Facilities Assessment Panel 2011 Leadership Weekend Friday, April 29
Panel Participants Marty Abrams, Program Co-Chair John Wisniewski, CDF, Program Co-Chair Stan Polmateer, Program Creator Carl Thurnau, PE, SED Liasion Judith Johnson, Superintendent (retired), Peekskill City SD
Origin of the Program • Began in 1999 • To-date, completed 30 Assessments • Variety of Districts Served oLarge districts – Peekskill City SD, Yonkers oSmall districts – Canastota, Panama CSD oBOCES – Monroe BOCES I, Nassau BOCES
Details of the Team Tailored to districts’ needs and goals ◦ align them with team members particular strengths, customizing each Assessment Team includes: ◦ Seasoned, experienced facilities professionals ◦ Certified Directors of Facilities (CDFs) ◦ NY State Education Department, Office of Facilities Planning staff member (including Carl Thurnau, PE) ◦ Director of Strategic Planning and Development
Details of the Site VisitA Team of Education and Facilities professionalstravels to district tour the buildings and grounds interview district stakeholdersThe Team works closely with the districtsfacilities management staff throughout theAssessment to discuss and review standards andbest practices.
The AnalysisConducted using accepted standardized criteria anddata (comparative indices, work standards, systemsanalysis, safety and health requirements, managerialpractices, and so on) General areas of analysis include: • Range of facilities services • Energy management • Budgeting • Safety and security • Organizational structure • Health and environmental • Staffing levels issues • Work planning • Expectations of • Capital planning stakeholders • Space requirements for • Quality of service facilities functions • Relationships with school- • Equipment needs based and community • Automated systems organizations
The Result – A Road Map The end product = comprehensive set of recommendations for an improved, systematized, efficient and cost effective facilities management organization Designed to help each unique school district benefit from efficient and effective facilities that support an inviting environment for teaching, learning, and sports programs and community activities
Post-Assessment Provide Final Report Maintain Contact with District Make Board Presentations
Case Study: Peekskill City SD• Why a Facilities Assessment with SBGA?• Post Assessment - What recommendations implemented?• How Program benefited the district?
The view from the Ground toShovel Ready GOAL: Safe, Sound, Contemporary Schools that address the needs of all students Facilities that support the opportunity for all students to learn to high standards
The Process • Citizens committee • Budget analysis • External expertise • Staffing Analysis • Staff interviews • Data Collection • Bonds for Capital Projects
Continuos Improvement vs. StagnationCosts vs. Savings Energy Efficient environmentsSafe environmentsStaff competenciesField ConditionsAligning facilities to program needsReactive vs. Anticipate
The Options: Repair, Renovate, Restore, ReplaceRepair - upgrade technology systemsRenovate - the fields, science labs, carpeting,media center, auditoriumRestore - ArtifactsReplace - roofs, a building, a pool, lockers,carpets, boiler equipment, security systems