Enfield PCT - Briefing Paper for Rob Lee on the Trusts Estates and by cYevV8B

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 5

									             Enfield Estates and Facilities Report
1. Introduction

This paper is intended to give the Board an overview on certain aspects of
the Trusts Estates and Facilities responsibilities and highlights some areas
requiring attention.

Following the transfer of the Estates management responsibilities from the
Provider arm of the organisation to the Commissioners from 1 April, a
review of the Estates and Facilities functions has been undertaken to
establish that the Trust is meeting its obligations in terms of statutory and
legislative requirements.

The review has focused on the management of established contracts,
estates upkeep, facilities management and statutory compliance.

2. Estates Maintenance Contracts – Hard FM (Facilities Management)

The Hard FM for the Trust sites is generally managed through established
contracts with recognised maintenance contractors, as follows;
Mitie – Bowes Road Clinic, Evergreen PCC, Moorfields HC, Ridge House
Clinic, St Michaels Hospital site, Wenlock House and Holbrook House
(part shared with landlord).
Lorne Stewart – All PCT occupied property on the Chase Farm site.
Integral – Forest PCC

There are three other sites which have the building maintenance covered
as part of the Lease arrangements with the landlord, these are;
Freezywater, Highlands HC and Eagle House

The contracts with Mitie and Lorne Stewart have been established for a
number of years but are due to expire in the spring of 2010.

Historically the management responsibility for these contracts was
commissioned out to the Estates Department of Barnet, Enfield and
Haringey Mental Health Trust who managed the contracts on the Trusts
behalf. This arrangement ceased in 2008 and the contract management
responsibility was taken on by Provider services.

Having reviewed the contracts in place with the maintenance providers it is
clear that the terms and conditions including performance standards are
pretty robust and that the contractors are keen to engage in regular
dialogue with the Trust.

Following review meetings with both of the main contractors (Mitie and
Lorne Stewart) I was reassured that they are generally complying with the
terms of the contract and both are keen to continue providing support post
2010.
However whilst It is clear that the maintenance contracts in place appear
robust there does not appear to have been any formal contract
management processes established for sometime. The Trust therefore
does not presently have any documentation that clearly details
performance against contract or give the necessary assurances regarding
compliance with statutory requirements.

This is therefore a risk and was also highlighted as one of the main
concerns in the recent due diligence report provided by Inventures.

Inventures were commissioned by the Trust to undertake a due diligence
exercise in respect of the building maintenance contracts and their findings
have been reported separately.

This issue is being addressed as a priority and we are establishing a more
formal contract management process with the maintenance contractors to
ensure that statutory compliance is being met on our sites as well as
providing a value for money service.

This process will for the immediate future be managed by the
Commissioners but given that many of the operational aspects of these
contracts impact directly on Provider services there will be a need to work
closely with the DPO.

As the Trusts assets sit currently with the Commissioners of services there
is a need to establish a formal lease/licence arrangement or memorandum
of occupation between the Commissioner and the DPO and this is
currently being progressed which will define the Estates responsibilities for
both parties.

3. Backlog Maintenance Programme/Health & Safety

As part of the review it is apparent that there has not been any formal
backlog maintenance programme in place for sometime and this may have
contributed to the poor condition of some of the Trusts Estate.

Trusts are required to ensure that their sites are being properly maintained
to an acceptable standard and whilst this has occurred in part through the
established contracts this does not appear to have happened in a
structured way.

Formal building condition surveys were undertaken a few years ago which
should have informed the backlog maintenance programme for the Trust
but it would seem that this has not happened.

This may partly be due to a lack of established funding to support such
works as it would seem that in the past Provider services have met the
cost of necessary maintenance works from their operational revenue
budgets.
The lack of funding to support backlog maintenance including Health &
Safety needs addressing and this was also identified as a concern by
Inventures.

The Trusts Premises and Capital Group will be addressing this issue and
will take into account the Trusts needs in terms of backlog maintenance
with a view to providing a clear funding stream.

4. Hotel Services – Soft FM

The majority of the soft facilities services are directly managed by the
Provider arm of the organisation and this arrangement has continued since
1 April.

It will be necessary for the soft FM services to be reviewed to ensure that
value for money (VFM) is being achieved as well as compliance with
statutory requirements and HCC standards.

In particular the current cleaning arrangements and associated
specifications for the clinics should be reviewed to ensure that they comply
with “Better Cleaning Standards” as this will need to be evidenced as part
of HCC standards.

There are some contracted out services such as Domestic Waste and
Clinical Waste and these contracts should also be reviewed to ensure that
Waste regulations are being met.

SLAs are currently in place with the Acute Trust for services provided by
Medirest (soft FM Provider) at St Michaels and this should be reviewed to
ensure that the Provider is receiving VFM.

Consideration may also need to be given to reviewing the current
switchboard arrangement that is hosted by the Acute Trust for St Michaels
to again ensure that VFM is being achieved.

Provider services recognise that they will need to give consideration to the
contract management aspects of their Hotel Services to ensure that they
have sufficient capacity and expertise and this will be addressed over the
coming months.

5. Wenlock House

As part of the review one of our sites, Wenlock House, has been identified
as a building with a number of high risk issues.

This is largely due to the fact that the building condition is generally poor
but also because we host a critical service (Health Informatics Service –
HIS) from this site and their business continuity is currently at risk due to
the condition of the building.
The Trust is currently tied into a full repairing lease with the landlord of the
building until the summer of 2010 and we are exploring options around the
continuation of the lease.

There are a number of complex factors to take into consideration around
the future use of this site and the Trust has engaged Barnet PCT Estates
Department to assist in exploring options around the future use of the
building.

There are clearly time constraints given that the lease expires next year
and so therefore future options will be worked up over the next few months
for Trust consideration.

6. Estates Governance Arrangements

As indicated earlier this review has identified a number of weaknesses in
the governance arrangements that are in place to manage the Trusts
estate and these need addressing.

We are already putting in place a more formal contract management
process around the established contracts with our Hard FM providers and
this will for the immediate future be managed by the Primary Care
Commissioners.

The Premises and Capital Group has recently met for the first time in a
while and in line with the revised Terms of Reference will continue to meet
on a regular basis.

This Group will be responsible for determining the future allocation of
capital monies and as part of this process will ensure that the Trusts
backlog maintenance requirements (including Health & Safety issues) are
met.

The Premises and Capital Group will provide formal minutes and its
recommendations/actions will be reported into the Trusts Finance
Committee.

The future Estates Management function for the Trust will need reviewing
and we will be working with our internal auditors as well as partner
organisations over the next few months to consider options for the future
that will best meet the needs for Enfield.

7. Conclusion

There are clearly areas of concern that need addressing and we are
starting to put in place a more structured approach to our Estates
management that will support this process and the establishment of the
Premises and Capital Group will also provide accountability.
This process will ensure that we minimise the risk issues associated with
some of our sites as well as enabling the Trust to meets its statutory
responsibilities.

There is also a need to establish a clear understanding of Estates
responsibilities between the Commissioner and the DPO and this will also
be addressed as a priority.

8. Recommendation

The Board are asked to note the findings of the Estates and Facilities
review and the actions currently being implemented.

								
To top