children resulted from the collapse of the gable wall at Oxgangs School in January 2016 was a matter of timing and luck. We all know there could easily have been far graver consequences. Therefore it is imperative that the collective components of the construction industry learn from the recommendations in the Cole report. The view of the independent inquiry that the primary cause of the collapse of the wall at Oxgangs school was poor quality construction in the building of the wall. There are three factors contributing to this cause:
The direct laying of the bricks and the positioning of the wall ties; The direct supervision of the laying of the bricks and the positioning of the wall ties The quality assurance processes used by the sub-contractor and main contractor to confirm the quality of the construction of the walls.
Submissions pack p20 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
All three issues were ultimately the responsibility of the design and build contractor in charge of the site.
Cole Report recommendations
There are specific recommendations in the Cole Report which we would like to draw to the committee’s attention. It is evident from recommendation 5.5 that there was a systemic failure of the quality assurance process across the PPP1 projects. The report says “The repeated failures across many different projects would suggest that either the quality assurance processes themselves or the manner in which these processes are implemented have frequently proved inadequate.”
The Cole report picks up on the specifics of the inspection and sign-off of cavity walls under recommendation 5.6. From the report: “It is therefore recommended that quality assurance processes on site are such that they prevent the closure of walls before proper inspection and sign-off has been facilitated to confirm the quality and completeness of the work.”
The report comments on the bricklaying profession in recommendation 5.7: “…given the widespread nature of similar defective construction across the 17 PPP1 projects undertaken by bricklayers from different sub-contracting companies, and from different squads within these companies, there is clear evidence of a problem in ensuring the appropriate quality in this fundamental area of construction”
Following the publication of the Cole report, I investigated whether any of the bricklaying sub-contractors named were, or still are FMB members. It didn’t surprise me that none of these firms have ever been FMB members. Our membership criteria has become more stringent since the construction of the schools in the PPP1 projects. Nonetheless it would have been the same type of quality SME construction firm that is attracted to joining the FMB today, than would have been the case 15 to 20 years ago.
Lessons for the future
Over many decades Scottish based construction firms have delivered a wide range of quality construction projects safely: often exceeding the client’s expectations. We should be very proud of the skills and quality of the many people working in our trades and professions who design, construct and maintain our built environment. However, the incident at Oxgangs school and the resultant Cole report, means we mustn’t become complacent about standards and quality. Especially concerning the recruitment, training, selection and appointment of contractors and sub-contractors.
The FMB’s state of trade surveys of our members in Scotland continue to highlight skills shortages as a barrier to business growth. The construction industry’s ageing workforce and poor image are combining to threaten the future capacity of our industry. Moreover, members are very concerned about the potential threat of deskilling across the trades in the construction industry. These factors will impact on the industry’s capacity to deliver the required quality of construction projects; whether this be new homes, schools or indeed energy and transport infrastructure.
In particular our Scottish members point to the quality and integrity of the Scottish craft apprenticeship model which gives them confidence in recruiting apprentices. SME construction firms such as FMB members, employ two thirds or all construction apprentices. If the quality and standards to which apprentices are trained are maintained and improved, then more SME’s would have confidence in taking on apprentices.
Submissions pack p21 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
I’ve picked up feedback from FMB members working in England that they are envious of our craft apprenticeship model in Scotland as we train to a higher level (SVQ3 v SVQ2), have 4 year apprenticeships, collectively bargained terms and skills tests. The rates of construction apprenticeship recruitment in Scotland remain significantly above those in the rest of the UK because of these qualities.
Recommendation 6.1 in the Cole report identified bricklaying as one of the three areas where a lack of recognition of the level of requirement has led to serious skills shortages and difficulties in recruitment. Protecting the quality and integrity of the bricklaying profession and other crafts is essential. As the Cole report says: “The appropriate authorities should undertake a review of the current level of provision of training in these areas, and any others considered relevant, to ensure that the construction industry has access to an adequate properly trained and qualified resource in each of these areas.”
Recommendation 6.2 concerning apprenticeships is one which the FMB fully supports, provided our members and relevant components of the construction industry are properly consulted and listened to concerning the effectiveness of the current apprenticeship arrangements. It is imperative that the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) adopts this approach. However recent feedback from our members and the Scottish Building Apprenticeship Training Council (SBATC) suggest that the CITB and the Scottish Qualification Authority (SQA) aren’t consulting and listening to industry as well as they could. Hopefully this will be resolved so the industry has confidence in the future apprenticeship arrangements.
On behalf of FMB Scotland, thank you for writing to me. I would be happy to provide further clarification on the points made to the Education & Skills Committee.
Yours sincerely,
Gordon Nelson, FMB Scotland Director. 5 New Mart Place Edinburgh, EH14 1RW Tel: 0131 442 8834
Submissions pack p22 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
UNISON Scotland Evidence Education and Skills Committee Professor Cole’s report into school closures
Introduction
UNISON is Scotland’s largest trade union with members across the public, private and voluntary sectors. We are the largest trade union public services representing a range of staff in schools and in Building Standards departments in local authorities We therefore welcome the opportunity to give evidence to the committee.
Evidence
The Cole report raises a range of issues which are relevant not just to public sector building projects but to the safety of all building work in Scotland. Concerns go beyond new building projects and include the ongoing maintenance and safety of existing structures.
UNISON believes that much more work needs to be done to ensure that the issues raised in the Cole report are being dealt with across the whole construction sector. There needs to be much more clarity round and scrutiny of:
Quality of the contracts Role of independent certifiers Preparation and maintenance of “as installed” records Adequate independent scrutiny Council resourcing of projects Role of building standards Management and maintenance of school building
While the Cole report is extensive this evidence will focus on Building Standards teams and PPP/PFI.
UNISON is currently undertaking research on the impact of cuts on Building Standards departments. Sadly, in terms of this evidence, we are in the early stages of our research. We have used the early responses to inform this evidence and will of course publish the full report in due course.
The ongoing cuts to local government are clearly causing difficulties across all services and Building Standards Departments are also feeling the pain. Over 50% of respondents, to our survey of members in building standards teams, report budget cuts this year and 16% say that cuts had been severe.
Submissions pack p23 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Members, responding to our survey, tell us that in some areas the slump in new building work which took place after the financial crash is now over and they are now expected to deal with a growing workload with fewer resources. Members feel under pressure trying to complete work to both the deadlines and standards required.
Initial responses to our survey do show that Building Standards departments are now focused on the approval of warrant drawings and meeting the initial response deadline. Many feel that the pressure to meet performance indicators prevents them from focusing on the quality of the work that they do. In particular they do not have time for “preventative work”. This is particularly disappointing as focusing on prevention was one of the key recommendations of the Christie Commission on public service reform.
Many suggest the new e-building standards system far from making things more efficient has just created work. They feel swamped in administrative tasks rather than out and about supporting those doing the building work to get things right.
Members indicate that they spend much less time out on site visits than in the past. They feel their jobs have become desk bound focused on paperwork or looking at drawings rather than checking if the building work meets the drawings presented. This backs up the findings of the Cole report. Respondents indicate that while they can sign off drawings as safe, builders often do “whatever is easiest at the time” rather than follow the plan that has been submitted. Members feel that the site visits they do get to make are often far too late in the process for the issues they should be checking for to be spotted. As one member stated
“there’s a lot you can cover up with wallpaper and a coat of paint”
Structural problems, like those in the school walls as well as drainage problems, and disturbances to walls and floors, can only be spotted early in the build.
As the Cole report also states there is a clear issue with limited resources of qualified staff in building standards. This has a number of causes. The cuts mean that it is the most experienced/older staff that tend to take voluntary severance when offered. This means the teams lose experience when in fact staff shortages make experience even more necessary. Survey respondents tell us that construction work is picking up in Scotland and so they are struggling to recruit and retain staff in the given the opportunities available in the private
Submissions pack p24 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
sector often with better pay and less pressure. The ongoing pay freeze in the public sector is also an issue which means that the staff do not feel valued. This impacts heavily on team and individual morale
Members also indicate that they have concerns that the long term budget cuts across the public sector mean are impacting on the ongoing maintenance and therefore safety of public buildings. Many buildings, including schools, are either Victorian or built in the 1960s. They require work to ensure that buildings are “wind and watertight” and are safe to use. Spending cuts can mean that problems that would be reasonably cheap to fix now are being delayed. This could lead at best to much more expensive work in future or at worst a serious accident.
As the Cole report highlights there seems to be a widespread misunderstanding of the role of Building Standards departments. They are not the “Clerk of Works” for any building project. Investing in resources in building standards teams while important will not in itself prevent the problems raised in the report from re-occurring there isn’t sufficient oversight of the day to day building work as it is being done.
The Cole report states that the embedment of the wall tiles was not an area that would normally checked by building standards. A Clerk of Works is a vital role still needs to be undertaken whether the project is funded by the public purse or private companies. This is the person who should be on site checking that all work is carried out to the correct standards. Some members go as far as suggesting that there should be legislation to make this role compulsory on any building job above a certain size. UNISON believes that this has reasonable merit and should be further investigated.
The Cole report highlighted problems with the Certificate of Completion. We did not ask about this in our survey but in our discussions round survey design a member did indicate that buildings are still being opened and used before the issue of the Completion Certificate which is a clear breach of the 1959 and 2003 Building (Scotland) Acts.
Feedback from UNISON Health and Safety Stewards on Schools
Gas supply Contractors supplying gas to the science department as part of a new built school did not follow the manufacturers’ instructions regarding the jointing of pipework. The integrity of the pipework was therefore compromised and couldn’t be used. It was only by coincidence that the Council’s Maintenance officer noticed the jointing compound and questioned the contractors upon its use. The contractors are currently rectifying the pipework.
Silica dust A newly built school was subject to a number of complaints regarding excessive dust. The interior finishing of the school was designed to have a natural effect i.e. bare concrete, but it had no sealant. As a consequence there is reportedly a significant amount of dust which is re- circulating within the School and members are concerned over silicate dust.
Chemical Stores/Lab Preparation rooms Scottish, Schools, Education, Research, Centre SSERC is a local authority shared-service providing support across thirty-two Scottish education authorities and produced a number of documents relating to health and safety. In nearly all cases of new build schools the labs and chemical storage rooms fail to achieve many of the health and safety standards suggested by SSERC. Ventilation, temperature control, emergency escape designs are some of the main issues. The contractors have argued that the design and construction meet the requirements of building control specifications and are reluctant to change anything. SSERC inspectors have
Submissions pack p25 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
visited the school in one case and produced a report outlining the design concerns. It is also worth noting that HSE would also take cognisance of the SSERC guidelines as they are specifically aligned to Health & Safety best practice and guidance. The issue is currently on- going.
In respect of Health and Safety the potential outcome of these examples could be significant. Not only in terms of their severity, but also the numbers of individuals involved.
PPP/PFI While UNISON opposed PPP schemes from the outset, we accept the findings in the report that PPP was not in itself the cause of the problems found. Problems like those identified can occur with any construction project which is why proper regulation and adequate funding for those tasked with ensuring the regulations are met are so crucial. We do believe that there are some reasons why such failures are a bigger risk in PPP schemes.
Firstly, the construction company in a PPP scheme is almost always an equity partner of the SPV running the scheme. In effect this means they are both the client and the contractor. Unlike conventional procurement, there is no council or other public service provider performing the supervisory client role.
Secondly, there is a profit incentive to keep costs to the minimum. Any saving that the construction partner can make, increases profits to both the construction company and the other SPV partners. There is therefore a stronger cost saving incentive than in conventional procurement.
Thirdly, many PPP schemes have been under pressure to cut costs late in the project because of budget overrun. We know that this has resulted in specification cuts, such as fewer beds in PPP hospitals and the loss of planned teaching areas in PPP schools. There is bound to be a concern that this may drive construction changes as well.
Fourthly, PPP schemes tend to use standard designs to keep architectural costs to a minimum. This has been criticised on aesthetic grounds because designs don't always reflect the local setting. It also means that a design feature that fails, could have implications for not one building, but many.
Conclusion UNISON is Scotland’s largest trade union with members across the public, private and voluntary sectors. UNISON members are the key staff delivering public services across Scotland. They have a unique perspective as tax payers, service users and in service delivery and are therefore well placed to contribute to the policy making process in Scotland. UNISON therefore welcomes the opportunity to provide information to the committee on their behalf.
June 2017
For further Information contact:
Kay Sillars [email protected]
Dave Watson Head of Policy and Public Affairs [email protected]
Submissions pack p26 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions School Buildings BRE Submission June 2017
EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE: SCHOOL BUILDINGS – WALL TIES AND FIRE STOPPING
Submission by the Building Research Establishment Ltd (BRE)
Correspondence to:
Dr Stephen Garvin Building Research Establishment BRE Scotland Scottish Enterprise Technology Park East Kilbride G75 0RD TEL: 01355 576200 EMAIL: ‘[email protected]’
Date: 2 June 2017
0
Submissions pack p27 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions School Buildings BRE Submission June 2017
EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE: SCHOOL BUILDINGS
Submission by the Building Research Establishment Ltd (BRE)
BRE (www.bre.co.uk) is an independent, research-based consultancy, testing and training organisation, offering expertise in every aspect of the built environment and associated industries. BRE has existed for nearly one hundred years. BRE helps clients to create better, safer and more sustainable products, buildings, communities and businesses, supporting the innovation needed. BRE Group is a world- leading centre of built environment expertise, research and training, and includes BRE Global a third- party approvals organisation offering certification of products and services to an international market. The BRE group of companies is wholly owned by the BRE Trust, the largest UK charity dedicated specifically to research and education in the built environment. Set up in 2002 to advance knowledge, innovation and communication for public benefit, the Trust uses all profits made by the BRE Group to fund new research and education programmes that will help to meet its goal of ‘building a better world together’. Prior to ownership by the BRE Trust, BRE was a public sector research establishment that supported Government in delivering building regulations and understanding how to improve the construction process and product.
BRE has undertaken substantial research over many years on the performance of masonry buildings and fire stopping relevant to the subject matter of the Cole Repoert, including the individual materials and the completed wall elements. Much of the research was undertaken up to year 2000; however, BRE continues to address the performance of masonry often being requested to investigate failures of buildings. BRE has not to date undertaken any investigations or reports related to wall tie performance in PFI/PPP schools in Scotland following the failure at Oxgangs School. This submission is therefore based on prior knowledge and experience of wall ties and related matters.
Good Practice BRE produces guidance through a series of publications that is widely used by the construction industry, including consultants and contractors as well as in education of professionals and trades. In 2000 BRE published Good Building Guide 41, Installing Wall Ties. The abstract of which states the following:
“Ties are essential in cavity walls to ensure that the wall is structurally sound and stable. A cavity wall is as strong as a solid wall only if the two slender leaves are securely tied together. Lack of skill or care in installing ties can lead to distortion, cracking, or – in extreme cases — collapse of the outer leaf. The outside leaf is also the vital rain shield for the building. If ties are badly installed, this can lead to rain penetration and dampness in the inner leaf.”
The Guide advises on the purpose of wall ties and the implications should ties not be correctly installed and/or an insufficient density of ties is provided. The guide states that ties which are too widely spaced, especially at openings, ties which are not long enough to bed into both leaves by at least 50 mm, or ties which are not correctly bedded can result in collapse of a cavity wall.
In addition a number of Defects Action Sheets have been published on the impact of incorrect wall ties installation on walls, as follows:
· DAS 19 External masonry walls: wall ties – selection and specification [February 1983] - The failure – instability of external cavity walls. - The defect – incorrect specification of type, size and frequency of wall ties. · DAS 20 External masonry walls: wall ties – selection and specification [February 1983] - The failure – instability and rain penetration of external cavity walls - The defect – insufficient ties to comply with Standards both generally and at openings: insufficient embedment; ties pushed into ‘green’ mortar; ties sloping the wrong way; drips not in the centre of the cavity, mortar snots on ties. · DAS 115 External masonry walls: wall ties – selection and specification [June 1988] - The failure – instability of external cavity walls. - The defect – incorrect specification of type, size and frequency of wall ties. · DAS116 External masonry walls: wall ties – selection and specification [February 1988] - The failure – instability and rain penetration of external cavity walls - The defect – insufficient ties to comply with Standards both generally and at openings: insufficient embedment; ties pushed
1
Submissions pack p28 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions School Buildings BRE Submission June 2017
into ‘green’ mortar; ties sloping the wrong way; drips not in the centre of the cavity, mortar snots on ties.
BRE Information Paper IP4/84 ‘Performance specification for wall ties’ [1984] covers the overall performance requirements for masonry cavity walls and masonry cladding are discussed in the context of the current and future design environment. A technical basis for the quantification of the structural requirements is suggested which, together with an appropriate schedule of type tests and materials and dimensional specification, could form the skeleton for a future performance standard. IP6/86 [1986] ‘Spacing or wall ties in cavity walls’ reviews the results of load tests. IP16/88 ‘Ties for cavity walls – new developments’ [1988] covers the durability of galvanised mild-steel ties made before 1981 has been shown to be insufficient, and also the types of tie used and the quality of workmanship have often been inappropriate, necessitating expensive remedial works. In this paper the history of the development of cavity wall ties is reviewed and recent improvements in both materials specifications and performance are covered. Newer forms of tie which are suitable for the same applications as the ties to British Standard BS 1243 are described and illustrated. IP11/00 ‘Ties for masonry walls: a decade of development’ covered the further development over the last decade and anticipated the future CEN (European) standard, the draft EN845-1.
BRE Report BR45 ‘Performance specification for wall ties’ [1984] covers the performance requirements for ties intended to connect two leaves of masonry together or the leaves of masonry cladding onto structural frames, are discussed. Many of the requirements, particularly those affecting the structural behaviour, are quantified in the context of existing Codes and Standards and data from recent programmes of research. Performance specifications are given for a range of ties to cover most normal masonry/masonry and masonry/timber wall applications in all geographical situations (exposure levels) in the UK and tests are proposed by which compliance may be judged.
Experience BRE has been called upon to investigate and report on instances of masonry wall failure over decades. This includes the collapse of walls, materials failure and rain ingress. An example of a recent project is from the south of England. In this case detachment of the outer leaf to an end terrace property located in the south of England occurred during strong winds even although remedial wall ties were understood to have been previously installed. An examination suggested that the remedial ties were introduced into defective mortar bed joints within the inner leaf or were ineffectively installed in holes drilled into the body of bricks forming the inner leaf.
At the PPP schools there were issues with the way the wall ties were installed but there could also be a problem with mortar. Factory made mortars are proprietary so the testing is undertaken on the ingredients (cement, lime, plasticiser, air entertainer, sand). There is also regular factory testing of the mix. The product should carry a CE mark. The huge increase in the use of proprietary mortars which offers the client, main contractor and sub-contractor confidence in the product also has a down side. Although test laboratories still offer mix proportion analysis and chemical testing as out lined in BS 4551. The results are ambiguous and often appear to indicate that mix is incorrectly formulated. The principal requirement of the mortar as out lined in British Standards is its compressive strength (mortar class M1 to M10). When there is a question about performance it is now challenging as there is no British Standard test method for assessing the properties of hardened proprietary mortars. There is the screw pull-out test (BRE Digest 421), which does give compressive strength by testing and calculation. The in-situ bond strength can also be determined by the brick to mortar bond strength as outlined in BRE Digest 360. However, none of these tests are recognised by British Standards.
The air content of fresh mortar is determined according to BSEN 998-2. There is no agreed test method for assessing the permitted void content of hardened mortar. BRE has been using petrography, water absorption and density to assist in understanding local variations within mortar on brick and blockwork facade.
Building Standards and Reasonable Inquiry BRE has undertaken research in recent years for Scottish Government related to ‘Reasonable Inquiry’, the initial research project undertaken in association with Optimal Economics ultimately resulted in the introduction of Construction Compliance and Notification Plans (CCNPs). Further research over 2015/16 itself addressed the introduction of CCNPs, where they had now become a significant part of
2
Submissions pack p29 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions School Buildings BRE Submission June 2017
the reasonable inquiry process (the report is on the Scottish Government website). However, some of the key findings were as follows:
· “The case studies (of local authority verifiers) demonstrated that although the CCNP approach across eight local authorities was similar that there were differences. The differences manifested themselves in different inspection stages, number of stages and how applicants could notify the Verifier that a stage was ready for inspection. There was most notably differences in inspection by the verifier, for example some verifiers did not inspect at initial notification at all, whilst others did when they were notified. · The verifiers all use a risk based approach to Reasonable Inquiry, but how to implement the findings vary by local authority. · Issues that need further consideration within existing guidance include how Verifiers deal with staged warrants; some local authorities use a CCNP by warrant stage, but for others one CCNP covers all warrant stages. For some straightforward projects, e.g. a domestic alteration all Verifiers should adopt the same CCNP and only change if project circumstances dictate such a requirement.”
This research addressed CCNPs mainly by process, it was also clear that the methods by which building stages were inspected or alternative evidence was provided was variable. There was an apparent increase in the reliance on photographs or other evidence being supplied by others to the Verifier in order to assess that the construction meets the building regulations. There is little in the way of technical guidance for local authority Verifiers in assessing compliance of wall tie installation, or appropriate inspection processes. It is clear that the risk based approach for wall tie installation on large stretches of masonry should involve significant inspection by Verifiers (building standards surveyors). The guidance should be tightened to ensure that such higher risk practices receive more attention.
Passive fire protection The Cole report also discussed the issue of passive fire protection. BRE broadly agrees with the recommendations made in respect of fire-stopping in the report. BRE have been aware of defects with passive fire protection in buildings due to poor workmanship and poor fire safety management for some time now. This issue has been the subject of a number of reports one of which was referred to by Prof. Coles. The most recent report “Life safety and Regulation 7” outlines these issues. BRE suggest that there are two potential approaches to the issue of assuring quality of passive fire protection installation. Regardless of the approach used BRE note that it is not possible (or desirable) to inspect 100% of installations.
Inspection and certification of installations Regarding Recommendation 5.8, BRE agrees that those carrying out inspections and certification of building work ought to specifically consider passive fire protection. With regards the Independent Inspector/Certifier (IIC), the specific remit of the IIC should be clarified as well as the extent of inspection and the level of training/knowledge the IIC has regarding adequacy of passive fire protection.
Approval of contractors The use of third-party approved installers for passive fire protection is recommended by industry and provides assurance to clients regarding quality of work and these involve regular audits of installations by the approved installer and their third party approval body.
Relevant guidance Holland, C; Shipp, M and Crowder, D. (2017) Life safety and Regulation 7. First published Building Engineer January 2017. BRE IP 6/12 Passive and reactive fire protection to structural steel, 2012. BRE Digest DG524 Fire doors, 2013. BRE GBG 81 Installing fire-resisting ductwork and dampers, Association for Specialist Fire Protection, ‘Fire stopping and penetration seals for the construction industry’ (Red Book).
3
Submissions pack p30 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
EIS response to the Education and Skills Committee’s call for evidence on school buildings across Scotland.
1. Introduction
1.1 The EIS is Scotland’s largest teachers’ trade union representing teachers and is pleased to respond to the Committee’s invitation to provide evidence on this subject. Below are the EIS’ views on the issues around the safety of school buildings, remediating these issues, and any lessons that should be learnt for the future.
2. Background
2.1 The EIS, alongside the rest of the trade union movement, has long been an opponent of both PFI and PPP schemes. This opposition derived both as a matter of principle and from a practical and operational perspective. In terms of the provision of capital to provide the investment in school infrastructure, the EIS regarded existing PFI/PPP schemes as being based on too restrictive a regime of local government borrowing. The EIS was also concerned that the principles underpinning the “best value” regime were undermined by the creation of the long term PFI/PPP contracts between councils and the private sector companies involved.
2.2 These PFI/PPP processes have had the effect both of radically increasing the drain on the revenue budget overall and, because of contractual protections and guarantees built into these schemes, radically reducing the ability of local authorities to control their spending priorities in future years over the length of the PFI/PPP contracts.
3. Safety of School Buildings
3.1 The event that prompted this enquiry – the collapse of an exterior wall at Oxgangs Primary School – was an extremely serious incident which, but for sheer luck, could well have had tragic consequences. The subsequent report by Professor Cole recommends that local authorities act to ensure that all buildings are well-designed, properly-built and maintained to an extremely high standard. The safety, health and wellbeing of pupils and staff must be the top priority in the design, construction and maintenance of schools. This is not an area where corners or costs should ever be cut.
Submissions pack p31 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
3.2 The legacy of the PPP/PFI funding model is too many inferior buildings, for which we will all be paying a vastly inflated price for decades to come. Scotland’s pupils and school staff and, indeed, Scottish taxpayers deserve far better.
3.3 It is a matter of great concern to the EIS that, according to a BBC investigation, at least 72 more schools in Scotland were found to have similar defects to Edinburgh schools judged to be unsafe. Clearly, similar problems could occur at other buildings constructed under the same public-private partnership (PPP) scheme and using the same construction techniques.
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39580308
4.0 Future Action
4.1 The EIS believes there is a clear need for an independent inquiry into the PFI / PPP model, with a view to ensuring ongoing value for money to the public purse and the health and safety of PFI/PPP/SFT built projects. The inquiry should examine the ongoing cost to the public purse of PFI/PPP/SFT projects, particularly through ongoing maintenance arrangements, at a time of austerity-driven budget restraint.
4.2 This independent inquiry into all PFI/PPP/SFT infrastructure projects in Scotland should also review existing educational PFI/PPP/SFT schemes in terms of the impact on education and the levels of service provided
4.3 The remit of this inquiry should include consideration of opening of contracts and charging regimes to public scrutiny and an examination of the opportunity of historic low borrowing rates on capital to bring back these schemes into the public sector.
4.4 Contracts which are found to be detrimental to education should be ended and the inquiry should operate with a view to provide proper safety controls and ongoing value for money.
4.5 Public sector clients should not rely on the quality assurance processes of contractors to confirm the safety of building projects. Independent scrutiny of the safety of building construction is essential to ensure safety and to restore public trust and confidence in private sector building projects regardless of how they are financed.
Submissions pack p32 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
4.6 With the “block and brick” design of construction, safety inspection of wall ties and head restraints etc. should be undertaken before the walls have been closed-up. This will require construction firms to review and to revise their quality assurance procedures.
4.7 The Scottish Government should ensure that all possible support is given to staff in affected schools to help them cope any ongoing disruption – this to include, but not be confined to:
(a) funding additional planning and preparation time for teachers; (b) suspending inspections; (c) providing additional administrative support to schools; and (d) providing additional staffing to schools.
4.8 The Scottish Government should also ensure ensure that the Edinburgh Schools Partnership and all other private sector consortia meet all costs incurred resulting from any disruption.
Submissions pack p33 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Mr James Dornan MSP Convener Education and Skills Committee Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP 5th June 2017
Schools infrastructure inquiry
Dear Mr Dornan
Thank you for your letter dated 15th May 2017 requesting input from NHBC to the Education and Skills Committee’s inquiry into school infrastructure.
Before offering comments on the specific issue in question I believe it would be helpful if NHBC’s purpose and role is clarified. NHBC’s primary purpose is to work with the new home building industry to raise the standards of construction of new homes and to provide consumer protection to purchasers of new homes.
It does this by implementing structured risk assessments of the design and build processes which include comprehensive inspection of work under construction, maintaining and managing a register of builders, and providing consumer protection to homeowners through its warranty and insurance products.
NHBC was established in 1936 with Government support; it is structured to be non-profit distributing and is an insurance company regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority. It is the leading provider of warranty and insurance protection in the new homes sector.
Since 1985 NHBC has been providing a Building Control service in England and Wales and it is the largest single provider of this service in the UK. Since devolution NHBC has lobbied successive Scottish Governments requesting it be allowed to deliver a Building Control service in Scotland but successive Scottish Ministers have declined to license NHBC to undertake this activity even though the current legislation was enacted to facilitate this.
Where NHBC undertake Building Control we carry out more risk based checks than when we carry out on warranty only projects and we provide additional insurance protection to homeowners to protect them if we fail in our delivery of our Building Control service. Although the majority of our Building Control activity focuses on the new homes market we also offer this service to commercial and retail organisations as the license granted to NHBC for this purpose in England and Wales places no restriction on the scale or type of building that NHBC can deliver a Building Control service on.
The technical failures of the Edinburgh schools has been well publicised and the form of construction used is relatively common i.e. a steel framed structure with masonry infill panels. Latter form can be and is used in constructing flatted dwellings and general masonry construction is very common in the home building industry and as a consequence this form and type of construction is known to NHBC. However I must stress that NHBC operates in the new home building sector and has no direct experience of operating in a PPI commercial environment.
Submissions pack p34 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
My proposal is to offer comment on some of the points raised in Professor Cole’s Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Construction of Edinburgh Schools.
Cole Report Section 5
The technical reasons for the wall collapse are well documented in this section of the Cole Report which also identifies good practise in the construction of masonry walls.
NHBC has developed its own Building Standards and Chapter 6.1 of these standards refer to External Masonry Walls. For information I have copied an extract taken Chapter 6.1 and as can be seen, it reflects the good masonry practises referred to in the Cole Report.
Cole Report Section 10.6 Administration of Statutory Building Standards
Although after the construction of the schools in question, the Scottish Government undertook a consultation in 2009 – Improving Compliance with Building Regulations. 96% of the stakeholders who responded identified that there was a gap between compliance and design highlighting that what was being constructed on site did not comply with the approved Building Warrant plans. Consequently it was recognised that reliance on the current Building Standards system would not in all cases deliver buildings that complied with the approved design drawings. As stated in the report
Submissions pack p35 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
the current Building Standards system heavily focuses on the checking of plans for approval whereas it is common knowledge that a greater focus should be placed on the construction as this is where it can - and has - gone seriously wrong.
The administrative structure of the current Scottish Building Control system is not in my view helpful in addressing the point made in the previous paragraph for the following reasons.
• It is not a mandatory public service and requires to be licensed by the Scottish Government – the current licenses were renewed in April of this year and the Minster recognised the poor performance of a number of local authorities by appointing them for this service for one year as opposed to the historical 5 year term. • Building warrant fees are paid on application and consequently the focus tends to be on processing the building warrant application and checking the design with a lesser focus on visiting site during the construction phase. • The Consultation on Building Warrant fees carried out earlier this year identified that the current fee structure does not support the cost of providing the building control service • The Building Scotland Act “wooly” when it comes to checking construction quality on site with local authority building control departments having to make “reasonable enquiry” as stated in the Act. This phrase is not defined and is therefore left at the discretion of local authorities to interpret. • Construction Compliance Notification Plans were introduced by local authorities in an attempt to manage risk during the construction process however it is not clear how these are developed and the most recent data suggests that although these are being set they are not being achieved.
Although in practise the extent of inspection of construction activity by local authority building control departments is generally known to be very limited, especially by those involved in the construction and home building industries, the public at large perceive this not to be the case and this is reflected in the Cole Report. The Cole Report also recognises the importance of “ensuring that contractors actually comply with what is on the approved drawings…” but the current system of Scottish building control is weak in this area.
The Cole Report highlights that in a number of cases work commenced on site before approval of the building warrant and unfortunately this is not uncommon. I have informed the Scottish Government that there are significant delays in some local authorities granting building warrants – in one example it took 98 weeks to obtain a stage 2 warrant. I have currently been advised of a builder who is unable to obtain a building warrant from his own local authority as they had passed the application to another local authority to process and neither of the local authorities can now agree how to process despite the builder being advised he has provided all the necessary information.
Against this background organisations are unfortunately taking risks by commencing works without the appropriate consents being in place. The most recent research undertaken by the Scottish Government (2016) identifies that resources within the local government building control departments are below capacity and that this situation is unlikely to improve. The same research identified poor service delivery across a range of areas so although lack of resources might have some part to play in encouraging work to commence without consent it remains a a clear breach of legislation. The reality is that the system is not working in practise and is placing commercial pressures on organisations that are not fully understood by the public sector.
Submissions pack p36 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
The legislation places an obligation on the building owner to apply for a completion certificate but this cannot be submitted without a building warrant being in place and given the delays in granting a warrant I have recently been advised of circumstances where a building warrant for a large block of flats was granted followed some 3 days later by the completion. As stated in the Cole Report the lack of legal sanctions in this area is well known and whilst this continues it will encourage the breaking of these rules.
I referred to the introduction of the Construction Compliance Notification Plans and when these were introduced by local authority building control departments it was with the intent to focus on areas of risk during the construction stages and inspect these areas when being built.
In 2014 I carried out some research into these inspections and the following paragraph is extracted from my summary comments of that research at the time.
Average Number of Inspections by Type per Site
• Highest number of inspection by volume is an inspection at completion i.e. on average there were 20 completion inspections carried out per site surveyed. • Second highest joint highest inspections are for open and closed drain inspections where on average about 17 inspections each for open and closed drain inspections per site were undertaken. • Third highest is for foundations where on average there were 13 foundation inspections per site carried out • Fourth is a list of varied inspections which in total average about 4 inspections per site”
It is not therefore surprising to me that the Cole Report identifies the disproportionate attention paid to inspecting drainage on site during the construction of the schools as this to an extent mirrors my findings. In essence and as stated above the Construction Compliance Notification Plans might not be focusing correctly on identifying areas of construction risk.
Through our experience of working with the home building industry, through research and through our experience in the management of insurance claims we know that the construction of external masonry wall is an area of risk and as a consequence it is one of the key stage inspections we carry out on every home we cover to ensure that the walls and especially the wall ties are correctly constructed.
Some of the statements in the Cole Report about local authority building control not checking masonry wall construction are disturbing and they even acknowledge that it is not perceived as an area of risk to them.
I hope this letter is helpful to the Committee as it begins its inquiry.
Yours sincerely
Malcolm MacLeod NHBC Scotland Director
Submissions pack p37 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Dear James,
Many thanks for the opportunity to express our views on the issues around safety of school buildings, remediating these issues, and any lessons that should be learnt for the future.
Firstly, I think it goes without saying that parents expect their children to be safe at school. That cost cutting measures should never be put before safety in any situation involving our children.
I have discussed this with my forum and the following points have been raised:
Self-evaluation of building projects is simply not appropriate. Parents want to know that a third party has ensured that the school building is safe. Glasgow have the largest school estate and yet the fewest problems, and believe this is due to having always employed a Clerk of Works. We would like to see this across Scotland.
We are pleased that Local Authorities across Scotland have been checking their school buildings, it is encouraging that the possible problems are being taken very seriously and time is being committed to checks.
In terms of lessons for the future, as with all school / local authority/ parent interactions, communication is key. Parents need to receive prompt, jargon free direct updates about anything that impacts on their child. Whilst parents can completely appreciate emergency situations happen, they should be prioritised in communications to limit anxiety and stress. If information held is limited there is still a need to communicate with parents to tell them that!
The logistics of managing school closures are bound to be complex but parents would always look for minimising travelling distance.
I hope this is helpful for the committee, Kind regards,
Joanna Murphy, Chair, National Parent Forum of Scotland
[5 June 2017]
Submissions pack p38 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Education and Skills Committee
School Infrastructure Inquiry
Submission from Association of Directors of Education in Scotland
5 June 2017
The safety of school buildings is vitally important for the pupils, wider communities, staff and, indeed, the authority as a whole.
Councils will have a range of approaches to managing the school estate and, in the main, these are robust with few incidents over many years.
However, recent events have shown that there is a requirement to reassess current arrangements. The investment in the school estate over the last 10-15 years has been welcomed, albeit there remains a number of schools that still require replacement/investment. Clearly, some of these newer buildings have failed to meet expectations and, therefore, there are risks associated with the current estate which had to be addressed. From an ADES perspective, while as an organisation ADES does not have professional/technical expertise in terms of building structures and related regulations, we are committed to ensuring appropriate and proportionate arrangements are in place to provide reassurance that school buildings are fit for purpose.
Current arrangements include regular inspections, provision of core fact data on condition and suitability (to Scottish Government), and processes to enable staff to report concerns about any aspect of the building. In a number of cases this includes providing information via a help desk.
Following the Edinburgh schools incidents a number of schools across the country have been reassessed (including intensive surveys). This has resulted in remedial action being required in some of these buildings. While it would appear that the buildings in question were not at risk of imminent failure the fact work was required demonstrates current processes need improving.
ADES is aware of the recommendations from the Report (Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Construction of Edinburgh Schools), and supports these recommendations. In particular, the recommendation that Public Bodies Act as an ‘intelligent customer’ (1.1) is supported.
There should be clearer guidance on expectation and regarding Independent Certification.
In particular, it is suggested a national standard should be considered. Furthermore, it needs to be demonstrated that the Independent Certifier is independent. Equally important is inspection during the construction period to ensure any defects are reported and rectified.
It is important when public bodies procure projects through, for example, hubco there needs to be processes in place to provide diligence, and ensure that robust inspection processes are in place during and after the construction phase.
There are a number of recommendations in the report and ADES (Resources Network) are happy to be involved, where appropriate, in contributing to how recommendations are implemented. For example, ADES are represented on a group to refresh Core Facts condition and suitability guidance. This is particularly important for building users to have confidence that condition (and suitability) is being assessed rigorously and consistently. ADES understands that, in the main, surveys are mainly based on visual inspection and this needs to be reviewed. Where appropriate, and based on risk, include more extensive/invasive surveys.
A related issue is investment available, both for new schools and maintaining existing schools. As resources available to local authorities will decline this will become ever more challenging.
Submissions pack p39 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
The 2009 Scottish Government/COSLA publication ‘Building Better Schools : Investing in Scotland’s Future’ sets out a vision for the schools estate which remains relevant. However, this can only be achieved (and sustained) through appropriate investment. In some cases, in order to sustain schools of good condition and suitability, there may be need to be rationalisation of the school estate. Clearly, educational benefit will be imperative in this regard, but cognisance also needs to be given to the cumulative impact of limited resource being spread across potentially too many schools.
CRAIG CLEMENT Joint Chair ADES Resources Network
Submissions pack p40 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Minister for Local Government Housing Scottish Government Kevin Stewart MSP and Riaghaltas na h-Al.ba gov.scot T: 0300 244 4000 E: [email protected]
James Dornan MSP Convener Education and Skills Committee Scottish Parliament
By email to: [email protected]
(:, June 2017
Thank you for your letter of 30 May 2017 inviting me to give evidence to the Education and Skills Committee on 28 June 2017 regarding school infrastructure. I look forward to attending the meeting and discussing this important matter.
In advance of the meeting, I have attached written evidence from the Scottish Government and Scottish Futures Trust.
I the committee finds his helpful. tie t . / cL�) ccj� /
KEv1N STEWART
Submissions pack p41 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p42 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p43 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p44 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p45 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p46 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p47 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p48 Back to Subs Menu SchoolES/S5/17/18/2 Infrastructure School Infrastructure Inquiry Submissions 7 June 2017
Multivista submission to the Education and Skills Committee
Introduction
Multivista (Scotland) welcome the opportunity to contribute to the Scottish Parliament’s Education and Skills Committee request for views of the School Infrastructure and Quality Assurance Practices for the School estate. At the outset, we wish to acknowledge the dedication of all the local authorities to delivering safe and stimulating learning environments for Scotland’s young people and recognise the potential challenges which they may face in bringing records of legacy estates up to date.
Multivista expertise
Multivista is a visual documentation company that has been contracted on over 2 billion square feet of construction projects worldwide and is trusted by the industry’s leading companies to mitigate risk, create efficiencies, and deliver a higher level of project insight throughout a building’s lifecycle.
Multivista offers a full suite of visual documentation services on an intuitive cloud-based platform with local boots-on-the-ground support. Along with streaming webcams, professional facility management videos, virtual walkthroughs, and UAVs, Multivista delivers interactive as-builts by linking inspection-grade visual documentation to architectural plans to capture every project with exceptional clarity.
Quality Assurance Practices
As a keen observer on capital projects throughout Scotland we would comment that there has always been a definite focus on quality assurance although it has been documented that in some instances there was a period of misplaced confidence. That now is not the case and local authorities ensure budget is made available to ensure quality is at the forefront of all capital projects.
Over the past few years Multivista have been procured by several local authorities to provide complete photo documentation of capital projects in addition to the more traditional practices. We ca also testify that the focus on quality assurance has only increased during this period.
Whilst discussing QA methodology, the topic Building information modelling (BIM) is always on the tip of the tongue. We recognise the benefits of BIM completely but the stark reality is that due to the commitment required both in man hours and in IT infrastructure many local authorities cannot cope with the demands necessary.
Submissions pack p49 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
In the interest of providing an example, Multivista have been instructed to provide our service on the new St John’s Primary in Portobello, Edinburgh. During this project, we will be providing high resolution images which we will tie to architectural drawings, indexed by date and location memorialising the entire project visually. We will also provide access to the images for wider project team via our cloud based platform. The scope of service we will provide are as follows; Exterior progression Capturing a 360-degree overview of your building’s exterior at pre-determined intervals or phases to track its construction over time. Shoots begin at structural framing. Interior progression Captures an overview of your building’s interior at pre-determined intervals or phases to track its construction over time. Shoots typically begin at substantial interior framing. MEP & Fire stopping Exact Built Exact-Built® Shoots are event-driven, one-time shoots used to create a complete photographic record of your project at critical milestones. Exact-Built® shoots are detailed, time sensitive, and provide 100% overlapping coverage and are generally captured post inspection and pre-cover up. Multivista offers numerous Exact-Built® shoot types that can be scheduled and customised according to your project’s needs.
The cost of this additional quality assurance measure is circa 0.15% of the overall project.
It is also important to highlight that not every authority has the ability to prioritise budget to engage in additional quality assurance measures.
Conclusion
With our industry knowledge, it is in our opinion that quality assurance measures are of paramount importance for capital projects which has certainly increased since January 2016. We would also like to mention that we are building strong relationships with the estates and facility management departments as a by-product of our endeavours to promote Multivista as an additional quality assurance tool. Which has been mostly driven by the local authority themselves as they are recognising the importance having easy access to visual records of their whole estate.
Submissions pack p50 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p51 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p52 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p53 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p54 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
The Cole Report
The Council is currently reviewing the content and recommendations of the Cole report and, in regard to the schools being delivered through hubNorth as part of the Scottish Government's Schools for the Future initiative, we are liaising closely with hubNorth in that exercise. We expect to complete that in early course and would be happy to share that with you if that would be of assistance.
I trust the foregoing provides you with the necessary information for your short inquiry on school buildings across Scotland however should you have any queries then please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours sincerely
Cleland Sneddon Chief Executive
Submissions pack p55 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Chief Executive Chief Executive’s Office Annemarie O’Donnell Glasgow City Council City Chambers LLB DipLP George Square Glasgow G2 1DU Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0141 287 4522 Fax No: 0141 287 3627
Your Ref: Our Ref: amod/lc/msp/dornan
22 May 2017
By Email James Dornan MSP Convener T3.40 Education & Skills Committee The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP
Dear Mr Dornan
RE: EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE - SHORT INQUIRY ON SCHOOL BUILDINGS ACROSS SCOTLAND
Thank you for your correspondence of 15 May 2017 regarding Glasgow City Council’s response to the unfortunate events in Edinburgh last year.
With specific regard to the information you have requested, we would respond as follows:
1. Inspection and remedial work of the current estate since January 2016 To what extent: has the school estate been inspected; have faults been identified; and has remedial work been undertaken and the impact of this?
Following the events that took place in Edinburgh, along with the other local authorities in Scotland, Glasgow committed to undertake inspection works within their school estate in order to satisfy themselves that the buildings constructed or extended by the authority in the period since 1996 until present, were free of any defects that could result in significant structural failure of the building elements. A group of senior officers from the Council with the relevant knowledge, skills and experience, were identified to form a working group that would coordinate this undertaking.
Glasgow City Council’s Education Estate can be broadly divided into two distinct categories:
1. The PPP estate – comprising 29 Secondary Schools and 1 Primary School. 2. The Pre-12 estate – comprising 138 establishments located in a wide range of building types from Victorian Period properties to recently constructed new-build properties.
Glasgow – Supporting the Gaelic language Glaschu – a’ toirt taic do’n Ghàidhlig SubmissionsGlasgow – UNESCO pack p56 City of Music Back to Subs Menu Glasgow City Council is an equal opportunities employer
ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions -2-
Glasgow commissioned its PPP partner 3Ed/Semperion to undertake invasive structural surveys of all the buildings constructed or extended as part of the PPP contract.
With regard to the remainder of the school estate, a total of 42 buildings were identified as having been constructed since 1996 by various main contractors. The working group referred to above, agreed that a representative sample of the buildings would be selected and inspected/surveyed invasively using the same scope as the buildings within the PPP estate. To ensure continuity and consistency of results, the same group of engineers that were involved in the Edinburgh investigation and the surveys of the PPP estate were used.
A total of 8 buildings were selected for survey, which included 2 other public buildings which did not form part of the Education Estate, but had been identified as having similar construction methodologies to the buildings in question, and which had been constructed contemporaneously with the other buildings selected.
As a result of all of the survey work undertaken within both the PPP estate, the Pre-12 estate and the 2 other public buildings, no defects were identified that would give any significant cause for concern. Some very minor defects were identified, in line with the findings in the Edinburgh Schools with regard to wall ties, but to a much lesser degree and within what the working group agreed to be an acceptable level of tolerance.
Despite the minor defects discovered being within an acceptable tolerance and causing no reason for concern, the decision was taken to undertake remedial works to provide a robust and high level of comfort for the Council that our buildings are structurally sound. The remedial works have been undertaken on a rolling programmed basis during holiday periods to minimise disruption to learning and teaching and on the basis that this work was classified as “business as usual” in terms of routine maintenance.
2. Quality Assurance Practices How quality assurance is undertaken on current capital projects on the school estate; whether the quality assurance of school capital projects has been reassessed since 2016; and whether there are, or were, particular issues depending on the funding model and the lessons to be learned?
Glasgow City Council has – in the main – procured its new primary school projects using a more traditional methodology. Glasgow has its own design team which carries the vast majority of design disciplines, and in the majority of cases, designs our new build projects internally. Even when circumstances dictate the use of an external design team, our own design team leads, will have a monitoring and oversight role in the design process.
With regard to the actual construction of our new build projects, once again, in the majority of cases, our own ALEO department – City Building Glasgow LLP (CBG) – undertakes the construction work. Of the 43 completed new-build schools within the Pre-12 estate (not including those currently under construction by CBG), 27 of them have been constructed by CBG.
Notwithstanding the above, in all cases, Glasgow City Council has always appointed a clerk of works to oversee the quality control of the construction process. Invariably, the clerk of works is an employee of the Council and is part of the Project Management & Design department.
We strongly believe that the fact that we did not find any significant construction defects within those buildings which were surveyed, was – in large part – due to the engagement of a clerk of works in the process, along with the rigour that our internal design team employs during both the design and construction phase of these contracts.
Submissions pack p57 Back to Subs Menu
ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions -3-
Having reviewed the matter as part of the working group’s scope, we do not propose any changes to the arrangements which are already in place for quality control during the design and construction process.
With regard to the times when Glasgow chooses to step outside of its default procurement process (i.e. internal design and tender award to CBG under the principles of Teckal), we remain committed to ensuring that the same standards of rigour are applied with regard to the quality control of both the design and construction phases of the work. For example, Glasgow is currently developing proposals for the construction of 2 new primary schools via the SFT DBFM finance model. These plans are well advanced and construction is due to commence in September.
The internal team that is overseeing this process is led by our Education Estate Manager who is a former construction manager from the schools sector and member of the chartered institute of building. Also part of the team is our internal design group manager from the schools team, and a schools construction liaison officer from the estates team. In allocating a team with a significant level of technical and construction management expertise, we believe that quality of both design and construction will be a tenet of these 2 projects. In addition, whilst there is no financial provision within the DBFM procurement process for the allocation of a clerk of works, Glasgow has made the decision to fund the appointment of a clerk of works to undertake a quality control role in the 2 construction projects.
In summary, having undertaken a large scale programme of invasive surveys in our existing secondary PPP estate and in a representative sample of our new-build primary estate, Glasgow has received sufficient reassurance that our buildings are of sound construction and contain only minor defects that are within an acceptable level of tolerance for this type of construction. We believe that the absence of significant defects is – in large part – due to the rigour we apply at all stages of a new-build project, and particularly at the construction phase with the oversight of a highly qualified design team and the appointment of a clerk of works. In addition, it would be remiss not to mention the role that our partner CBG plays in ensuring the quality of the construction within those buildings constructed by them. CBG also has a highly skilled and experienced construction management team and a well-trained and highly skilled team of construction trades operatives.
I trust the information above sufficiently answers the questions in your letter and is helpful in terms of the wider enquiry.
Yours sincerely
ANNEMARIE O’DONNELL CHIEF EXECUTIVE
Submissions pack p58 Back to Subs Menu
ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE
School infrastructure inquiry
Submission from Dundee City Council 25 May 2017
Dear Ned,
In response to your update for the School Infrastructure Enquiry, we have taken a recent report to our Policy and Resource Committee that has all the necessary details that I am sure you will require. If you require further information please let me know.
Sincerely,
Paul Clancy
**************************************************** Paul Clancy Executive Director of Children and Families Service Children and Families Service
Submissions pack p59 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
2 Report No 158-2017
REPORT TO: POLICY & RESOURCES COMMITTEE – 24 APRIL 2017
REPORT ON: REVIEW OF INDEPENDENT INQUIRY INTO THE CONSTRUCTION OF EDINBURGH SCHOOLS
REPORT BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CITY DEVELOPMENT
REPORT NO: 158-2017
1 PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 The purpose of this report is to summarise the findings of the recently published Independent Inquiry into the Construction of Edinburgh Schools and advise on Dundee City Council's position relating to the issues raised and recommendations made.
2 RECOMMENDATION
2.1 It is recommended that the Committee notes the contents of this report and agrees that Dundee City Council will implement the best practice recommendations of Inquiry.
3 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
3.1 There are no direct financial implications arising from this report.
4 BACKGROUND
In January 2016, part of an external wall at Oxgangs Primary School in Edinburgh collapsed during high winds, in the hours prior to normal school opening times. During the subsequent investigation of this and other PPP schools, construction defects were uncovered which led to the closure of 17 Edinburgh schools for a significant period of time. An independent inquiry was commissioned by the Chief Executive of Edinburgh City Council, remitted to determine the underlying cause of and responsibility for the construction defects as well as providing recommendations for future projects.
4.1 Structural Arrangement of Affected Schools and Builderwork Terminology
The affected PPP schools in Edinburgh were all of similar structural layouts; steel frames with external walls of masonry construction. This form of construction is not unusual or innovative and is widely used and understood in the UK. In this form of construction the structural steel frame carries the weight of the building and the walls cladding the building resist wind loading, transferring these forces back to the structural frame. In order to do so the walls typically require builderwork components installed within their construction. The following are technical terms used within the report:-
Cavity walls are the external cladding to the envelope of the building formed by two leafs of brick or blockwork separated by a gap, or cavity, which provides insulation and a weatherproof barrier between inside and outside faces.
A wall panel is a portion of an elevation, subdivided, bounded by and connected to the beams and columns of the structural frame.
Wall ties provide stability to cavity walls as they connect inner and outer leafs together so that they act as one single structural element. These are typically stainless steel bars installed at a predefined quantity in walls and importantly must be embedded a minimum of 50mm into both inner and outer leafs of the wall.
Submissions pack p60 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
3 Report No 158-2017
Wall head restraints are stainless steel ties used to connect the top of the cavity wall back to the structural frame to allow wind loads to be transferred to the principal structure.
Bed joint reinforcement comprises stainless steel wire bedded in masonry joints and is used to improve the stiffness of masonry walls and assist in wind load resistance.
Fire stopping is a system used to seal openings and joints in fire resistant floors or walls, preventing the spread of smoke and fire into other areas of the building.
4.2 Conclusions of Edinburgh Inquiry
The Inquiry determined that the wall at Oxgangs Primary School failed as a result of inadequate wall tie embedment in the original construction. A contributory reason for this was that the inner leaf of the cavity wall was constructed in advance of the outer leaf. Normally, both leafs are constructed together which allows adjustments and tolerance in wall tie installation. Had the wall been built correctly, the structural design was considered adequate to resist the wind loadings and would not have failed.
Inspections at the other Edinburgh Schools highlighted similar construction issues and observed areas of missing head restraint, bed joint reinforcement and under-embedded wall ties. Although the inspection concentrated on the components required for integrity of cavity wall construction, a common thread of deficient fire-stopping was also noted during these inspections.
One of the remits of the Inquiry was to determine if the PPP procurement process had led to the construction shortcomings. In principle, the Inquiry determined that the PPP procurement process in itself was not intrinsically at fault. The defects in construction were ultimately the contractor’s responsibility. Conventionally, clerk of works, resident engineers and similar independent representatives are appointed to closely monitor construction quality on site. These appointments were absent from the Edinburgh PPP projects and there was a reliance on the contractor’s own self checking of quality. The brief of Independent Certifiers appointed for these PPP projects was misunderstood as the role was more progress focused with ad-hoc visits rather than the closer scrutiny of a clerk of works resident on site. Similarly, the Inquiry concluded that there was a general lack of understanding in the nature and extent of the role that Building Standards provide in site inspections of construction works.
The Inquiry therefore concluded that the level of independent site supervision briefed and provided and misunderstandings on the reassurance provided by this site supervision resulted in gaps in scrutiny that may have allowed the observed quality issues to occur on site otherwise undetected. The inquiry made no comment on whether the quality issues were intentional or otherwise but concluded that the skills shortage in the construction industry may have contributed to these defects and that similar defects had been encountered in other Scottish authorities.
4.3 Recommendations of Edinburgh Inquiry
The Inquiry detailed several recommendations, summarised as follows.
4.3.1 Procurement
Whilst not citing the PPP/PFI process as the cause of the construction defects, it was recommended that public sector bodies maintain or have access to a level of expertise and resources to act as an intelligent customer when procuring public buildings with due diligence in terms of defining a developed brief, setting of quality standards and ensuring compliance with specification.
Submissions pack p61 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
4 Report No 158-2017
4.3.2 Independent Inspection/Certification
Modern forms of procurement have reduced the traditional use of Clerk of Works and resident engineers and the substitution of the Independent Certifier in the construction inspection role does not necessarily have the same level or depth of coverage. The role and level of service provided of those appointed to review construction quality requires to be more defined by clients to reflect the extent and level of construction checking required to ensure compliance.
4.3.3 Client's Relationship With Design Team Members
In several models of procurement, the client relationship is removed from the design team such that the client should review their procurement arrangements to allow them to benefit from their professional advice and expertise.
The scope of the design team appointment should be appropriately defined, including their proposed role in inspecting works on site and liaison with the client on any safety or functionality matters raised with the contractor.
4.3.4 Information Sharing
Recommendations on information sharing concentrated on the design team members appropriately conveying their design intent through documentation, specifications and drawings such the importance of wall ties, bed joint reinforcement and wall head restraint should be readily expressed to those constructing the buildings.
Additionally, the accuracy of as-built information and deviations from the designers' details require to more coherently documented and collated into records, prepared and certified by the contractor for retention by the client.
4.3.5 Construction Processes and Industry Training
The Inquiry recommended the construction industry review the appropriateness of the practice apparent in the Edinburgh Schools of building inner and outer leafs of cavity walls at different times.
The Inquiry recommended that building component manufacturers investigate the design of products that are more buildable and readily aid assessment of correct installation. Due to the difficulty of post-construction inspection, it was also recommended that sign off processes are reviewed and developed by contractors to verify quality and completeness of construction prior to the cavity being closed off.
Inspections in Edinburgh observed other quality issues with construction, principally in fire- stopping. This was sufficiently widespread for the Inquiry to recommend that inspection and certification of installation compliance should be part of the requirements for gaining Completion Certification by Building Standards.
The Inquiry recommended that the construction industry reviews its own training and recruitment schemes to deal with a considered skills shortage in order to develop a highly skilled bricklaying workforce with emphasis on the importance of the role of properly installed builderwork components.
4.3.6 Building Standards
The Inquiry noted that the typical frequency of site visits and the nature of inspections undertaken by Building Standards Departments could only confirm that buildings are generally built in accordance with approved warrants and not of a detail necessary to
Submissions pack p62 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
5 Report No 158-2017
identify the risks to user safety identified in the Inquiry. The Inquiry recommended that consideration be given to extending mandatory inspection and certification of certain building elements by approved certifiers to demonstrate compliance where this cannot be practically undertaken by Building Inspectors themselves. The Inquiry did note that this would require a legislative change.
However, the Inquiry did recommend that site visits undertaken by Building Inspectors are planned to ensure these properly reflect a prioritisation of the identification and inspection of areas of higher risk. Additionally, it was recommended that sanctions are more widely enforced for non-compliance and a more stringent control of temporary occupation certificates out in place to prevent abuse of the system.
4.3.7 Further Investigations
Finally, the report recommended that other clients with recently constructed buildings of similar structural form should undertake a similar risk-based approach to inspection and investigation of their properties. Information sharing between authorities was also recommended such that emerging issues could be communicated and actioned in a co- ordinated fashion.
4.4 Dundee City Council’s Position on Recommendations of Edinburgh Inquiry
The following details Dundee City Council’s response to the Edinburgh Inquiry and its position on the recommendations arising from the Inquiry.
4.4.1 Structural Inspection of Properties
Following the Edinburgh incident, Dundee’s recent estate was inspected to determine if similar issues within cavity walls were present in properties of a similar age and construction.
PPP Schools
All eight of Dundee's PPP Schools were inspected visually and subsequently intrusively to determine if structural defects were evident and whether wall ties, wall head restraints and bed joint reinforcement, where required by design, were installed correctly. Investigations were co-ordinated by Discovery Education plc and undertaken by the original designer and verified by an independent consulting engineer.
In these schools, cavity masonry construction is primarily limited to games halls and these areas were the prime focus of investigations. These intrusive inspections, in principle, confirmed appropriate build quality throughout the properties including suitable provision and embedment of wall ties and the provision of bed joint reinforcement and wall head restraint. However, at three PPP schools, some deficiencies were encountered.
At Craigowl PS and St Andrews RC PS, isolated wall panels were found to be missing some bed joint reinforcement and/or some wall head restraint ties, both required by design and specified as part of the construction drawings. The reason for these components being omitted at the noted locations is not apparent but their incorporation in other areas of the same buildings does not suggest an inherent construction issue.
The as-installed structural capacity was reviewed by Discovery Education's appointed structural engineers and three wall panels were found to be operating at a factor of safety less than structural design codes require. Remedial works were undertaken during school holidays to restore the affected wall panels back to their original intended design capacity.
Submissions pack p63 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
6 Report No 158-2017
At Grove Academy, wall tie embedment was found to be below minimum design requirements at some locations and several wall panels were missing their specified wall head restraint ties. This has been addressed through the provision of retro-fitted wall ties and masonry wall head restraint such that the affected wall panels retain their original intended design capacity.
Non-PPP Properties
Non-PPP properties were inspected by the City Engineer and these inspections comprised seven schools and six non education sector buildings, concentrating on areas of cavity masonry construction and their interaction with the structural frame. Similar to the PPP properties, these buildings only adopt cavity masonry construction for additional robustness in areas such as games halls, plant rooms and stairwells. In addition to the inspections, reference was made to as-built drawings, calculations and comprehensive record photographs taken by DCC Clerks of Works during construction of these properties. These records allowed sufficient verification of build quality `without recourse to disruptive or intrusive investigations. In summary, there were no deficiencies apparent in the cavity wall provision for these properties.
4.4.2 Procurement
Dundee City Council utilise several procurement methods for construction works, these proportionate to the scope, extent and risk of the projects undertaken. A dedicated Capital Projects team is located within the Design and Property Division which has the appropriate level of technical expertise to act as “intelligent client” for developing briefs, setting of quality standards and ensuring quality compliance. Additionally, commonly used procurement routes such as the SCAPE framework allow early contractor engagement such that good governance is in place from design through to construction.
4.4.3 Independent Certification / Inspection
The Design and Property Division have a team of 14 Clerk of Works for Capital Projects undertaken within Dundee City Council. As well as providing independent scrutiny on the contractor’s work, record photographs and “sign-off” inspection sheets are implemented throughout to manage and assess quality of work, including reporting and correction of non-conformances. These are particularly used in cavity wall construction and fire- stopping areas where future compliance inspections become difficult once the works are sealed up.
4.4.4 Client’s Relationship with Design Team Members
The Design team members are retained during the construction phase of Dundee City Council’s capital projects to provide feedback and resolution of technical queries as well as site attendance during the construction. The in-house consultancy services within the Design and Property Division allow for this relationship of on-going dialogue to be more direct than would necessarily be the case with outside parties.
4.4.5 Information Sharing
Dundee City Council’s use of procurement methods such as the SCAPE framework allows early engagement with the contractor such that information can be shared at an early stage in the design process, mitigating against issues with technical details and buildability on site.
A working group is currently defining how Dundee City Council will implement Building Information Modelling (BIM) which will improve the retrieval and ease of understanding of construction information and management of its buildings.
Submissions pack p64 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
7 Report No 158-2017
4.4.6 Construction Processes and Industry Training
This requires the general construction industry to improve its competence and is difficult for Dundee City Council to directly influence. However, Dundee City Council do ensure that robust quality assessments are included in procurement exercises to verify those contractors appointed have the appropriate skills.
4.4.7 Building Standards
The work of Building Standards has two main elements: checking that building plans comply with regulations when an application is made for a building warrant and undertaking reasonable inquiries to verify that the building work complies with the approved plans and with regulations.
Building standards cannot and are not required to supervise or monitor every activity on a building project nor can they be present at all times. The supervision of building work is the responsibility of the building owner who should appoint a building professional to supervise the work to ensure the standard of workmanship is satisfactory and meets the building regulations.
Currently the building standards service adopts a risk assessed approach, so as to ensure resources are applied where the greatest risk of non-compliance exist. The risk assessment allows for a Construction Compliance & Notification Plan (CCNP) to be created, this is issued along with the building warrant. The CCNP confirms the different stages of the project where the owner or developer should notify Building Standards and provide an opportunity to inspect.
Along with Local Authority Building Standards (LABSS), DCC Building Standards intends to work with the Building Standards Division of the Scottish Government to help develop any proposed changes to the current reasonable inquiry process in light of the Edinburgh Schools Inquiry.
4.4.8 Further Investigations
Dundee City Council responded as part of the Inquiry by undertaking an investigation of its recently constructed schools and other buildings of similar construction to Edinburgh’s Oxgangs Primary School, both PPP and non-PPP. The findings of these investigations (outlined in this report) have been shared with and feature in the Inquiry.
It should be noted that Dundee City Council undertakes regular, cyclical and structural inspections of its entire estate with targeted maintenance to ensure buildings continue to be safe to use.
Opportunities for information sharing between authorities exists through inter authority working groups such that emerging issues can be communicated and actioned in a co- ordinated fashion.
5 CONCLUSION
5.1 A review of the Independent Inquiry into the construction of Edinburgh schools has been carried out and generally, Dundee City Council currently complies well with the best practice recommendations contained therein.
5.2 All of Dundee City Council’s properties of similar build to those of Edinburgh Schools Inquiry were thoroughly investigated at the time and confirmed as safe for occupancy. Relatively minor works were required to address issues in three PPP schools. These
Submissions pack p65 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
8 Report No 158-2017
works were carried out at no cost to the Council generally over school holidays with no real impact on the operation of the schools.
6 POLICY IMPLICATIONS
6.1 This Report has been screened for any policy implications in respect of Sustainability, Strategic Environmental Assessment, Anti-Poverty, Equality Impact Assessment and Risk Management. There are no major issues.
7 CONSULTATIONS
7.1 All members of the Council Management Team have been consulted and are in agreement with the contents of this report.
8 BACKGROUND PAPERS
8.1 None.
Mike Galloway Fergus Wilson Executive Director of City Development Head of Design & Property
FW/NM/MS 6 April 2017
Dundee City Council Dundee House Dundee
Submissions pack p66 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Clackmannanshire Council
Scottish Parliament Education & Skills Committee Inquiry
June 2017
Part 1 Inspection and Remedial work of the current estate since January 2016
All schools were fully inspected
PPP Academies opened in 2009
We worked with our PFI partners Clackmannanshire Schools Education Partnership (CSEP) regarding the three Academies opened in 2009.
In May 2016 CSEP engaged with Curtins Consultancy Structural Engineers to have the schools inspected in light of the Edinburgh schools issues arising in April 2016. The advice provided by Scottish Government as a result of the Edinburgh Inquiry was provided later in 2016. All recommendations from the Inquiry have been overtaken.
It is worth noting that Clackmannanshire Council employed a full time team incorporating a Project Manager , a Project Coordinator and a Clerk of Works on the PFI Project started in 2007, this enabled the Council to monitor and measure the quality assurance during the construction period.
Hub projects
Redwell Primary School opened 2014
Hub East Central Scotland Ltd has appointed Scott Bennett Associates to carry out a review of the external masonry wall ties and restraints at Redwell Primary School, Alloa. The review comprises a Desktop Study of the project drawings and specifications, an assessment of the capacity of specified ties and restraints against the calculated wind loadings, and a visual inspection of the external envelope from the ground level to identify any apparent significant structural defects in the masonry cladding. The visual inspection was carried out on 14 March 2017 and no significant structural defects were noted during the visual survey. The review of the design The Scott Bennet Associates review of the external wall tie and head restraint design for Redwell Primary School has been concluded with no issues with regard to the design of the wall ties or any significant structural defects noted during the visual inspection. Report conclusions are as follows:
E.Turnbull Scottish Government Response 160517
Submissions pack p67 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
“No significant structural defects were noted during our visual survey. Following our assessment of the design capacity of the specified wall ties against the design loading:
• Cavity masonry wall ties: These were found to have a capacity in excess of the applied design loading.
• Masonry cladding to timber frame: These were found to meet with the criteria set out in BS 5268-6.1:1996 Table B.1.”
A full copy of the report is available, however due to the file size it would need to be sent separately if required.
All other Educational establishments
A condition survey of all school buildings was undertaken in 2014 and a programme of works, based on the requirements identified in the surveys , planned for 2016-2020 after due consideration of the planning needs of the education estate. No structural faults were identified at this time.
All of Clackmannanshire schools were visually inspected in April 2016 and a working spreadsheet kept of any issues noted from a visual inspection. Any areas of concern were then checked by CRA, Civil & Structural Engineers. . There were no issues in the buildings however two boundary walls were found to require repair. One wall at Fishcross Primary School and one at Tillicoultry Primary School, both repairs are due for completion in June 2017.
PPP Reports – faults identified
The reports that were prepared in May 2016 are the property of Curtins and are available if required. As stated on Page 1 Section 1.3 on each of the separate reports these cannot be used by any Third Party without the authority of Curtins.
Drawings were examined taking particular note of the specification of the wall ties, size of cavities, head restraint details and wind post designs. Site inspections were completed by a suitably qualified Engineer at each of the three sites. There is no indication from these surveys of any of the structural defects identified in the Edinburgh Inquiry.
Remedial Work Undertaken
There were two minor affected areas noted in the surveys undertaken at the PPP schools :-
1) Minor Bulge in external wall at Alloa, West Gable end.
E.Turnbull Scottish Government Response 160517
Submissions pack p68 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
An extension piece was added to an existing Lintel, Bricks were removed. Some minor cracking in this location was also evident and was repaired with helix reinforcement across the crack in each bed joint. All works completed on 10th December 2016.
2) PE Block Lornshill track reinforcement showing to finished facing brick wall Track reinforcement end pincher found to have a kink in it, reinforcement was adjusted and bricks have been repointed. Works completed 25th November 2016.
Scheduled work in the three PPP Academies..
There is no structural work scheduled for any of the schools related to wall ties or issues related to the Edinburgh issues.
There is a Planned Preventative Maintenance Schedule agreed each year for each of the three schools, this spreadsheet is quite large and can be made available if required.
There is work planned for the summer holiday on Alloa Academy Roof across the PE and Courtyard area. This Contractor’s notice of Change is to rectify a defect with the rainwater drainage located in these areas.
Regular checks on Fire doors are completed to Amey, the facilities management provider, Amey 99-29 standard (last check January 2017), fire dampers are completed to SFG20-16-03 (last check Feb 2017) and fire stopping is completed to Amey 99-50 (last check January 2017) . All are completed at 6 monthly intervals.
There are no further works planned in light of the Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Construction of Edinburgh Schools
Part 2 . Quality Assurance on Capital projects
The quality assurance procedures are integrated into the capital works procedures manual. In large projects or programmes, individuals take on the role of assuring the quality of specific products/outputs of the project on behalf of the Programme Manager or Projects Director. A summary of the QA procedures are outlined below.
Details of quality standards of the project's final outputs/products are defined in the definition stage of the project and included in the project mandates.
In the planning stage and In consultation with the Project Clerk of Works (CoW), the Project Coordinator(PC) prepares a written description (Quality Management Plan) of how agreed quality standards will be monitored and finally checked and “signed-off” – including details of any legislative, policy or national standards to be met.
E.Turnbull Scottish Government Response 160517
Submissions pack p69 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
During the managing product delivery stage, officers have to strike a balance between quality and cost to ensure value for money outcomes. This will includes managing risks/ issues and implementing mitigation strategies in place should risk occur or issues arise.
The PC and CoW are responsible for supervising works on site. The PC co-ordinates the work of the CoW by means of weekly meetings to confirm CoW instructions to contractor. The PC liaises with contract Quantity Surveyor to estimate value of CoW directions and reconciles values with the final account.
Once the Practical Completion has been issued the PC will liaise with the Council’s Quality Control Officer to ensure all completion dates, certificates and improvement information is have been recorded in the appropriate database.
The project closure procedures includes evaluation of ;adherence to the project time scales, contractor conduct, standard of customer services, regulation compliance, defects management and quality of completed works.
Detailed roles and responsibilities are outlined in the capital works project management procedures manual.
The procedures outlined above are based on a time when resources were available,, they will need to be reviewed in the future to reflect the current staff establishment, reduction in staffing and restructuring that the Council is currently undergoing. The previous method of monitoring and managing contractors relied on the availability of suitably qualified and experienced staff. Past experience of vigilant monitoring, of PPP contractors predominately by means of a CoW and PC has ensured that all subsequent capital projects were similarly monitored.
The quality assurance methods outlined above have not been reassessed since 2016, however the Council has undertaken a significant change to the structure of delivery recently, January 2017. Staffing reductions and an increased externalisation of work is likely to impact on the internal quality assurance methodologies previously used.
Prepared on behalf of Clackmannanshire Council
Chief Executive Elaine Mcpherson
Eileen Turnbull
Service Manager
Education Estate
E.Turnbull Scottish Government Response 160517
Submissions pack p70 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
E.Turnbull Scottish Government Response 160517
Submissions pack p71 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p72 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p73 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p74 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p75 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p76 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p77 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p78 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p79 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p80 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p81 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
MW/LH/BAK
9 June 2017
Mr James Dornan, MSP CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S UNIT T3.40 Chief Executive: The Scottish Parliament Margo Williamson Edinburgh EH99 1SP
Dear Mr Dornan
I refer to your letter of 15 May 2017 requesting information for the Education and Skills Committee. The situation for Angus Council is described below.
1. Inspection and remedial work of the current estate since January 2016 To what extent:
has the school estate been inspected; have faults been identified; and has remedial work been undertaken and the impact of this?
We will be reporting the position to our Communities committee on 06 June 2017. To avoid duplication of effort, I have appended the information schedule, which covers the points you have raised.
2. Quality Assurance Practices
How quality assurance is undertaken on current capital projects on the school estate;
Quality assurance and site inspection varies according to the procurement type. Current examples include:-
Build Only – Where projects are designed by the council’s own Property Section, Quality Assurance of site works would involve the Design Team and Clerk of Works carrying out site inspections. The extent of involvement from the Clerk of Works has been agreed on a project by project basis. Examples of this are the recently completed Timmergreens and Warddykes Primary Schools (completed in 2016 through East Central Hubco, fully designed by Angus Council Property).
Angus House │ Orchardbank Business Park │ Forfar │ DD8 1AX │ LP8 Forfar T: (01307) 461460 │ E: [email protected] │ www.angus.gov.uk
Submissions pack p82 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
2
8 June 2017
Design and Build (DBDA) – Quality Assurance is undertaken by a Council representative (Property or Client Directorate, as appropriate) and Clerk of Works. The extent of involvement from the Clerk of Works has been agreed on a project by project basis. An example of this is the recently completed Brechin Community Campus (completed in 2016 through East Central Hubco).
Design, Build, Finance, Maintain (DBFM) – Quality Assurance has generally been carried out by an independent tester, commissioned as part of the project.
In addition, Angus Council has used in-house Clerk of Works services to provide additional site supervision. This has been a reduced scope in comparison to other procurement methods noted above. The focus has been on general site observations, relayed to the main contractor, together with more formal inspections of building elements where the authority retains responsibility for maintenance etc. An example of this is the recently completed Forfar Community Campus (completed in 2017 through East Central Hubco).
All designs, irrespective of the type of procurement, are subjected to approval through Building Control. This is to ensure the designs meet the technical standards and any amendments are made following a review. A Building Warrant will be issued by Building Control once they are satisfied that all the relevant standards are met.
whether the quality assurance of school capital projects has been reassessed since 2016;
Quality assurance has not formally been reassessed in response to the Cole report. This is directly due to there being no new capital projects in Angus.
As part of next phase of Angus Council’s school replacement programme it is our intention to formalise the Council’s approach to using internal Clerk of Works. This will involve agreeing a formal scope of service, including the extent of inspections carried out and reporting provided to project team/contract administrators.
In addition our current Technical Advisor (Currie and Brown) appointed as part of our DBFM project to replace two Arbroath Primary Schools has highlighted that more robust requirements for contractor quality assurance will be included within the Authority Construction Requirements (ACR’s). It is intended both of these pieces of work will be developed and agreed by September 2017.
whether there are, or were, particular issues depending on the funding model and the lessons to be learned?
Submissions pack p83 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
3
9 June 2017
Regarding lessons learned, we have identified the potential risks in not documenting the scope and remit for a Clerk of Works service. The documented scope should specify the extent of site inspection required and the circumstances that would lead to additional inspections.
The response to the second bullet above and the aim to formalise a scope of service should resolve this issue.
I hope that this information is clear and sufficient for your purposes. If you have any queries on this matter, please contact Les Hutchinson, Head of Corporate Quality and Performance ([email protected]).
Yours sincerely
Margo Williamson Chief Executive
Submissions pack p84 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Schedule
ANGUS COUNCIL
COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE 6 JUNE 2017
PPP SCHOOL ESTATE INSPECTIONS
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 Members will be aware of the Edinburgh School Inquiry following the collapse of an external wall at Oxgang school in 2016 which resulted in the closure of 17 schools requiring decant of school pupils and remedial works to schools in Edinburgh. The schools were constructed under the Private Public Partnership (PPP) contractual and funding arrangements.
1.2 The inquiry identified failure by the contractor to adequately tie the external cladding of brickwork into the main structure with a lack of suitable wall ties, either or both, at the top of the wall (head restraint); or in the main sections of the walls with insufficient wall tie embedment or missing wall ties.
1.3 The provision of wall ties is part of the design undertaken by the private contractor, who is also responsible for constructing the building in accordance with that design and arranging for an independent certification of the project by a third party. The Edinburgh School Inquiry found fault with the construction and certification process.
1.4 The defects found in the remaining Edinburgh schools following the Oxgang collapse, indicated that there were little or no external signs of distress in the buildings; and defects were only subsequently found following intrusive surveys necessitating removal of part of the wall and inspection by borescope.
1.5 Latterly there was also an issue identified in regard to appropriate Fire Stopping within the Edinburgh schools. Fire Stopping restricts the spread of fire in areas such as ceiling voids.
2.0 IMPACT IN ANGUS
2.1 Following the collapse at Oxgangs, all Scottish public sector bodies were asked to give consideration of buildings constructed under PPP arrangements. In Angus there are seven existing schools procured through Children and Learning in partnership with Elgin Education (Forfar & Carnoustie) Limited and constructed by Robertson Construction. The contractors involved in the PPP schools in Edinburgh are not the same as used in Angus. The schools involved are:
• Burnside Primary School, Carnoustie - New school construction • Carlogie Primary School, Carnoustie - Small extension construction • Carnoustie High School, Carnoustie - Large extension construction • Langlands Primary School, Forfar - New school construction • Strathmore Primary School, Forfar - Large extension construction • Whitehills Primary School, Forfar - New school construction • Woodlands Primary School, Carnoustie - New school construction
2.2 The investigation into the schools in Angus was undertaken by Technical and Property Services and involved.
• Visual Inspection – inspection of a structure/building; • Intrusive investigations – removal of sections of the external walls (masonry blocks) needed to be removed to allow inspection of the existing wall ties and head restraints.
2.3 These intrusive investigations highlighted some similar construction issues, on a smaller scale, to those found in the Edinburgh Council schools. A summary of the issues are noted below:
Submissions pack p85 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
• Burnside Primary School (PS) - Missing or inadequate Head Restraints • Carlogie Primary School - Due the size of the extension and construction type, the inspection was limited to a visual inspection - no issues found • Carnoustie High School - No issues found • Langlands Primary School - An initial investigation found that some walls ties to have an embedment 5mm less than the 50mm required. On further investigation it was found that the majority of ties embedment were greater than the required 50mm. • Strathmore Primary School - Missing or inadequate head restraints; an initial investigation found some ties were to have an embedment less than required. On further investigation it was found that the majority of ties embedment were greater than the required 50mm.One tie was found to be missing from the outer leaf of the external wall. Difference in coursing levels of the inner and outer leafs of the external walls resulting in ties not being horizontal. • Whitehills Primary School - Missing or inadequate head restraints • Woodlands Primary School - Missing or inadequate head restraints wall ties embedment less than the minimum requirement.
2.4 In summary one school (Woodlands PS) required remedial tie replacement in three wall panels and remedial header tie works were required at four schools (Burnside PS, Strathmore PS, Whitehills PS and Woodlands PS).
2.5 Consulting engineers, Fairhurst, were employed by the PPP contractor to provide the remedial works design/details and Robertsons organised the onsite construction. Fairhurst also confirmed that coursing levels, not being horizontal, at Strathmore PS was not of concern to the integrity of the structure.
2.6 The following works were undertaken by Robertsons
• Burnside PS: Head restraint straps were installed at agreed locations in the plant room area, along with some being installed to the rear gable end of the games hall. • Strathmore PS: Head restraint straps were installed at agreed locations in the plant room area. • Whitehills PS: Head restraint straps were installed at agreed locations in the plant room area, along with some remedial wall ties along a single elevation of the games hall. • Woodlands PS: Additional wall ties were inserted in all three panels
2.7 Angus Council structures team within Technical & Property Services reviewed and accepted the proposed remedial works for all the schools which were carried out between September and October 2016.
2.8 Elgin Education (Forfar & Carnoustie) Limited appointed an accredited Fire Consultants to verify overall fire compliance in the schools, following a previous survey by Robertsons in 2015. The consultants have completed their own survey of the facilities in February 2017, and Elgin Education (Forfar & Carnoustie) Limited have not raised any concerns following receipt of the consultant’s report.
3.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
3.1 All surveys, including intrusive works and any subsequent consultant costs and remedial works have been met by Elgin Education (Forfar & Carnoustie) Limited and/or their contractor. The council has borne its own costs associated with the staff involvement, with was contained within the Technical & Property Services revenue staff budget in 206/17.
Contact for further information: Ian Cochrane, Head of Technical and Property Services Email: [email protected].
Submissions pack p86 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p87 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p88 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p89 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
Submissions pack p90 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions
FifeU N C O C
Assets, Transportation & Environment
Mr James Dornan MSP Colin Mccredie Convener Tel: 03451 555 555 Education and Skills Committee The Scottish Parliament Your Ref: Edinburgh Our Ref: CMcC/KC EH991SP
By email 9June, 2017
Dear Mr Dornan,
I refer to your letter of 15 May 2017 to our Chief Executive, Mr Grimmond, which he has passed to me to respond.
Our responses to your numerated inquiries are as follows:
1. Inspection and remedial work of the currentestate since January 2016
• Has the school estate been inspected; o Intrusive inspections were carried out on all PPP schools. o A risk assessment has been carried out on other schools with some intrusive inspections carried out where deemed appropriate. o There is an ongoing structural inspection regime which then addresses any issues requiring rectification to ensure the continued safety of the school and wider estate.
• Have faults been identified; o Some minor issues have been identified.
• Has remedial work been undertaken and the impact of this? o As a precaution, some minor rectification works have been carried out but these has not impacted upon the normal operation of the schools involved.
2. QualityAssurance Practices
• How quality assurance is undertaken on current capital projects on the school estate; o Inspection of the works is carried out by the Contract Administrators across all projects. On larger projects the CAs are supported by Clerks of Works (CoW) who are deployed depending upon the scale and complexity regardless of the procurement method/form of
Submissions pack p91 Back to Subs Menu www.fifedirect.org.ul contract, e.g. CoWs are/were deployed on our PPP and DBFM contracts, on our DBDA and traditional contract. • Whether the quality assurance of school capital projects has been reassessed since 2016; o This has been reassessed and has provided reassurance that our approach of deploying CoWs on all projects other than minor works is correct. In general terms there is an increased awareness of the issues identified in the Cole Report resulting in heightened vigilance on site. • Whether there are, or were, particular issues depending on the funding model and the lessons to be learned? o Many of the defects identified seem to be related to the speed of construction with an emphasis on the need to get projects 'wind and watertight' as early in the programme as possible allied to insufficient supervision. In addition, certain forms of construction require a higher degree of workmanship accuracy and are not best suited to projects where early completion or a lighter approachto supervision is required. Fife Council has not sought to devolve responsibility for quality assurance to contractors and has retained a direct interest and control of compliance with the design, specification and all relevant standards. I trust that this provides you with all of the information that you require at this time. Yours sincerely, Colin Mccredie Programme Manager BFF CC Steve Grimmond, Chief Executive Property Services, Ground Floor 1 Bankhead Park, Glenrothes KY7 6GH Tel: 01592 583238 201.'3 Submissions pack p92 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Inverclydecouncil Aubrey Fawcett Our Ref: AF/EM BSc(Hons), DAAS, DipTP, RIBA, ARIAS, MRTPI Chief Executive Your Ref: Municipal Buildings Clyde Square 91h June 2017 Greenock PA15 1LY Mr James Dornan MSP Chief. executive@i nverclyde. gov. T3.40 uk The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH991SP By email Dear Mr Dornan I refer to your letter of 15 May 2017 regarding the enquiry on school buildings across Scotland and enclose Inverclyde's response as requested. Yours sincerely Aubrey Fawcett Chief Executive Submissions pack p93 Back to Subs Menu www.inverclyde.gov.uk ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE SCHOOL BUILDINGS INQUIRY Inverclyde Council Response 1. Inspection and remedial work of the current estate since January 2016 To what extent has the school estate been inspected; Refer to attached summary (Appendix 1). have faults been identified; Summary included in appendix 1. Minor remedial works were required to 4 schools to address insertion of remedial wall ties in small localised areas. has remedial work been undertaken and the impact of this? Remedial works were undertaken in October 2016 utilising the school holiday period without disruption to the operation of the facilities. The works were undertaken in a single day at one school (Inverclyde Academy) and across 6 days (circa 2 days per facility) for the other 3 schools (Clydeview Academy / Notre Dame HS / All Saints PS). 2. Quality Assurance Practices How quality assurance is undertaken on current capital projects on the school estate; The Council’s School Estate projects are monitored / managed through the Council’s Client Services (former School Estate) Team within Legal & Property Services. This team takes forward the briefing and consultation for all education projects with the manager of this team also responsible for Council wide property maintenance. Projects are either: o procured traditionally through the Council’s Technical Services section (Architectural / Engineering / Surveying) with design teams augmented by external consultant appointment where no in-house expertise is available or due to resourcing / workload. o procured through OJEU / hub model and managed by the Council’s Client Services Team augmented by external consultant appointment as required. The two approaches above involve much the same assurance processes with the only difference being in respect of the hub model structure and hub side project delivery staff. Prior to use of the hub, major new build school projects were procured via OJEU and Design & Build contracts utilising novated Council appointed external design team. See summary in table below: 1 | Page Inverclyde Council Submissions pack p94 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE SCHOOL BUILDINGS INQUIRY Traditional Hub DBDA Project Stage Pre- Post- Use Council Project Management contract contract (RIBA 7) (RIBA 0-4) (RIBA 5-6) Client Services Team: Client Services Team: Property Services Manager Property Services Manager (Chartered Quantity Surveyor) (Chartered Quantity Surveyor) Senior Architect – Client Senior Architect – Client X X X Services Services Quality Improvement Officer Quality Improvement Officer (Educationalist) (Educationalist) Maintenance Officer Maintenance Officer Technical Services Manager X X X (Senior Architect) Design Team (predominantly in-house supplemented by X X X external consultant appointment as required) Pre- Post- Use External Consultants contract contract (RIBA 7) (RIBA 0-4) (RIBA 5-6) Part design team as required Design Team (hub - disciplines vary depending X X X on type and size of project) Project Development X X X Manager (hub) Technical Manager (hub) X X Clerk of Works (Council Clerk of Works (Council X X appointed – agency) appointed – agency) Independent Testing & Independent Testing & Commissioning Engineer Commissioning Engineer X X (Council appointed on larger (Council appointed on larger scale projects) scale projects) As referred to in Appendix 2 the Council has also trialled the use of photo documentation services on a recent Education Capital project and this is being utilised on a further 3 current capital projects. whether the quality assurance of school capital projects has been reassessed since 2016; The quality assurance procedures currently in place have been reviewed. No changes are proposed to current procedures. whether there are, or were, particular issues depending on the funding model and the lessons to be learned? The Edinburgh School Enquiry concluded that whilst the financing method was not responsible for the defective construction, aspects of the way in which the PPP methodology was implemented on the projects did increase the risk of poor quality design and construction. 2 | Page Inverclyde Council Submissions pack p95 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE SCHOOL BUILDINGS INQUIRY The Council formed the School Estate Team in 2005 to manage all aspects of the School Estate Management Plan including the Council’s PPP project. The team at that time consisted of: o Head of Service – Planning & Resources (Educationalist) o School Estate Manager (Chartered Quantity Surveyor) o Assistant School Estate Manager (Charted Quantity Surveyor) o School Estate Development Officer – Secondary (Educationalist) o School Estate Development Officer – Primary (Educationalist) o Finance Officer (Chartered Accountant) o Maintenance Officer The Inverclyde experience of PPP procurement involved a competitive dialogue procedure which involved developing the designs for 3 bidders through the RIBA stages from inception to stage D/E. The Council invested in external advisors (legal / financial / technical) throughout this stage and had in place a Council team to manage the process (outlined above). The process involved extensive consultation with all stakeholders and a number of key statutory consultees including Planning, Roads, Police, Fire Service etc. The Council had also secured assistance via the Carbon Trust to provide guidance and design advice in terms of sustainable / low carbon design. This management of this process assisted in delivering / maintaining design quality through the pre-contract stages to financial close. The post- contract construction phase was monitored by the externally or jointly appointed advisors (SPV Employers Agent & Independent Certifier). Internally the Council’s School Estate Team managed the Reviewable Design Data (RDD) process and monitored quality through the Senior Architect on the team with a Council appointed Independent Testing & Commissioning Engineer (external consultant) providing specialist Mechanical & Electrical (M&E) support on the RDD process and an M&E Clerk of Works role which also assisted in areas such as fire stopping. The Council did not employ a more traditional ‘Clerk of Works’ on its PPP project. The Council has no plans to procure any future projects under the current hub model equivalent (DBFM) route however, should that procurement route be adopted in the future, use of a traditional Clerk of Works would be considered as part of the overall project resourcing. Please also refer to the Appendix 2 which includes a summary of the key recommendations from the Edinburgh Schools Enquiry report with Inverclyde’s notes / comments. 3 | Page Inverclyde Council Submissions pack p96 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions School / Centre Information Project Information Survey Information / General Comments Year Original Year Major Intrusive School / Construction No. of Works Type of Surveys School / Centre Name Centre Type Completed Storeys Completed Contract Description of new construction / extension works Completed Notes / Comments Aileymill Primary School Primary 2010 2 n/a PPP New Build PPP School completed Feb 2010. Steel framed Y Intrusive surveys carried out during Easter 2016 ‐ no safety Design & Build construction with predominatly structural framing system concerns. Follow‐up assurance survey undertaken summer and external brick / render with areas of cladding / curtian 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. walling. All Saints Primary School Primary 2010 2 n/a PPP New Build PPP School completed Feb 2010. Steel framed Y Intrusive surveys carried out during Easter 2016 ‐ no safety Design & Build construction with predominatly structural framing system concerns. Follow‐up assurance survey undertaken summer and external brick / render with areas of cladding / curtain 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. Minor remedial works walling. recommended to single small area (remedial ties) ‐ works completed in October 2016 holiday period. Ardgowan Primary School Primary 1900 3 2015 Traditional Extension completed 2015. Main structure of existing buildng NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. is traditional ashlar sandstone construction (no cavity). Hall Council appointed clerk of works. extension steel framed with blockwork cavity low level and cladding system at higher level. Gourock Primary School Primary 2000 1 n/a Traditional New Build completed Aug 2000. Steel frame construction NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. with blockwork cavity wall construction and cladding Council appointed clerk of works. externally at higher level (central hall section). Inverkip Primary School Primary 1836 1 1963 Traditional Original building is of ashlar sandstone construction (no NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. 1999 cavity). Extensions completed in phases are single storey in Council appointed clerk of works. 2006 traditional cavity wall construction with hall extensions diaphram construction. Kilmacolm Primary School Primary 1974 1 2016 hub DBDA Minor infill extensions 2016. Original building is concrete N External Design Team and support services via hub. Client Design & Build frame with brickwork cavity wall construction and external Services Team Project Management. Council appointed clerk concrete cladding panels. of works. King's Oak Primary School Primary 1970 2 2006 Traditional Extension completed Aug 2008 ‐ steel framed with YIn house design team supplemented by external consultants, brick/block cavity wall construction (2 storey) with 2 sections site inspection via design team. Intrusive surveys carried out of Kalwall cladding. Main building is concrete frame with in September 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. Follow‐up assurance brickwork cavity wall construction. survey undertaken Easter 2017 ‐ no safety concerns. Lady Alice Primary School Primary 1930 2 n/a Traditional Extension proposed (single storey) as part of major N Vacant ‐ major refurbishment project will commence on site refurbishment works. Existing building is traditional brick June 2017 to complete May 2018. cavity construction. Moorfoot Primary School Primary 1969 2 TBC hub DBDA Minor infill extension proposed only. Original building is N Vacant ‐ major refurbishment project commenced on site Design & Build concrete frame with brickwork cavity wall construction and April 2017 to complete March 2018. External Design Team significant areas of cladding panel / curtain walling. and support services via hub. Client Services Team Project Management. Council appointed clerk of works. Newark Primary School Primary 2008 2 n/a Design & Build New Build completed 2008. Steel framed construction with Y Design and Build with Client appointed Design Team pre‐ rendered cavity wall construction and significant areas of contract novated to Contractor post‐contract. School Estate metal cladding / curtain walling. Team Project Management. Council appointed external Employers Agent + Clerk of Works. Intrusive surveys carried out in September 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. St Andrew's Primary School Primary 1972 2 2011 Traditional Extension completed Oct 2011. Original building is concrete NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. frame with rendered cavity wall construction and cladding at Council appointed clerk of works. high level. Submissions pack p97 Back to Subs Menu Appendix 1 ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions School / Centre Information Project Information Survey Information / General Comments Year Original Year Major Intrusive School / Construction No. of Works Type of Surveys School / Centre Name Centre Type Completed Storeys Completed Contract Description of new construction / extension works Completed Notes / Comments St Francis' Primary School Primary 1972 1 2004 Traditional Original building is concrete frame with brickwork cavity wall NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. construction and external concrete cladding panels. 2004 Council appointed clerk of works. work did not involve extension. St John's Primary School Primary 1931 2 2015 Traditional Extension completed Oct 2015 (single storey ‐ rendered NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. brickwork on timber frame). Original building is concrete Council appointed clerk of works. frame with rendered cavity wall construction and externally applied insulation render system. St Joseph's Primary School Primary 1953 2 2006 Traditional Extension completed Aug 2006 (steel frame with block cavity YIn house design team supplemented by external consultants, wall construction and Kalwall cladding system). Original site inspection via design team. Intrusive surveys carried out building is concrete frame with brick / block cavity wall in September 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. construction and external concrete blockwork St Mary's Primary School Primary 1909 4 n/a - Main structure of existing buildng is traditional ashlar N Major refurbishment and extension proposed ‐ summer 2018 sandstone construction (no cavity). to summer 2019. St Michael's Primary School Primary 1960 4 2006 Traditional Original building is steel/concrete frame with brickwork NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants, cavity wall construction and externally applied insulation site inspection via design team. render system. Only new construction during refurbishment involved forming extension for lift shaft. St Ninian's Primary School Primary 1960 2 c1997 - Original building is steel/concrete frame with brickwork N Replacement proposed via new build hub DBDA project to cavity wall construction (part rendered). commence June 2017 and complete June 2018. St Patrick's Primary School Primary 2016 2 n/a hub DBDA New Build completed October 2016. Steel framed Y Inspection report via hub West Scotland and main contractor Design & Build construction with predominatly structural framing system during construction. External Design Team and support and external brick / curtian walling. services via hub. Client Services Team Project Management. Council appointed clerk of works. Wemyss Bay Primary School Primary 1980 2 1991 Traditional Recent extension completed Aug 2012 (steel frame and cavity NIn house design team, site inspection via design team. 2012 brick / block construction). Existing building is steel frame with brickwork cavity construction and render finish. Whinhill Primary School Primary 1973 1 2012 Traditional Extension completed Aug 2012 (timber frame and glu‐ YIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. lamintaed beams / steel frame brick / block construction). Council appointed clerk of works. Intrusive surveys carried Original building is concrete frame with brickwork cavity wall out during Easter 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. construction and external concrete cladding panels. Clydeview Academy Secondary 2011 3 n/a PPP New Build PPP School completed May 2011. Structural Y Intrusive surveys carried out during Easter 2016 ‐ no safety Design & Build concrete / steel frame with predominantly structural framing concerns. Follow‐up assurance survey undertaken summer system and external brick / render with areas of cladding / 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. Minor remedial works curtain walling. recommended to small areas (remedial ties) ‐ works completed in October 2016 holiday period. Inverclyde Academy Secondary 2008 2 n/a Design & Build New Build completed Dec 2008. Structural steel frame with Y Design and Build with School Estate Team PM and external low level brick / render and areas of cladding / curtain Employers Agent + External Clerk of Works. Intrusive surveys walling. carried out in September 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. Minor remedial works recommended to small areas (remedial ties) ‐ works completed in October 2016 holiday period. Submissions pack p98 Back to Subs Menu Appendix 1 ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions School / Centre Information Project Information Survey Information / General Comments Year Original Year Major Intrusive School / Construction No. of Works Type of Surveys School / Centre Name Centre Type Completed Storeys Completed Contract Description of new construction / extension works Completed Notes / Comments Notre Dame High School Secondary 2011 3 n/a PPP New Build PPP School completed May 2011. Structural Y Intrusive surveys carried out during Easter 2016 ‐ no safety Design & Build concrete / steel frame with predominantly structural framing concerns. Follow‐up assurance survey undertaken summer system and external brick / render with areas of cladding / 2016 ‐ no safety concerns. Minor remedial works curtain walling. recommended to small areas (remedial ties) ‐ works completed in October 2016 holiday period. Port Glasgow Community Campus Secondary 2013 3 n/a Design & Build New Build Community Campus completed Dec 2013. N Recent build. Design and Build with School Estate Team PM Construction varies from structural timber frame at single and external Employers Agent + External Clerk of Works. storey element , concrete and part steel frame elsewhere. Predominantly structural framing system and external brick with areas of cladding / curtain walling. St Columba's High School Secondary c1960 3 2012 Traditional New Extension completed Aug 2012 (steel frame and cavity NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. brick / block construction). Original building is concrete frame Council appointed clerk of works. which was re‐elevated and now brickwork cavity wall construction at lower level with structural framing system and cladding at higher level. Former Sacred Heart Primary School Decant c1950 2 n/a - Structural concrete frame with brickwork cavity wall N Demolition planned following completion of SEMP ‐ autumn construction and dry dash render finish at higher levels. 2019. Former St Stephen's High School Decant c1950 3 n/a - Structural concrete frame with brickwork cavity wall N Demolition planned following completion of current SEMP construction and painted concrete render at higher levels. project ‐ summer 2018. Lomond View Academy Special c1970 2 2012 Traditional Original structural is steel / concrete frame with brickwork NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. cavity wall construction. Comprehensive refurbishment Council appointed clerk of works. involved partial demolition of the building and over‐cladding (inlcuding insertion of remedial wall ties). Binnie Street Children's Centre Early Years 1876 2 2012 Traditional Main structure of existing buildng is traditional ashlar NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants. sandstone construction (no cavity). Council appointed clerk of works. Gibshill Children's Centre Early Years c1960 1 2002 Traditional Structural concrete/steel frame with blockwork cavity wall NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants, construction and externally applied insulation render system. site inspection via design team. Glenbrae Children's Centre Early Years 1970 1 n/a - Structural concrete frame with blockwork cavity wall N Replacement planned via conversion of Abefoyle Road offices construction and external rendered finish. with transfer circa 1st Quarter 2018. Hillend Children's Centre Early Years 1958 1 n/a - Structural concrete frame with brick/blockwork cavity wall N Comprehensive refurbishment planned 2018. construction and external rendered finish. Kelly Street Children's Centre Early Years c1930 2 n/a - Structural concrete frame with brickwork cavity wall N Replacement planned via new build ‐ Greenock West Early construction. Years Facility with transfer summer 2018. Rainbow Family Centre Early Years 2008 1 n/a Traditional New build completed 2008. Timber glu‐lamintaed beams and N Facility was subject of structural investigation post steel frame structure with brick / block cavity wall construction in connection with roof fixings (resolved in construction and Kalwall cladding system. 2011). In house design team, site inspection via design team. Wellpark Children's Centre Early Years 2001 1 n/a Traditional New build completed 2001. Structural steel frame with NIn house design team supplemented by external consultants, blockwork cavity construction. site inspection via design team. Submissions pack p99 Back to Subs Menu Appendix 1 ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments 1. Procurement a. A public sector body engaged in the procurement of public buildings Inverclyde currently has access to construction professionals through the should maintain, or have access to, a level of expertise and resources Council’s Legal & Property Service. Major capital projects involving new that allows that body to act as an ‘intelligent customer’. buildings or comprehensive refurbishment and/or extension are procured through the Client Services (former School Estate) Team and/or the Council’s Technical Services Team (Architectural / Engineering / Surveying). The Council formed the School Estate Team in 2005 to manage all aspects of the School Estate Management Plan (SEMP) with the current Client Services Team formed from the remaining members of that team. This team consists of fully qualified construction professionals, including a senior architect, senior quantity surveyor, maintenance officer and educationalist, all with extensive construction project / project management experience. This team manages the Council’s larger scale projects and acts as ‘ intelligent client’ i.e. projects currently procured through hub West Scotland, and large scale Design & Build OJEU level projects (including the Council’s PPP Schools project) prior to hub involvement. The above internal resource is supplemented by the appointment of external consultants as appropriate for each individual project. The Council has access to the hub framework, recruitment agencies and a number of consultant frameworks in addition to the ability to tender ad‐hoc for specific services. b. The public body should ensure that due diligence is undertaken to The teams outlined above ensure the delivery of projects in accordance confirm that requirements of the contract are actually delivered in with the agreed terms and conditions. This is supported as required via accordance with its terms. external consultants e.g. on the Council’s PPP project this involved Financial, Legal and Technical advisor assistance in addition to the core Council project team. The Client and Technical Services Teams have a combination of commercial / contract / design / educational expertise to facilitate robust interrogation and compliance checking, with regular engagement at design and construction meetings from inception to completion. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p100 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments c. Public bodies should understand that they cannot delegate the duty to Inverclyde recognises this duty and has in place a structure and ensure the provision of a safe environment for the delivery of services. procedures that address project / service delivery in accordance with all relevant legislation. d. Procurement strategies should include appropriate investment in the Scrutiny of projects is achieved through the Teams and consultants provision of informed independent scrutiny of projects when they are outlined above and as follows: being designed and constructed so that they are built right first time. Client & Technical Services Teams involvement from inception to completion with input from relevant services/users co‐ordinated at the correct stages of design and construction. Council appointed Clerk of Works on major projects. Independent Testing & Commissioning Engineer on large scale / major projects (includes a Mechanical & Electrical Clerk of Works role). Design team involvement in site inspection / quality monitoring. e. There should be a more informed approach as to how best practice The inquiry noted the importance of clear and considered articulation in methodologies aimed at optimising the quality of design and the quality a comprehensive brief by the client of the quality objectives for a project. of construction can be incorporated into current models of procurement. The Client Services Team briefing process has been refined through multiple project experience and draws upon the construction professional’s knowledge and experience providing a solid platform for the development of the design. The inquiry also noted the importance of the methodology to be used for ensuring the achievement of quality. The contract documents for major design and build projects have also been refined through experience to incorporate a robust Reviewable Design Data process that allows key client input into the developing design at the correct stages of construction and ensure that the Contractors Proposals are aligning with the original design brief and Employers Requirements. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p101 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments 2. Independent Certifier a. The level of service provided by independent certifiers needs to be Inverclyde has no current plans to procure further buildings/services via changed to reflect what clients actually require of the role. PPP or the current hub model equivalent DBFM (Design, Build, Finance and Maintain) route. The role of independent certifier (or independent tester under DBFM) is defined by the original scope of services agreed between the parties. It is understood that some hub territories are reviewing the scope of independent tester appointments to offer an additional clerk of works role. Individual procuring authorities should ensure that they are aware of the scope of services being provided and consider this in terms of their overall project delivery strategy / resourcing. b. The level of professional indemnity insurance sought and the liability No specific Inverclyde comment ‐ Industry review and guidance / period for independent certifiers needs to reflect the significance of their recommendations required as to the appropriate professional indemnity certification processes and the degree of reliance that is to be placed on level and liability period. it. c. The appointment of independent certifiers should be made following Note recommendation with implication that the appointment would be properly advertised and conducted public procurement processes. led, tendered and evaluated by the Local Authority which may not align with the current hub model. Inverclyde has no experience of the current hub DBFM procurement route but understands that there is a competitive process followed involving hub framework suppliers based on (but not restricted by) hub fee caps and a tendered schedule of services with a price / quality evaluation (typically 30/70) carried out jointly by the hub territory and Authority. d. The fees for undertaking the independent certifier role should reflect the Fee level should reflect the agreed / proposed scope of services and level of service required, rather than being restricted to fit a subject to procurement process as noted in c. above with an appropriate predetermined budget. weighted set of evaluation criteria. e. Clients should engage qualified individuals or organisations to undertake Agree and note that the approach will vary across Authorities / Clients an appropriate level of ongoing inspection of the construction of their depending on available internal resource / internal project management buildings (clerk of works, resident engineers, and/or resident architect procedures. Inverclyde approach outlined in 1. d. above. for example). Appendix 2 Submissions pack p102 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments 3. Client’s Relationship with the Design Team a. Current procurement arrangements should be reviewed to ensure they Effective communication between client and design team is also affected are providing the optimum level of communication between clients and by the way Authorities approach procurement of major projects. The key members of the design team. Inverclyde approach involves co‐ordination of stakeholder input via an experienced in‐house multi‐disciplinary team (Client & Technical Services) which enables focus / direction throughout the key stages of the project. The Inverclyde experience is that this works well in the pre‐ contract phases of projects either where engagement is: direct with in‐house or Authority appointed design teams on more traditional contracts; via Authority or hub/Authority procured design teams for OJEU / hub projects; via competitive dialogue (the Authorities only PPP contract was procured in this manner involving dialogue with 3 bidders / design teams) Inverclyde’s experience is mixed in terms of the post contract communication with greater design team engagement generally possible via traditionally procured projects and a general reluctance of main contractors to allow unrestricted client access to design teams post novation / post financial close on D&B/DBDA contracts. The Authority has sought to address this in its own D&B contracts via contract clauses / amendments e.g. Contractor progress reporting to including separate designer progress reports and site observations and this is also part of the original design team schedule of services. The reviewable design data process is also used in both D&B/DBDA contracts to maintain / encourage open lines of communication throughout the construction phase. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p103 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments b. Public sector clients should at least require that submitted tenders The procuring Authority has control of the scope of design team services include a full description of the proposed scope of design team services, via traditionally procured projects either via in‐house technical staff or including any proposed role in the inspection of works on site. externally procured consultants. Authorities also have the opportunity to review the scope of design team services on hub projects (DBDA / DBFM) and there are currently clauses in the standard schedules covering inspection of works on site. When procuring large Design & Build projects (non‐hub) Inverclyde has drafted the original scope of services documents for all design team members for both the pre and post novation stages and these include a requirement to visit the sites to inspect and verify the progress and quality of work. c. Where possible, there should be a mandatory provision built into In terms of safety of building users Inverclyde would expect design team contracts that where, to the knowledge of a professional design team members to adopt this approach under their professional duty of care member, a contractor has failed to take appropriate action on issues that regardless of contractual position. Within Inverclyde drafted schedules of could impact on the subsequent safety of building users or functionality services for major Design & Build projects there are clauses that require of the building, the consultant in question should be required to inform design team members to advise both Contractor and Employers Agent of the public sector client of the advice provided to the contractor. any special inspections, investigations or tests (including opening up where necessary) necessary to ensure that the correct and adequate standards of construction are maintained and works are constructed in accordance with the contract. The schedules also require novated consultants to provide a signed statement at each progress meeting confirming that all works are being progressed in accordance with the Employers Requirements. 4. Project Information Sharing a. Public bodies should establish a mandatory protocol for insisting on the Agree. This is also essentially the aim of the current Building Information production, retention and updating of accurate construction and and Modelling (BIM) initiative. operational information and related documentation on projects. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p104 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments b. Contractors should be required to record any on‐site changes to final Agree, and this should be the current position. Inverclyde’s experience of ‘construction issue’ drawings, certify that they are an accurate record of this issue indicates that the process can be affected, particularly on what has been built and arrange for these to be issued to the client for Design & Build projects, where the original design has been altered / retention. alternative design proposals have been brought by the Contractor and agreed through the contract change procedures, but for which no allowance / agreement has been made for updating / revising the original designer’s drawings. c. ‘As built’ drawings should also be submitted to buildings standards as a Agree, and should be current practice. As built drawings are a vital record definitive record of what was built. and Inverclyde Council require that these are included within the O&M manual submitted by the Contractor. Drawings that differ from the approved Building Warrant set should be revised to reflect what has been built and included in an Amendment to Warrant. d. The design and construction profession should consider the need for the BIM as noted in 1. a. will address improved integration of building design development of a better approach to the integration of documentation and construction information. The requirements and benefits of projects to reflect the practical needs to provide such information in a building utilising BIM should be further developed. Inverclyde’s approach to site environment. major projects has included use of construction “collaboration tools” which are set up at the start of any major project to ensure the correct integration of project documentation. This is also the standard approach across the current hub projects. e. Structural engineers should be required to describe in their Agree. This would aid understanding of design and component inter‐ documentation and drawings the approach and design philosophy dependence. There remains a fundamental requirement to carry out and adopted in their designs and the relative inter‐dependence of these complete the works in accordance with the contract drawings and various components. specification. Contractors site quality processes can assist in this area e.g. ‘technical workshops’ or ‘toolbox talks’ ahead of key operations / tasks to ensure the philosophies are shared at site level with site operatives suitably informed of the intricacies or complexities of the designs, particularly at the interface of responsibilities between sub‐contractors. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p105 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments f. Contractors should ensure that any changes to structural design should Agree. This should be current practice and a fundamental process / area only be implemented after having undertaken any necessary checks by of compliance in respect of the Contractors co‐ordination / development the structural engineer. of the design regardless of the form of contract. Any Contractor led design change, particularly where contractor design portions affect or alter the design team’s construction drawings must be highlighted. Consultants should revise the construction drawings accordingly to reflect the change and again fees must be allocated for this service to ensure drawings are fully co‐ordinated. g. PPP contract arrangements should incorporate the right for public sector This should already be the case. Authorities can stipulate the level / clients to be provided with copies of all design and technical information extent of reviewable design data as part of a normal D&B or hub DBDA in relation to their projects. project. The Health and Safety File and Operation & Maintenance manuals should also provide this information upon completion. In addition to this the Employers Requirements or ACR’s should identify this requirement and for those documents to be made available not just at the end of a project but throughout the design and construction phases. 5. Construction Recommendations a. The construction industry should review the practice of building the Industry review required. Can also be addressed in contract outer and inner leaves of cavity walls at different times, and where this documentation either via specification clauses / method statements / must be carried out alternative approved wall ties or structural framing Employer’s Requirements / ACR’s. Note use of structural framing systems systems should be used. offers more flexibility to stagger outer and inner leaf construction. b. Improved identification on wall ties should be introduced so that the No specific Inverclyde comment – industry / manufacturer action point re level of embedment is more clearly visible. product development. Does not detract from duty of care responsibilities from the site operative, brick laying sub‐contractor, main contractor and others observing and inspecting the works. c. There may be benefit in designers, contractors and manufacturers Designers have a duty to understand the methods of construction and reviewing the practical complexity of installing different forms of head consider ease of installation. There is also a fundamental requirement for restraints to reduce the time required to fit them and potential main contractors to provide appropriate and effective site supervision. reluctance from bricklayers to install them. Contractors should operate a system of work that involves appropriate hold points to allow inspection prior to covering up / building in key structural elements. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p106 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments d. It would be beneficial if head restraints were also designed to Comments as b. above. incorporate some visible indicator to prove in subsequent inspections that they had been fitted. e. The construction industry should seek to review how bricklayers are paid Agree. Does not detract from fundamental requirement for the main to remove any perverse incentive which speeds up construction but as a contractor to provide appropriate and effective site supervision in consequence encourages the omission of elements providing structural addition to design team and client appointed independent inspection via integrity. Clerk of Works or similar. f. The construction industry should seek to introduce standardised best Agree. Many Contractors have established methods in place and practice methods in relation to quality assurance processes and consider standardisation would assist to aid sub‐contractors understanding of the potential greater use of digital recording. processes. Inverclyde has recently trialled digital recording on one of its recent hub projects with feedback from the main contractor positive indicating a raised awareness of the digital recording process with a resultant improvement in quality. This is now being implemented on a further 3 projects. g. Quality assurance processes on site should prevent the closure of walls Agree. Inverclyde experience through evaluation of Contractor pre ‐ before proper inspection and sign‐off has been facilitated to confirm the qualification questionnaires indicates that these processes are being quality and completeness of work. considered with experience of these processes on a number of past and current projects. The effectiveness of these processes is reliant on rigid adherence regardless of programme pressures and the quality & experience of key site personnel. h. The construction industry should re‐examine its approach to recruitment, No specific Inverclyde comment. Industry action with impact varying training, selection and appointment of bricklaying sub‐contractors, depending on type of Contractor i.e. Management Contractor or means of remuneration, vetting of qualifications and competence, Contractor with core retained skilled operatives. Supply chain procedures supervision and quality assurance of bricklayers. as operated by most medium to large contractors should address the management of key sub‐contractors including bricklaying. i. An independent in‐depth inspection and certification of fire stopping by a Agree. Inverclyde use of independent testing and commissioning suitably qualified person should be required to provide evidence to engineer with M&E clerk of works role on major projects has aided building standards of a fully compliant installation. compliance in this area. Clerk of works and design team members can also be utilised. Formal changes in this area requiring certification to building standards would be welcomed. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p107 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments 6. Training and Recruitment a. The appropriate authorities should undertake a review of the current No specific Inverclyde comment – Industry led action in this area level of provision of training in bricklaying, clerks of works and building addressing improvements in the quality of the available resource is standards inspectors to ensure the construction industry has access to welcomed. and adequate properly trained and qualified resource in each of these areas. b. The Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) should review the No specific Inverclyde comment – Industry led action in this area effectiveness of current apprenticeship arrangements in meeting the addressing improvements in the quality of the workforce is welcomed. objective of developing a highly skilled bricklaying workforce. 7. Building Standards Recommendations a. It is recommended that consideration be given to the practicality of The practicalities of how local authorities are to respond to non‐notified extending the concept of mandatory inspection and certification of mandatory inspection work is crucial, as it is Inverclyde Council’s construction by approved certifiers to elements of the building that could experience that the greatest obstacle to inspection is the applicant’s potentially pose significant risk to users if not constructed properly and failure to notify. Inverclyde Council supports the concept of mandatory which level of inspection cannot practically be undertaken by building inspections on the basis that the applicant has a mandatory responsibility inspectors themselves. to notify the building standards authority at the appropriate stages and with appropriate time scales specified for inspection following notification. Inverclyde Council has no objection to Certification of Construction provided the certification scheme adequately considers the need for independence of the certifier and the audit process applied to them. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p108 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments b. Appropriate arrangements should be developed and implemented to Any arrangements should fully recognise the individual roles in the identify, pursue and sanction those who fail to “secure the health, safety, process. The building standards process sets out the essential standards welfare and convenience of persons in or about buildings” as required by to be met when the building is constructed, and only to the extent the Building (Scotland) Act. necessary to meet the building regulations. The system is pre‐emptive, designed to check that the proposed building meets the standards. Once approved it is the responsibility of the developer to construct in accordance with the plans and to issue a completion certificate to confirm that the building accords with the approved plans. The building standards authority is responsible for accepting the completion certificate after a risk assessed reasonable inquiry. This reasonable inquiry does not provide a system to control work on site; this is a matter for the contracts and arrangements put in place between client and builder and where the ultimate responsibility for securing “the health, safety, welfare and convenience of persons in or about buildings” lies. It would be a concern that legal prosecution is a clumsy and expensive tool to use to drive up reliability of construction. c. In PPP contracts where a certificate of completion cannot be issued, and As PPP contracts relate to public buildings, alternatives to the acceptance the issue of an availability certificate is permitted on the basis of a of a completion certificate are not considered desirable. A public building temporary occupation certificate, the independent certifier issuing such should ideally not be occupied until such time as a completion certificate an availability certificate should formally advise the public sector client of is issued by the appropriate person and accepted by the local building this fact and qualify the documentation to reflect this position. standards authority. Temporary occupation certificates should only be issued where minor non‐safety critical aspects of the works remain incomplete. The associated contractual certification is a matter for the client and builder to consider. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p109 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments d. A review should be undertaken as to the overall objective of site visits Inverclyde Council, as a member of Local Authority Building Standards undertaken by building inspectors to ensure that the planning of these Scotland (LABSS) issues a Construction Compliance Notification Plan properly reflects a prioritisation of the identification and inspection of (CCNP) with each building warrant issued. The level of inspection areas of highest risk. required is in accordance with the nationally agreed risk protocol. This places an obligation on developers to notify the Council at appropriate stages of construction so that inspections can be undertaken efficiently. The CCNP identifies the minimum level of inspection and case officers, based on what is seen on site, may undertake additional inspections as deemed necessary. No change to objectives of the CCNP is considered necessary. e. A review should be undertaken of the staffing and funding of the Building No Inverclyde comment. Standards Department in Edinburgh Council. 8. Public Body Information Sharing a. There should be a formal requirement on public bodies to make Inverclyde supports the sharing of information and has assisted the automatic disclosure to a central source of information on building enquiry by providing all available reports. failures, particularly in relation to those that pose potential risks to the safety of building users. 9. Recommendations for the City of Edinburgh Council a. The Council may wish to investigate whether implementation arising Inverclyde’s PPP School s contract has operated to date with minimal from requests for minor changes within PPP schools can be simplified. requirement for changes and any changes that have been implemented have been minor with no overall lifecycle impact. This particular recommendation appears to be related to the requirement to formally record and consider the whole life costs of proposed minor changes (alterations / improvements generally that are school or parent council funded) and the relatively lengthy process compared to that of non‐PPP schools. The process for this is set out in the accepted project agreement documents for the contract. It should be noted that the overall process should not differ significantly between PPP and non‐PPP, as any maintenance or lifecycle impact on Council budgets should always be considered. Instances of School / Parent Council funded works requests have been relatively rare most likely due to the significant investment in the Inverclyde School estate over the last 12 years. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p110 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Enquiry Recommendations Inverclyde Response / Comments b. The Council should facilitate a joint meeting with representatives of the No Inverclyde comment. parent councils and heads of schools to review all issues relevant to the management of the closure of schools as a result of the wall collapse. c. Appropriate frequent on‐going inspections should be undertaken by Building inspection and maintenance is co‐ordinated through the those responsible for the management of buildings to ensure that these Council’s Legal & Property Services section with input / support from a are properly maintained over time. number of other Council Services e.g. Corporate Health & Safety, Facilities Management (Janitorial/Cleaning/Grounds Maintenance). The following contribute to the proper maintenance of the Council’s Assets: 5 yearly externally procured building surveys (Building Surveyor led including Mechanical & Electrical Engineering input). Annual internal review of building surveys (Property Services). Annual prioritisation and targeting of available lifecycle funding (Property / Technical Services). Day to day inspection / reporting by Janitors/Caretakers (FM) Statutory Duty related testing and maintenance (asbestos / water safety & hygiene / electrical safety / emergency lighting / lightning conductor / lift maintenance etc. – Property Services) Annual Fire Risk Assessments review and procedures (Property Services / Corporate Health & Safety) PPP schools contract monitoring and audit via Client Services Team (Property Services) 10. Further Investigations a. Other clients of recently constructed buildings of a similar scale and form Inverclyde Council’s approach to assurance surveys of its existing estate of construction may wish to adopt a risk‐based approach to investigating is as outlined in Appendix 1. This has considered a number of factors their estate especially in regards to the issues identified within this including the age and form of construction, scope and timing of recent inquiry. comprehensive refurbishment works, and arrangements for contract / project management. Appendix 2 Submissions pack p111 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Submissions pack p112 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Submissions pack p113 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Submissions pack p114 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions -4- 2. Quality Assurance Practices • How quality assurance is undertaken on current capital projects on the school estate South Lanarkshire Council have an internal resource of multi disciplinary construction professionals who manage all construction projects carried out by the Council. This team includes architects, engineers and clerk or works, who monitor quality assurance through the construction process, including adherence to specification, together with the quality of workmanship and quality of materials. • Whether the quality assurance of school capital projects has been re-assessed since 2016 South Lanarkshire Council has not specifically reviewed the quality assurance procedures since 2016. However, in light of the Edinburgh Schools Inquiry, information and instruction has been provided to designers, clerks of works and construction teams, relative to the findings. • Whether there are, or were, particular issues depending on the funding model and the lessons to be learned Since 1999, the Council has not fundamentally altered the process for quality assurance on construction projects, including schools, in that this is carried out by the Council's in-house technical team of architects, engineers and clerk of works. Due to the scale of the Secondary School Modernisation Programme, the delivery of this contract was managed by a cross Resource team of Council officers, who were seconded into a Schools Modernisation Team. This team included a qualified architect and an experienced clerk of works, who represented the Council relative to technical and quality matters during the construction process and had the ability to draw on additional resources from the in-house service, as required. The Council also employed external technical advisors, Turner Townsend, and the Partnership was also subject to independent certification by Davis Langdon. During the delivery of this works programme, the Council did not experience any issues as a result of the funding model. Finally, in terms of lessons learned, as noted earlier, the Council is carrying out an internal review into the findings and recommendations of the report and from this will determine and implement any changes deemed necessary. I trust the above clarifies the matter and provides you with the details you were looking for. If you require any further information or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely Lindsay Freela Chief Executive Submissions pack p115 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Submissions pack p116 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions . • The Council has a rolling programme of condition surveys for schools, and this is currently up to date. Additional surveys may be commissionedin advance of specificprojects, and targeted surveys may also be instructed should issues be identified by Property Maintenance Officers making routine visits or by teaching or facilities management staffraising issues. Additional wall ties were installed at a primary school last summer when corrosion of existing ties were identifiedin advance of a refurbishment project. There are currently two primaryschool boundarywalls being monitored after identification of issues during routine visits. There has been no impact on education delivery within these properties. This work is supported by a Property Maintenance Officer for the school estate, and a Building Surveyor with specific responsibility for structure fabric. Quality Assurance Practices Stirling Council appoints a Clerk of Works, along with a Project Architect or Project Manager to manage the quality aspects of capital programme projects. The Clerk of Works has generally been a directly employed officer, however, this has been supported by a consultancy framework in the past, to support periods of higher requirement. This has been a long standing approach by the Council. The Clerk of Works has day to day responsibility for quality monitoring and reporting. The Clerk ofWorks will typically visit sites most days during projects, recording works, liaising with contractors and designers, proactively identifying issues, and reporting progress, safety and quality issues through informal and formal routes. The remit and scope of the Clerk of Works role will vary in terms of the form ofcontract. There have been no significant changes to the approach to quality assurance practices since 2016, however, a review of the Clerk of Works scope of service has taken place and a more focussed approach to certain activities and trades has been developed on design and build projects. Taking a more active approach to monitoring quality. This can include agreeing a schedule of 'sign offs' with the Site Manager on specific trades, and recording within the reporting process. Quality inspectors will select around 12 specific processes, such as blockwork/brickwork, in-situ concrete, firestopping, vinyl flooring and would monitor in greater detail, reviewing contractors quality assurance processes in parallel to their own review. In parallel with this assurance, Stirling Council's Building Standards service will also verify any capital project design in accordance with the Building Regulations and undertake a robust inspection regime on specific stages of the construction as partof the Construction Compliance Notification Plan (CCNP) issued with the Building Warrant approval. Only when reasonable enquiry through inspection has been verified would the Building Standards service consider issuing an Acceptance ofthe Completion submission for any project. I trust that this response is of assistance. Yours sincerely c:.-----· Stewart Carruth Chief Executive Submissions pack p117 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions James Dornan MSP Convenor of Education and Skills Committee The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH99 1SP Dear Sir, Further to your letter of 15th May 2017 in relation to schools inspections, I can respond to the two part enquiry as follows: Part 1 - Inspection and remedial work of the current estate since January 2016 To what extent: • has the school estate been inspected? Visual inspections of all four PPP procured schools and three traditionally procured schools were carried out by a team of technical officers on Monday 11th April 2016. In April 2016, BAM, who were the contractor for all PPP built schools in West Dunbartonshire, also carried out their own inspections of the four PPP schools. BAM also provided documentary evidence of their own quality assurance processes including: Quality Assurance Records, Defects Avoidance Procedures, Internal Quality Audits and BSI Audit Documentation. During April 2017 BAM also arranged for a third party specialist contractor WSP, to carry out a survey on fire stopping elements of the PPP buildings. • have faults been identified? In relation to the visual inspections, no faults were discovered either by WDCs technical officers in the four PPP and three traditionally built schools or BAMs inspection team in relation to the four PPP schools. • has remedial work been undertaken and the impact of this? In relation to the buildings structures, no work was deemed necessary. In relation to fire stopping, surveys have taken place over the last two weeks however the report will not be available until after this response. Notwithstanding this, BAM have agreed, if necessary, they will attend to any remedial work highlighted in the report. Part 2 - Quality Assurance Practices • how quality assurance is undertaken on current capital projects on the school estate; West Dunbartonshire Council have an in house team of Clerks of Works who undertake quality assurance duties in all capital projects. Submissions pack p118 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions • whether the quality assurance of school capital projects has been reassessed since 2016; In relation to traditionally procured contracts, West Dunbartonshire Council has always employed the services of our own Clerks of Works. In relation to PPP or DBFM contracts, we have reassessed the arrangement where the contractor principally retains responsibility for quality assurance but governed by the appointment of an Independent Certifier who provides a third party quality assurance service. • whether there are, or were, particular issues depending on the funding model and the lessons to be learned? In previous PPP and DBFM contracts, the contractor was principally responsible for quality assurance with further scrutiny being provided by the Independent Certifier. As seems to be the case, and indeed highlighted by Professor Cole in his report, this failed to provide the level of quality assurance required in many of the Edinburgh Schools contracts. As such West Dunbartonshire Council has taken the decision going forward that in any future contracts of these types, we will appoint our own in-house Clerk of Works to provide quality assurance advice to the Council for onward communication to the contractor. With regard to the rest of the schools estate, visual inspections on building structures were carried out between 7th and 24th April 2014 following the tragic death of a pupil at Liberton High School, Edinburgh. As a result of these inspections, a number of minor repairs were carried out. Furthermore, West Dunbartonshire Council employs two Property Coordinators who frequently visit all operational properties and are tasked, among other duties, with reporting any evidence of potential structural defects to our in house Structural Engineer, who would then follow up with a site visit and report if necessary. I trust you find this information helpful. Yours sincerely Joyce White Chief Executive West Dunbartonshire Council Council Offices Garshake Road Dumbarton G82 3PU Direct line: 01389 737668 Email: [email protected] Submissions pack p119 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Submissions pack p120 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Submissions pack p121 Back to Subs Menu ES/S5/17/18/2 School Infrastructure Submissions Submissions pack p122 Back to Subs Menu Agenda Item 4 ES/S5/17/18/3 EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE Wednesday 14 June 2017 Teacher Workforce Planning Inquiry Submissions pack Purpose 1. A number of additional submissions and pieces of correspondence have been received since the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills provided evidence to the Committee on the teacher workforce planning inquiry on 31 May 2017. This paper provides links to these pieces of additional evidence. Links to evidence 2. A further submission was received from an attendee of the focus group session on the 17 May 2017. The link to this additional submission is below. • Teach First supplementary • General Teaching Council Scotland supplementary (Teacher Induction Scheme) • General Teaching Council Scotland additional statistics (Qualified Outside Scotland by country/subject) • Scottish Funding Council (ITE targets/post-probationer teacher numbers) • Simon Needham • Susan Rhind Davidson • Gillian McInnes • Richard Storton 1