Facilities Management Services in U.K. Schools - Literature review Example

Facilities Management Services in U.K. Schools The study focuses on various facilities management services provided by different private and public sector providers with the experience of PFI, PPP and BSF projects. The section focuses on the roles and functions of the facility management services provided to the schools which includes the safety and security maintenance. The duty of the facility management service providers also includes the formation of an environmentally sound organisation and managing the operations in a cost-effective manner. According to Atkin and Brooks (2009), outsourcing is an important concept in the field of facility management. The educational institutes in UK generally outsource the service provision of various sectors involved in the job. In recent times, facility management services have evolved as a new trend in United Kingdom. Chidgey (2009) observed, the non-government department - partnership for schools which is responsible for the BSF (Building Schools for the Future) has made the announcement for re-establishment of secondary schools. It will also include academics that will be opened in England in the next 20 years. Therefore, the future perspective of facility management in UK seems quite bright (Chidgey, 2009). According to Nicola Brittain (2010), the project of rebuilding of the secondary schools by the previous government (mentioned above) has to be in process during the next 15 years. But according to the contracts of recent ICT which came out of the BSF programme, are on the basis of the review proposed by Schools Minister, Michael Gove. There had been confusions regarding these undertakings. But those were removed by the announcement from Gove. The new government will take up the BSF projects one by one. The article describes that though the government has changed but the objectives haven’t (Brittain, 2010). Loopholes of BSF Programmes Knight (2010) observed that the building programmes of schools have got some erroneous facts associated with it. Many school projects were cancelled which were under way. BSF has been largely affected by the high spending, over delays and bureaucracy which were needless. According to the writer, a fifteen year programme for re-building secondary schools in England cannot be without some challenges. The writer calls it as highly ambitious. The transformations due to the projects affected education to a larger extent (Knight, 2010). Correction of the Loopholes According to Garner (2010), Michael Gove has apologised and mentioned that there were errors in release of information about cancellation of building programmes of schools in England. Mr. Gove had sent a letter of apology to the speaker saying that there was need of clearness regarding some issues for teachers and parents in the areas where it was thought that the projects will be cancelled (Garner, 2010). Workings of BSF for the Future In order to highlight the future of facility management services in UK schools, it is important to first understand the workings of BSF programmes. The understanding will lead to a clearer view of the coming future. According to Jones and Williams (2005), BSF is a strategic programme of the government launched in February 2004 for the development of secondary schools in England. This programme is rolled out by the Department for Education and Skills. Through the BSF programme the following attributes can be related to UK. Educational Changes There will be a definite change in the system of education provided to secondary schools with infusion of such a big investment. The schools will then be indulged in facilities more than just those normally provided in secondary schools. They will be providing many non-educational facilities and other projects. Partnering The BSF scheme uses public-private partnership as a tool of working for every project. It partners up with Partnership for Schools (PFS) and Private Sector Partner (PSP). PFS plays a direct role in helping out BSF operations. Apart from PFS, the Public Private Partnership Programme also plays an active role in reviewing the changes necessary at different times. In addition to all these parties, there is Partnership UK which has been brought to develop PPP. The involvement of these huge numbers of external parties may at certain times make the project critical. Local Authority The operations will only get into shape when there is proper written consultation with the local authority. It is duty of the LAs to consult the local stakeholders for taking up the concerned projects. After consultations the procurement process should start followed by the selection of the PSP. Creating the LEP After selecting PSP, LEP will be created which holds the task of delivering projects. It will have the responsibility of buying goods and services and monitoring activities. Despite the vast formulation of such an authentic system, there will also be some other organisations that will be interested in guiding (Jones & Williams, 2005). Reflection on the School Private Finance Initiative (PFI) The trend of facility management services towards the schools in UK can be recognised more clearly if the light is thrown on the initiative programme of PFI that supports the modern functioning of the facility management services. Rossiter (2008), a head teacher of a school in England describes the operations of the PFI in his school’s final stages. The aim of the project was to transform the school into an educational establishment. The following points were mentioned by the writer while describing the works of the PFI towards development of schools. Benefits from the Contract The writer explains the co-operation between various members involved in the contract signing and other formalities to be an “unspoken agenda”. The dealings regarding the processing were highly appreciated by the writer. The modern terminologies of the facility management services are such that the complex processing was done very easily. Costs Controlled The cost related to the project with respect to its planning, construction and other facilities was being negotiated and at times reductions were also made. By mentioning this point, the writer wants to highlight the flexibility of the modern system that he enjoyed during the construction of his school project. The school authorities and the Local authorities were made capable to formulate changes on different plans put forward. Regular monthly meetings were held to discuss issues that they wanted to negotiate upon. Fitting To the Changed Infrastructure The author who is also the head teacher of the school has displayed himself to be quite concerned regarding the changes that were about to come by shifting from the old building to the new one. According to him the PFI contractor was very much devoted towards his project and LA as well as the school members did not find any difficulties in the phase of their works. The writer has mentioned that there were cases when they were not in the same line of ideas as the contractors. To handle the problems then, they had even taken other initiatives of taking suppliers from outside. This mentions the flexibility of PFI processing (Rossiter, 2008). Reason to Go For the PFI According to Blois (2008), the local authority can still be a better option for the small and middle projects but the schools aiming in the bigger prospect of the infrastructure are taking up facilities provided by the PFI. It was launched in the year 1992 and was developed for providing financial support to the relationship between private and public sectors. The big school projects that face necessities of funds for investment, achieve a lot of help from the support of PFI. The funds that government was unable to dispose for development of schools come from PFI. This is a useful device for accounting because it reduces public borrowing. PFI tool can be treated as an ‘off balance sheet’ instrument because the money borrowed by PFI is not considered as a national debt (Blois, 2008). Loopholes to the PFI Jones (2009) viewed the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) is a terrible thing for the taxpayers. The writer mentioned that 641 PFI projects have left the public with huge amount of payments whose value was four times the value of total assets. The study towards the issue has revealed that PFI projects have forced the public agencies to cut services in order to cope up with the huge debt ratio created. The writer has mentioned that defining the present scenario of PFI as bankrupt, it must be decided to bare all the systems of funding through them (Jones, 2009). Move towards the Facility Management Services: Schools Which Have Taken Up the Projects and Schools Which Have Not According to Richardson (2010), it is very essential to evaluate the modern changes in infrastructural facilities with the educational attainment. The critics that have arrived by adoption of the facilities revolve around the evaluation of the educational qualities, whether they have increased or decreased, whether there is link between the standards of performance in older schools; and modernity has been questioned. The writer has displayed the evidence when the students of a school performed better in its older facilities. This may be due to the hindrances in concentration that arrived in the course of construction owing to noise. As there are also evidences which has proved that performance of schools under BSF programme has improved from the initial year of its transformation. The scholar shows economic benefits from investment school construction that has a long term perspective for the economy. The equality arrangement will improve because government comes under a moral obligation to offer all the modern facilities to the schools if relation between pupil performance and infrastructure is defined (Richardson, 2010). PFI in Schools: A Success or a Failure According to McCabe & Et. Al., (2001), the PFI has been accepted as a replacement to public sector funding. Public Private Partnership has largely evolved due to the involvement of private investment in public activities. The role of PFI in education sectors have been highlighted by the writer as he mentions that a PFI project in schools should show worth for money (McCabe & Et. Al., 2001). Comparison of the Future of Facility Management Services with the Present Local Authorities According to Total Workplace Management (2010), from the day the British Institute of Financial Management has been formed it has been the fastest developing professional body in the states of United Kingdom. BIFM has been the leading institute in UK that has been providing the organisations with Facility Management related goods and services (Total Workplace Management, 2010). According to Berry (2005), PFI procurement route has seen tremendous growth in eight years of time period i.e. from 1997 to 2005. This is evident from the fact that in the year 1997 it was successful in generating £700m and then it increased at a rapid rate to £5.2bn in the year 2005 in Building Schools for the Future Programme. Through the availability of the Financial Management contracts, schools and colleges got the opportunity to concentrate more on the core business that they have like teaching and learning. It has also enabled the schools to check the feasibility of the business plan for the working of the extended schools. With the introduction of PFI there have been several benefits among which one of them has been transfer of the risk. PFI has forced the parties to identify the risk and to take the ownership of that risk. The cost of lessening the risk is bear by the client in most of the sectors. Therefore what the PFI does is that it provides such a device through which the risk remains to the party who is most suitable to mitigate the risk. It is to be noted that in case of the traditional procurement methods both the cost as well as the risk remained with the clients. At the same time traditional methods helped to incur the actual cost and paid little attention to the cost of risk. Although there is no guarantee of value for money by the PFI but they provide a level of certainty. When the budget has already been located towards the particular sector then the level of certainty proves to be very helpful (Berry, 2005). According to Teaching Expertise (2008), there have been various ways through which the building works can be undertaken at schools. One of them is the traditional procurement that is beneficial if the project has been of small to medium sized in nature. In this case the local authorities provides the commission to the consultants who would be responsible to prepare the designs for the work that is to be conducted and the construction part is done by the contractor. However, when the large projects are to be executed then the involvement of the Public Private Partnership (PPP) becomes important in schools of UK. PFI is a type of PPP. CBI (2010) observed that the local authorities have been working hard in order to deliver its wide range of services to the various communities like schools and housing. However, in the coming years the local authorities may face the problem of budgets, inefficient production facilities and may deliver the project but at a relatively low cost (CBI, 2010). According to the National Audit Office Report (2009), in the year 2003 Building Schools for the Future Programme was announced by the Department of Children, Schools and Families. The main aim was to renovate 3500 English Schools in the period of 15 years that was subjected to the future public spending decision. The plan was to rebuild half of the entire school, remodel the 35% and to renovate the rest of the school. In this case there has been involvement of the local authorities who would be maintaining and commissioning the school. Partnership for Schools was also created by the companies in an attempt to manage the program entirely in a better style by the department. The department also wants the building to be used and shared by the local authorities. BSFs have been providing support to the local authorities to use the capital funding in a strategic manner (National Audit Office, 2009). According to Teaching Expertise (2005), BSF has been providing schools with improved facilities with the intention that the educational experience of all children is enhanced in the country. With an investment of £2.2 billion, the scheme will help to derive major change in the way the secondary schools are being operated in UK. It is imagined that through this programme the schools will house as well as offer the non-educational projects and facilities. The community as well as the children will be benefited to a large extent as they would get an opportunity to interact with the Government based School initiatives. As it is impossible for the BSF to deliver the projects independently, therefore it requires the partnership of the various initiatives to deliver the project successfully. BSF schemes can only be successful if it has the partnering with the Public-Private Partnership. In this scenario the scheme will make use of the local authority of education in order to deliver the projects on time. The partnership will be held between the Partnership for Schools and the Private Sector Partner that is a joint venture between the local education authorities. The PFS will be responsible to support the local authorities and on the same time it will also check how the projects have been progressing over the period of time. There will also be involvement of the Public Private Partnership Programme (4 Ps) along with the PFS. The 4 Ps will help the key project partners to learn as they work in the project and gain from their experience and use the same experience in the coming projects (Teaching Expertise, 2005). Facilities Management Companies as Service Providers in UK Schools According to G4S, there has been innumerable number of facility management companies for Schools in UK. One of them has been G4S that is responsible to build and execute the facilities and also provide the facility management services in the educational institutions. They have been quite experienced in providing the services and also have worked with the PFI, BSF and PPP projects. In this scenario the main concern is to effectively deliver the support services in an attempt to enhance the environment where the students can learn properly and the parent, visitors, teachers as well as the pupils can also feel valued. In its facility management services it ensures that the schools are maintained to the highest level of standard and is clean and safe. Its activities or more precisely the facilities include catering, caretaking as well as portering, and IT services. The G4S has been committed to the BSF programmes that aim to renovate 3500 schools in England. It provides integrated and reliable solution to the BSF programmes to renovate the schools (G4S, n.d.). According to BAM (2010), Royal BAM Group has also been one of the facility service providers in UK. It has its three subsidiaries in UK as BAM Construct, BAM Nuttall and BAM PPP which has been generating revenue of £1.8 billions p.a. It is at the top position in terms of the construction service in UK. BAM Construct UK has been involved in facility management services in UK and has a partnership with BAM PPP on the bidding programmes in order to build schools under the BSF programmes. BAM Construct UK has been proving continuously that they can withstand any difficult situation as well as environment and lead the others. It has also shown an outstanding performance in the educational institutes. It has been successful in the earlier stages of BSF bids in Camden and Coventry and has been the preferred bidder for BSF Somerset (BAM, 2010). According to Microsoft UK Education (2009), the company Microsoft has been helping the BSF strategies and has been taking initiative in order to support the development of the skills as a part of the learning and teaching programme. It has close relation with various construction companies (Microsoft UK Education, 2009). References Berry, C., 2005. PFI vs. Traditional Procurement Methods. The PPP Journal- Issue 51. [Online] Available at: http://www.publicservice.co.uk/article.asp?publication=The%20PPP%20Journal&id=201&content_name=Risk%20Management&article=5167 [Accessed November 11, 2010]. BAM, 2010. Royal BAM Group’s UK Operations Post Solid Financial Results. Press Release. [Online] Available at: http://www.bam.co.uk/Default/NewsRoom/NewsDetails/10-04-29/royal_bam_groups_uk_operations_post_solid_financial_results.aspx [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Brittain, N., 2010. BSF Programme Axed By Gove. Computing. [Online] Available at: http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/news/2266006/bsf-programme-axed [Accessed November 11, 2010]. CBI, 2010. Shared Services in Local Government. Foreward. [Online] Available at: http://publicservices.cbi.org.uk/uploaded/SharedServices_Report_October_2010.pdf [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Chidgey, J., 2009. Building Schools for the Future: Implications for Design and Technology. Resources. [Online] Available at: http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/publications-reports-articles/web-articles/Web-Article1316 [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Garner, R., 2010. Gove Apology for Errors on Schools List. The Independent. [Online] Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/gove-apology-for-errors-on-schools-list-2021140.html [Accessed November 11, 2010]. G4S, No Date. Services for Schools. Providing Clean, Secure Premises. [Online] Available at: http://www.g4s.uk.com/en-GB/What%20we%20do/Services/Facilities%20management/Services%20for%20schools/ [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Jones, S. & Williams, R., 2005. Building schools for the future: how the programme works. Major changes to education. [Online] Available at: http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/building-schools-future-how-programme-works-546 [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Jones, A., 2009. Private Finance Initiative 'Terrible' For Taxpayers. The Independent. [Online] Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/article1836312.ece [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Knight, J., 2010. The Case Against Building Schools For The Future Is Highly Erroneous. Articles. [Online] Available at: http://www.thinkpolitics.co.uk/article/the-case-against-building-schools-for-the-future-is-highly-erroneous/ [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Microsoft UK Education, 2009. Turning Your Vision into Reality. Other Partners. [Online] Available at: http://www.microsoft.com/uk/education/schools/building-schools-for-the-future/get-involved.aspx [Accessed November 11, 2010]. McCabe, B. & Et. Al., 2001. PFI in Schools – Pass or Fail? Abstract. [Online] Available at: http://www.cipfa.org.uk/thejournal/download/jour_vol1_no1_d.pdf [Accessed November 11, 2010]. National Audit Office, 2009. The Building Schools for the Future Programme: Renewing the Secondary School Estate. National Audit Office Report. [Online] Available at: http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0809/schools_for_the_future.aspx [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Rossiter, B., 2008. Reflecting On A School Private Finance Initiative (PFI). Benefits. [Online] Available at: http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/benefits-school-private-finance-initiative-pfi-3899 [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Richardson, S., 2010. Charter 284 Education: The Economic Case for Investing In Schools. Articles. [Online] Available at: http://www.cabe.org.uk/articles/charter-284-education [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Teaching Expertise, 2005. Building School For The Future: How The Program Works. Major Changes to Education. [Online] Available at: http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/building-schools-future-how-programme-works-546 [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Teaching Expertise, 2008. Using PFI to Build at Your Schools. Home. [Online] Available at: http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/using-pfi-build-your-school-4069 [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Total WorkPlace Management, 2010. BIFM. Total Workplace Management. [Online] Available at: http://www.twmexpo.com/page.cfm/Link=14/t=m/goSection=12 [Accessed November 11, 2010]. Read More