Agenda item

[Report of the Director for Environment and Neighbourhoods. To be introduced by the Leader of the Council.]

This report will review options for the future of the facilities management, and ask Cabinet to approve the preferred option for future service provision and the timescales for service transformation.

In introducing the report, the Leader of the Council outlined the importance of clean, safe, well-maintained buildings, public services in Haringey to meet the needs of residents. The proposal represented the determination to improve facilities management in Haringey, for the good of all residents.

The Leader added that how buildings were run had a wider significance. It affected the productivity of staff, the wellbeing of service users and it represented the civic pride in the borough. He referred to climate change becoming a deepening concern, therefore having greener, more energy efficient buildings was becoming ever more important. Having direct control of this vital service allowed the Council to deliver on these objectives.

The Leader referred to the manifesto pledge of considering bringing services back in-house where it was prudent to do so and was delighted to strive to achieve this with Facilities Management, improving the conditions of employment of around 100 staff and providing a better service at a lower cost.

Further to considering exempt information at item 32,

RESOLVED

That Cabinet approves the following strategy for recommissioning the Council’s FM services:

1. That the Council should work with Homes for Haringey and internal services to create a Hybrid in-house model for FM services;

2. That a phased approach is taken to transitioning to this model;

3. That the Council immediately initiates works to secure a Computer Aided Facilities Management (CAFM) system as the key technical underpinning to the service;

4. To note that a transformation fund of £627k is made to facilitate the successful adoption of this strategy; and

5. That the Council takes up the further option set out in paragraph 1 of the exempt report.

Reasons for decision

For the reason set out in paragraph 2 of the Exempt report, a commissioning review was undertaken by officers to identify the Council’s future needs in relation to facilities management and to consider what supply arrangements would be most appropriate.

The overarching finding of the review is that there is a strong case for change, to meet the evolving needs of the Council to develop and improve the management of its facilities, within a constrained cost envelope and to deliver wider social benefits. See further findings set out in paragraph 2 of the Exempt report including further details on the preferred option, the Hybrid Model with Homes for Haringey.

Computer Aided Facilities Management (CAFM) system

A CAFM system is the key technical underpinning to the service. It enables the management of the Council’s property data in one place, and supports key aspects of the service, such as the Helpdesk and scheduling of tasks.

Transition Funding

The cost of the transition team and other enablers for the proposed recommissioning strategy is set out in paragraph 2 of the exempt report. This will support the project management, IT costs and purchase of equipment and delivery of training to ensure the preferred option is successfully introduced.

Alternative options considered

Seven other options were considered in the Commissioning Study

• Extending the Council’s existing Total Facilities Management (TFM) contract with Amey Community Ltd (“Amey”) for a further 2 years was rejected as the contract is not delivering the desired outcomes.  
• Bringing the service fully back in house was discounted as it cannot be safely delivered in the required timescale.
• The option to commission Homes for Haringey (HFH) to fully provide the service was discounted as HFH lack capability in key areas.

• Entering into a shared service agreement with another authority was rejected as shared service arrangements do not provide the control necessary to guarantee performance.  
• Creating a joint venture with another body was discounted as this arrangement could not be mobilised in a timely way.  
• The option of letting a new TFM contract was explored but proved not to be in the Council’s overall interest. This option was demonstrated to be likely to lead to higher costs, while being unlikely to deliver the Council’s desired outcomes for the service.
• Letting a series of contracts for separate parts of the service was discounted due to the length and complexity of the procurement process.

A further consideration is set out in paragraph 2.4.2 of the exempt report.