好色先生TV

An in-depth government-commissioned evaluation of schools built under the previous government has found that all schools were built to an 鈥榓cceptable鈥� standard with one third rated 鈥榲ery good鈥�.

The Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE) report into schools built under the Labour government, obtained by 好色先生TV magazine, reveals that of the 25 schools assessed, all schools were rated 鈥榓cceptable鈥�, with 16 of the 25 (64%) rated 鈥榩ass鈥� and nine of 25 (36%) rated as 鈥榲ery good鈥�.

Undertaking thorough POE was a central recommendation of Sebastian James鈥� government-commissioned review of schools capital, which described POE as 鈥渁 critical tool to capture 鈥� learning鈥�.

However, the government has refused to publish the POE research on schools built under the previous government, despite calls from the industry and the British Council for School Environments (BCSE) to do so in order to help share learning and develop best practice in school design and construction as well as driving down costs.

Speaking at a BSCE event last week, Mairi Johnson, EFA deputy director of design said: 鈥淚t鈥檚 no longer the intention to publish the POE work. It was done under the previous government and was an analysis of 好色先生TV Schools for the Future (BSF) schools and we are not building BSF schools anymore, so you can see why.鈥�

However, 好色先生TV has since obtained a copy of the report, which assesses 25 schools built under the previous government鈥檚 school building programme, including secondary schools built under the BSF programme, cancelled by the coalition government, as well as schools built under the previous Academies and Primary Capital Programme.

General satisfaction

In total the POE evaluates nine primary schools, 14 secondary/sixth form schools and two special schools on a range of elements of design and construction. The POE includes peer review by design, education, ICT and sustainability professionals; student and staff feedback; as well as an assessment of environmental performance (for more in-depth results see PDF attached, right).

The report said the conclusions of the education specialists were the 鈥渕ost positive鈥�, followed by the design and ICT specialists, with sustainability specialists the 鈥渓east positive鈥�.

The report said the review teams 鈥渃ommented particularly favourably on the organisation of spaces and the provision of ICT, but less favourably on ventilation, toilets and the ability of buildings to adapt to changing circumstances鈥�.

It added that 鈥渟taff and students were generally very satisfied with their school buildings and grounds鈥�.

However, the POE did identify serious concerns around the sustainability of the schools, with nine of the 25 schools (36%) rated unsatisfactory, with particular concerns around the energy consumption of the schools (See 好色先生TV.co.uk tomorrow for more on the sustainability issues).

Darren Talbot, Davis Langdon head of schools, who was passed a copy of the report by 好色先生TV, highlighted the sustainability performance as an area of concern, but said overall the POE revealed that the schools were generally of a 鈥渞easonable鈥� standard.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a reasonable performance鈥� it could be a lot worse, could be a lot better. But you have to remember that these schools were built without the benefit of POE work that had previously been done, so some mistakes were always going to be made.

鈥淭hese schools were never going to be as good as they could have been because they weren鈥檛 learning - holistically learning - the lessons of previous building programmes.鈥�

Sharing learning

One of the key recommendations of the POE report is that it should be 鈥渟hared widely鈥� among the industry in order to 鈥渉elp to improve the quality of design in school buildings and inform any support that鈥檚 given to schools so that they make the most effective use of their premises鈥�.

Talbot said it was a concern that the government had not published the POE research - despite this recommendation to do so - as there was a danger that the lessons would not be taken on board for its own school building programmes.

鈥淚 can鈥檛 see there鈥檚 anything particularly scary inside this report. I鈥檓 not entirely sure why it hasn鈥檛 been released. It鈥檚 just good lessons for the future. All I can see is good learning.

鈥淚f there are good reasons for not publishing it then as an industry we need to know - we need to know what aspects of it the department has concerns about or what aspects they say they don鈥檛 believe are valid in future schools and that should be part of the debate.鈥�

Nusrat Faizullah, BCSE chief executive said POE was a 鈥渃rucial tool when it comes to designing and building schools, especially at a time of austerity鈥�.

She said: 鈥淲e hope that when the Department for Education (DfE) finally responds to the James review we鈥檒l see post-occupancy evaluation as part of the DNA of future school capital investment programmes.

鈥淲e learn from past successes as well as failures - highlighting key areas such as sustainability gives us key information on where the spotlight needs to be.

A DfE spokesman said: 鈥淭he POE was carried out for the previous government by [schools delivery agency] Partnerships for Schools.

鈥淎s the report focuses on BSF - a programme no longer being taken forward - and on projects where the levels of funding, area sizes, and procurement routes have all changed, it was not published.

鈥淗owever, the relevant findings have been taken on board and will be used in future school building programmes such as the Priority School 好色先生TV Programme.鈥�

• For more on the schools report, including how the schools are failing to meet environmental standards,
• Then on Friday 好色先生TV.co.uk will cover the key recommendations and publish the report in full.