Unionville-Chadds Ford School District

Transcription

1 Unionville-Chadds Ford School District Custodial and Grounds Operations Review Study Visitation Conducted May 2-3, 2011 Pennsylvania Association of School Business Officials P. O. Box 6993 Harrisburg, PA (717) Fax (717)

2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION...2 BACKGROUND...4 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE...5 A. BENCHMARKING...11 B. CUSTODIAL STAFFING STANDARDS...20 C. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS - CUSTODIAL...24 D. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS - GROUNDS...28 E. BEST PRACTICES IN SCHOOL FACILITY MANAGEMENT...33 APPENDIX A Custodial Staffing Time Studies APPENDIX B Outline of Agronomic Program APPENDIX C Playground Inspection Form APPENDIX D Monthly Custodial Cleaning Level Inspection Form

4 2 INTRODUCTION A custodial and grounds operational review of the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District was conducted under the administration of the Pennsylvania Association of School Business Officials (PASBO). This study was conducted at the request of the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District. Members of the PASBO Study Team included: William McGill, PRSBA, RSBA William L. McGill, PRSBA, RSBA, Director of Technical Assistance for PASBO, has extensive experience in school business and facilities management. Prior to his current position with PASBO, Mr. McGill was the Director of Business Affairs at the East Stroudsburg Area School District. During his tenure at East Stroudsburg Area School District, Mr. McGill also served in the capacity of Support Services Administrator where Facilities Management was one of his responsibilities. Wayne McCullough, MBA, PRSBA Wayne McCullough is the Director of Administrative Services and Board Secretary at the Southern York County School District. Mr. McCullough is considered one of the true experts in the field of school operations and facilities management. He is the author of the PASBO s Elements of Facilities Management and received PASBO s 2003 Award of Achievement in recognition of the outstanding practice: A Guidance Document for Planning, Design, and Construction of Major Projects Using the Design Team Concept. Mr. McCullough began serving his term as PASBO s President on July 1, Mr. McCullough has served as a Director on PASBO s Board, Vice President, Chair of the Facilities Committee, and Chair of the Materials Management (Purchasing) Committee. In addition, Mr. McCullough served as vicepresident of the Central Regional School Facility Managers from Mr. McCullough has chaired numerous PASBO consulting projects, including Pittsburgh City School District, William Penn School District, New Kensington-Arnold School District, Downingtown School District, Williamsport School District, Schuylkill Valley School District, and Dover Area School District. Mr. McCullough also serves as an adjunct professor for Wilkes University, teaching courses in facilities management, purchasing, and student transportation in their Master of School Business Leadership program. Mr. McCullough co-authored PASBO s Elements of Transportation and has been a speaker at numerous workshops and seminars, including PASBO s School Operations Academy. Craig Boltz, PRSBO Craig Boltz is the Director of Buildings and Grounds at the Lebanon School District. Mr. Boltz has thirty years experience as a facilities director having worked for three Pennsylvania public school districts. His active membership in PASBO includes having been elected to the PASBO Board of Directors in 2008, serving as chair of the Facilities Committee for five years, a member of the PASBO Safety committee and serving the Lancaster/Lebanon Plant Managers Group as president for two years and secretary for three years. Mr. Boltz received PASBO s 1995 Award of Achievement in recognition of the outstanding practice: Your Maintenance Department as

5 3 Clerk of the Works. In addition Mr. Boltz was named the 2007 recipient of PASBO s prestigious Gary Reeser Memorial Award, for the outstanding school business official of the year. Mr. Boltz has been a speaker at numerous workshops and seminars, including PASBO s School Operations Academy. Ed Poprik, PRSBO Ed Poprik has over 20 years of experience in school business serving as the Director of Physical Plant at State College Area School District for the past twelve years. Prior to this position, Mr. Poprik was employed in a similar capacity with the Rose Tree Media School District. Mr. Poprik is a graduate of the Pennsylvania State University. He was selected for the esteemed Association of School Business Officials Facilities Masters Award in Mr. Poprik has recently been appointed Chair of PASBO s Facilities Committee and was the principal author of the criteria for the PASBO Award of Excellence in School Facilities. He also served on the document review team for the Planning Guide for Maintaining School Facilities, published by ASBO in He was founding member and the first President of the Mid Penn Facility Managers Regional Chapter. Mr. Poprik has been a speaker at numerous workshops and seminars including the PASBO School Operations Academy and the PASBO Elements of Facilities Management Series.

6 4 BACKGROUND Qualified consultants and team members (Study Team) under the direction of the Pennsylvania Association of School Business Officials conducted a study of the Custodial and Grounds Maintenance Operations of the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District with an emphasis on the organizational structure and general operations, including an examination of the daily routine as the primary comparative focus. The Study Team visited the School District on May 2-3, The results of this visit are included in this report.

7 5 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE The Study Team spent two days at the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District meeting with district staff, visiting schools and facilities, and reviewing district provided documents. The primary charge of the Team was to study the Custodial and Grounds Maintenance Operations of the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District with an emphasis on the organizational structure and general operations, including an examination of the daily routine as the primary comparative focus. The Study Team and the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District leadership agreed to the following objectives for this project: A. Refine the project goals and objectives with the Superintendent, Director of Business and Operations, Supervisor of Buildings and Grounds, and other identified personnel for the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District prior to starting this project. B. Review the overall organizational structure and budget of the District s Custodial and Grounds Maintenance Operations, including, but not necessarily limited to, staffing levels for custodial and maintenance employees and an examination of overtime and other costs of the operation, given the bargaining agreements in place, while still maintaining appropriate standards. C. Review the decision-making process as it relates to performance/completion of the custodial/grounds maintenance operations in an effort to insure that the District is making the most cost effective use of resources. D. Analyze and review current job descriptions and the organizational structure including job functions, job assignments and assessment of the level of job skills needed to perform position responsibilities. E. Provide for in-depth interviews with the Superintendent, Director of Business and Operations, Supervisor of Building & Grounds, District head custodians, District grounds maintenance personnel, and other District staff as deemed appropriate. F. In addition, emphasis regarding custodial operations will specifically be placed on: a. A review of the custodial program for quality, effectiveness and efficiency. b. Offering an opinion as to the whether (1) the School District should continue their custodial operations in-house without modification; (2) continue their custodial operations in-house with suggested improvements; (3) consider outsourcing their custodial operations; or (4) some hybrid of the above.

8 6 c. Identification of the advantages and disadvantages of each option including short term and long term financial impact to labor, materials, and capital expenditures. This data shall also include the experiences of other similar school districts. d. Review the district operated custodial operations at each District facility consisting of 4 elementary schools, 1 middle school, 1 high school, 1 transportation facility, and 1 maintenance facility. e. Review all aspects of the School District s custodial program including, but not limited to: 1. Cleaning methods, products and equipment 2. Level of cleaning based on AAPA guidelines or similar industry acceptable publication 3. Square footage per custodian 4. Number of students per custodian 5. Comparison to similar school districts 6. Level of staffing by shift 7. Number and type of positions 8. Needs due to extracurricular activities 9. Non-custodial related tasks 10. Training 11. Cost per square foot 12. Cost per student 13. Work Schedules G. In addition, specific emphasis regarding grounds maintenance operations will be placed on: a. Review of the Grounds program for quality, effectiveness and efficiency. b. Offering an opinion as to whether (1) the School District should continue their Grounds operations in-house without modification; (2) continue their operations inhouse with suggested improvements; (3) consider outsourcing their Grounds operations; or (4) some hybrid of the above. c. Identification of the advantages and disadvantages of each option including short term and long term financial impact of labor, materials, and capital expenditures. This data shall also include the experiences of other similar school districts. d. Review all aspects of the district operated grounds operations at the District at its 4 elementary schools, 1 middle school, 1 high school, 1 transportation facility, and 1 maintenance facility. This review will also include the approximately 130 acres of land, 30 athletic fields, and the maintenance of 3 Wastewater Treatment Plants. e. Review all aspects of the School District s Grounds program including, but not limited to:

9 7 1. Mowing program 2. Equipment inventory and management 3. Lawn care program 4. Athletic field layout 5. Athletic field maintenance and care program 6. Landscape maintenance and care program 7. Herbicide and Pesticide program 8. Wastewater Treatment Plant program 9. Staffing levels 10. Cost 11. Needs due to extracurricular activities 12. Training 13. Staff certifications 14. Snow removal 15. Non grounds related tasks H. Collect and analyze School District statistical data: a. Organizational Charts for Custodial and Grounds Maintenance Operations b. Job Descriptions for Custodial and Grounds Maintenance Operations c. Visit and conduct cursory inspections of selected schools and major auxiliary buildings to determine existing conditions and typical service demands. d. Review of the following reports, documents and information: 1. District and department budgets/expenditures data, including wages, contracted services, supplies, utilities, equipment and capital long-range plans 2. AFR documentation of the 2600 accounts 3. Department purchasing procedures and documentation with access to purchase orders as needed 4. Materials and supplies specifications for the current year 5. Support Personnel bargaining agreements 6. Staff training documentation, including Right-to-Know and asbestos awareness 7. Data for each school building to include number of students, number of classrooms, total square feet, number of teachers and total acres 8. Bid documents for the current and previous fiscal years 9. Any Mandate Waivers received as they relate to this Study 10. Documentation relating to quotation process 11. Listing of recent construction projects and a listing of change orders (may need access to project files) if applicable

10 8 I. Provide an exit conference prior to leaving the School District. J. Prepare a comprehensive report identifying directors, clerical and other staff support for District Custodial and Grounds Operations. The final Report will address the aspects as described within the content of this Proposal. K. Upon completion of the review, a draft of the report will be delivered and reviewed with the Superintendent and Supervisor of Building & Grounds of the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District, and others that they determine appropriate. L. Fifteen (15) copies of the approved final written report will be provided. M. If requested, a presentation of the final report will be made to the organization membership designated at a date and time mutually acceptable. The cost of the presentation was not part of the initial proposal and will be presented for acceptance prior to the presentation. The following is the list of individuals interviewed by the Study Team during the visitation: Sharon Parker, Superintendent Robert Cochran, Director of Business and Operations Rick Hostetler, Supervisor of Buildings and Grounds Paula Massanari, Principal, Unionville High School Mark Kline, Head Custodian, Unionville High School Bruce Vosburgh, Principal, Charles F. Patton Middle School James Fulginiti, Assistant Principal, Charles F. Patton Middle School Dave Quaintance, Head Custodian, Charles F. Patton Middle School Paul Heron, Head Mechanic (Grounds) Mark Ransford, Principal, Chadds Ford Elementary School Bonnie Eroh, Head Custodian, Chadds Ford Elementary School Stan Jones, Custodian, Chadds Ford Elementary School Dr. Andrew McLaughlin, Principal, Pocopson Elementary School Sharon Towber, Head Custodian, Pocopson Elementary School Anthony Massari, Head Custodian, Hillendale Elementary School Brett Culberson, Head Custodian, Unionville Elementary School The following is the list of individuals who attended the Study Team s Exit Conference on May 3, 2011: Sharon Parker, Superintendent Robert Cochran, Director of Business and Operations Rick Hostetler, Supervisor of Buildings and Grounds

11 9 The list of documents viewed by the PASBO Study Team during the visitation to the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District is as follows: A. Notebook: Unionville-Chadds Ford School District Custodial/Grounds Review May 2011 TABS: 1. Building Information a. Student Population b. Rooms/Square Footage 2. Building Statistics a. Athletic Fields b. Map of HS/MS Complex c. Parking Lot Sizes d. Building Floor Plans i. Unionville High School (A Floor; B Floor; C Floor) ii. Charles F. Patton Middle School (1 st Floor; 2 nd Floor) iii. Chadds Ford Elementary School (Basement; 1 st Floor; 2 nd Floor) iv. Hillendale Elementary School (Grounds Floor; 1 st Floor) v. Pocopson Elementary School (1 st Floor; 2 nd Floor) vi. Unionville Elementary School (Basement; 1 st Floor; 2 nd Floor) 3. AFR/PASBO Study a PASBO Maintenance & Custodial Benchmarking Survey 4. Capital Improvement Plan a through Plan b. Items to Include in the Long-Range Plan February 2011 (by building) 5. Work Orders a. Copy of Typical Work Order (emaint Web 2002 by emaint Enterprises, LLC) 6. Preventative Maintenance 7. Agronomic plan a. Annual Turf Management Program b. Grounds Tasks off Season 8. Employee Handbook a. Organizational Chart Building & Grounds Department b. Job Descriptions i. Custodian Day Shift ii. Custodian Night Shift iii. Second Shift Supervisor Custodian iv. Head/Assistant/Skilled Mechanic Grounds 9. Cleaning Procedures a. Daytime Custodial Tasks b. Chemical Cleaning System Unionville High School (Hillyard Chemicals Arsenal II)

12 10 c. Chemical Cleaning System Charles F. Patton Middle School (Twist-N-Fill Dispensing Systems Trumixs System) d. Chadds Ford Elementary School (3-M Twist-N-Fill Cleaning System) e. Hillendale Elementary School f. Pocopson Elementary School (Envirox) g. Unionville Elementary School (Envirox/H2 Orange) 10. Staff Evaluation a. Support Staff Evaluation b. Custodial Inspection Sheet c. Custodial Feedback Form 11. RTK Documentation a. Right-to-know Training Signature Sheets 12. Asbestos Environmental Control Systems, Inc. Environmental Engineers and Consultants 950 Sussex Boulevard, Broomall, PA a. February 16, 2010 Report on 02/02 non-destructive investigation & collected bulk samples of suspect asbestos containing materials b. AHERA 3-Year Re-inspection Report (December 2010) 13. IPM a. Integrated Pest Management Staff Information Sheet (IPM Plan) b. Letter to Parents/Guardians c. Integrated Pest Management Pest Sighting Log d. Notice of Pesticide Application e. Intent to Apply Pesticides 14. Equipment a. Custodial Equipment Inventory by Building B. District-Wide Facilities Study, Unionville-Chadds Ford School District, Unionville, Pennsylvania by KCBA Architects (2005) C. Annual Financial Report ( )

13 11 A. BENCHMARKING The following benchmarking data is designed to provide Unionville-Chadds Ford School District with a valuable management tool. Facilities benchmarking is a process that analyzes base data provided by the Unionville-Chadds School District and compares that data to standard benchmarks of other Pennsylvania school districts, school districts in the same region of the state, and school districts of similar size. The PASBO Team recommends that the benchmarks should not be considered absolutes, but rather a means of comparison to other school districts. In essence, benchmarking is a tool that brings an important objectivity to the analysis of performance and identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the facilities operation. It is important to note that the benchmarking data representing other school districts is the median for that category. The median represents the number that is midway in the range of values that point at which an equal number of school districts fall above and below. The data represents data from 252 Pennsylvania school districts, 33 school districts in region 6 (southeast corner of the state to include the Philadelphia suburban area school districts serviced by Intermediate Units 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26), and 85 school districts with a student population of between 3,000 and 6,999 students. It should be understood that the information contained in this section of the report is strictly quantitative, and does not address the quality of buildings and ground maintenance. Fourteen key measures were selected as being information most useful to the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District. These 14 measures are: 1. Maintenance expenditures as a percent of total expenditures. 2. Maintenance expenditures per square foot of instructional building space. 3. Contracted Services per square foot of instructional space. 4. Total building and grounds salaries per square foot of instructional space. 5. Custodial salaries per square foot of instructional space. 6. Supervisory/Other salaries per square foot of instructional space. 7. Instructional square feet per total Buildings and Grounds FTE. 8. Instructional square feet per Custodial FTE. 9. Instructional square feet per Supervisory/Other FTE. 10. Acres, per Grounds FTE. 11. Total maintenance expenditures per student. 12. Average annual salary of all Building and Ground FTE. 13. Average annual salary of Custodial FTE. 14. Number of Custodial, Skilled and Grounds FTEs per Supervisory/Other FTE.

14 12 Definitions Median: The midpoint in a range of values. That point at which an equal number of school districts fall above and below. Maintenance Expenditures: The total amount spent in Building Operations, less the cost of utilities. This is the figure whenever the term Maintenance Expenditures is used. Utilities: The combined cost of gas, electricity, other heating fuels, water and sewer. Instructional Space: Includes classrooms, corridors, gymnasiums, and swimming pools, along with associated spaces. Does not include maintenance buildings. The information related to square feet was provided by the school district and includes post-renovation high school square feet. FTE: Full time equivalents. The number of individuals in a work category. Where Total Building and Grounds FTE is used it includes personnel, even when the ratio is expressed in square feet of building space. Salaries: All payroll dollars, including overtime and paid time off. This category does not include the cost of fringe benefits. Custodial: Those individuals assigned the tasks in building cleanliness, although it is understood that their duties sometimes involve other, non-cleaning tasks. Forty-three (43) custodians were assigned to this category. Grounds: Six (6) grounds staff were assigned to this category as an estimate to the amount of time spent on grounds work. Skilled Trades/Maintenance: Seven (7) maintenance staff were assigned to this category representing the staff that handles the more technical aspects of building and equipment repair and upkeep. Supervisory/Other: Those individuals who provide supervision and support to the maintenance and housekeeping effort, but do not perform those tasks directly. The Supervisor of Buildings & Grounds and one Secretary were assigned to this category. Right to Know Program: The PA Right to Know regulations are designed to provide knowledge, warning, protection and training to employees who may be exposed to hazards of chemicals and other materials.

15 13 1. Maintenance Expenditures as a Percent of Total Expenditures Utility expenses were subtracted from Total Buildings Operations, to arrive at Maintenance Expenditures. Maintenance Expenditures were divided by Total General Fund Expenditures to arrive at a percentage of the total budget that is devoted to Maintenance. This shows the emphasis put on maintenance of facilities and helps identify the district s commitment to its investment in the physical plant. Unionville-Chadds Ford School District expends 6.40% of its budget on maintenance expenditures, which is very similar to others in the state and region. 2. Maintenance Expenditures per Square Foot of Instructional Space This is the most important first step in determining if you have opportunities to reduce expenses, and is often used grouped with information found in Chart 1 to get a good view of the district s maintenance expenditures. To analyze this data, maintenance expenditures were divided by instructional square footage.

16 14 3. Contracted Services Per Square Foot of Instructional Space Contracted Services should be looked at in conjunction with salaries, since outside contractors may be used instead of hiring employees directly. Typically, districts that expend heavily in the contracted services are able to reduce expenditures in maintenance salaries and vice versa. Unionville-Chadds Ford School District is well below the state median in this category due to the amount of large amount of quality work that is completed using in-house personnel. 4. Total Buildings and Grounds Salaries per Square Foot of Instructional Space Statewide, salaries account for about half of total maintenance costs, and if fringe benefits were added, more than half of the total. The total salaries paid to buildings and grounds were divided by instructional square footage. Overall, Unionville-Chadds Ford School District spends $0.24 less in total buildings and grounds salaries per square foot of instructional space than other school districts in the same region of the state.

17 15 5. Custodial Salaries per Square Foot of Instructional Space Statewide, custodial salaries account for more that two-thirds of all salaries in maintenance and usually offers the biggest opportunity for gains through staffing improvements. Unionville-Chadds Ford School District spends $0.12 less per square foot for custodial salaries than other school districts in the same region of the state. 6. Supervisory/Other Salaries per Square Foot of Instructional Space This category includes those employees who are not directly engaged in cleaning and maintaining buildings, grounds and equipment. The full costs for one supervisor (Supervisor of Buildings and Grounds) and one Secretary. The cost in this area is $0.08 per square foot below school districts in the same region of the state.

18 16 7. Instructional Square Feet per Total Buildings and Grounds FTE Instructional square feet per FTE is the most important measurement of staff productivity. This data chart considers all staff (including supervisors, custodians, maintenance and grounds) and is therefore is a global barometer. Unionville-Chadds Ford School District is below the medians in this area. 8. Instructional Square Feet per Custodial FTE This is a measurement of productivity in terms of square feet per custodian.

19 17 9. Instructional Square Feet per Supervisory/Other FTE This category includes those employees who are not directly engaged in cleaning and maintaining buildings, grounds and equipment. This would suggest that Unionville-Chadds Ford School District is not overstaffed in supervisory employees for the operations & maintenance functions of the District. 10. Acres, per Ground FTE The FTE for Grounds staff is compared to the gross acreage maintained is analyzed here as a very general evaluation. The amount of acres per Grounds FTE is approximately 55% less than other school districts in the state. This number suggests that the amount of staff assigned to grounds is high. The Study Team did note, however, the condition of the grounds as excellent and has already noted that staff time from this category is used to support the skilled maintenance staff during winter months. Also, this number is expected to be lower than median due to the low amount spent on contracted services. Please note the District s waste water operator is included in the grounds staff, which causes this number to be lower than actual.

20 Total Maintenance Expenditures per Student In addition to building square feet and acres, the number of students has an impact on the cost of maintenance. 12. Average Annual Salary of All Buildings and Grounds FTE Total salaries paid were divided by total FTEs to arrive at the average annual salary for all categories, and for each category, as shown in the graphs following this one. This figure does not include fringe benefits, but is a direct comparison of wages. Again, the regional comparison is the most important.

21 Average Annual Salary of Custodial FTE This figure does not include fringe benefits, but is a direct comparison of wages. Again, the regional comparison is the most important. 14. Number of Custodial, Skilled and Grounds FTEs per Supervisory/Other FTE This ratio indicates the amount of supervision and support personnel used in the buildings and grounds area. The FTEs in custodial, skilled trades/maintenance and grounds was divided by the FTEs for one supervisors and one secretary.

22 20 B. CUSTODIAL STAFFING STANDARDS The PASBO Facilities Management Committee recently updated a staffing formula used to project the number of full time equivalent custodians required to clean school buildings. The formula utilizes the following factors: (1) number of teachers divided by 9, (2) number of students divided by 300 for elementary schools or 200 for secondary schools, (3) the number of teaching stations divided by 12, (4) building square feet divided by 16,000, and (5) number of washroom fixtures divided by 35. The average of all five factors determines the number of cleaning custodians needed. The staffing formula provides a benchmark for determining the number of custodians needed. Other factors to consider include: (a) Level of expectation - the level of cleanliness expected by the district and delivered by the staff. If marginal cleanliness is acceptable, fewer custodians will be needed; (b) Automation - a custodial staff with adequate equipment can clean a building with less manpower. The Study Team observed the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District provides an adequate level of automation. More commentary about this will be found later in this report; (c) Services rendered it is the observation of the Study Team that the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District buildings have a high level of cleanliness, are well maintained, and custodians are called upon to provide services to staff above and beyond cleaning the buildings; (d) Comparisons - benchmarking data found previously in this report provides supporting documentation by comparing not just staffing levels to other districts but also the costs for that staffing; and (e) Contract obligations negotiated items in the labor agreement usually impacts the number of custodians needed by a school district. The PASBO staffing formula indicates there may be opportunities to reduce staff. It should be noted that the summer workers utilized annually were not included in the staffing formula due to the nature of their work. 5-Factor Staff Sizing Formula A. Teacher Factor 1 custodian for each 9 teachers (instructional stations) B. Students Factor 1 custodian for 300 students (elementary) or 1 custodian for 200 students (secondary) C. Room Factor 1 custodian for each 12 teaching stations to be cleaned D. Square Foot Factor 1 custodian for each 16,000 square feet E. Washroom Fixtures Factor 1 custodian for every 35 washroom fixtures F. Add All factors Total of A + B + C + D + E G. Divide by 5 Value determined in Step F Divided by 5 H. Result Recommended custodial staff size

23 21 Building Existing Custodial Staff (includes head custodians) PASBO Formula Recommended Custodial Staff Unionville High School Patton Middle School Chadds Ford Elementary School Hillendale Elementary School Pocopson Elementary School Unionville Elementary School TOTAL Unionville High School Teacher Factor: 100 divided by Student Factor: 1,394 divided by Teaching Space Factor: 215 divided by Building Size Factor: 343,789 divided by 16, Washroom Fixtures Factor: 286 divided by STAFFING RECOMMENDATION 13.0 ACTUAL 12.0 Notes: Post renovation numbers were used in the calculations. Charles F. Patton Middle School Teacher Factor: 76.9 divided by Student Factor: 982 divided by Teaching Space Factor: 105 divided by Building Size Factor: 166,960 divided by 16, Washroom Fixtures Factor: 169 divided by STAFFING RECOMMENDATION 8.0 ACTUAL 9.0

24 22 Chadds Ford Elementary School Teacher Factor: 26.2 divided by Student Factor: 329 divided by Teaching Space Factor: 48 divided by Building Size Factor: 69,294divided by 16, Washroom Fixtures Factor: 85 divided by STAFFING RECOMMENDATION 3.0 ACTUAL 5.0 Hillendale Elementary School Teacher Factor: 27.5 divided by Student Factor: 376 divided by Teaching Space Factor: 47 divided by Building Size Factor: 64,997 divided by 16, Washroom Fixtures Factor: 68 divided by STAFFING RECOMMENDATION 3.0 ACTUAL 5.0 Pocopson Elementary School Teacher Factor: 46.6 divided by Student Factor: 592 divided by Teaching Space Factor: 75 divided by Building Size Factor: 98,135 divided by 16, Washroom Fixtures Factor: 156 divided by STAFFING RECOMMENDATION 5.0 ACTUAL 6.0

25 23 Unionville Elementary School Teacher Factor: 32.4 divided by Student Factor: 429 divided by Teaching Space Factor: 66 divided by Building Size Factor: 94,307 divided by 16, Washroom Fixtures Factor: 111 divided by STAFFING RECOMMENDATION 4.0 ACTUAL 6.0

26 24 C. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS CUSTODIAL OPERATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS It is the recommendation of the Study Team that the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District keep custodial operations in-house with improvements. Data supports the conclusion that the most cost-effective solution is in-house custodial operations with improvements. This recommendation is also based on the Study Team s observation of a custodial staff that is meeting an overall outstanding level of cleanliness. We mention this, because it is our overwhelming experience that this level of service is not achieved with outside contracted custodial services. Issues related to outsourcing include the need to consider matters of quality (cleanliness, responsiveness, satisfaction), flexibility (special events, emergencies), management control, risk (safety and security), knowledge of the facility, and human factors. The Study Team notes these issues because the levels of cleanliness, responsiveness, satisfaction, and flexibility are currently outstanding. School leaders frequently need to respond quickly to unanticipated situations. When outsourcing restricts flexibility, it may not be serving the best interest of the students. The ultimate restriction on flexibility occurs when school districts cannot get out of contracts when they deem it necessary. If a district finds a service is unsatisfactory, whether from poor quality or because it s too costly, school officials may seek to terminate the contract. However breaking a legal arrangement can be daunting and expensive. The Dayton School District, according to the Dayton Daily News, wanted to get out of a custodial contract that was costing $1 million more than anticipated. Breaking the contract, unfortunately, cost the district $1.5 million. Recommendation #1: The custodial staff should be reduced by 7 full-time equivalent positions. This recommendation is supported by benchmarking data as well as the PASBO staff formula. The potential savings in salary costs, including benefits, is approximately $340,600 per year. Reducing staff by 7 custodians will also result in a savings of $340,622 (includes all benefits, including PSERS) per year. Please note that full-time custodial staff members are currently being used as crossing guards at the High School campus. This could be accomplished in a more cost efficient manner by hiring part-time crossing guards. This would also allow the reduction of the number of day custodians needed, which is a recommendation made later in this report. The Association of Physical Plant Administrators (APPA.org) noted that outsourcing custodial labor is priced in the following ranges (2010) Note these are nationwide costs Eastern Pennsylvania is likely slightly higher: Level A: Pristine service almost never any complaints: $2.00 range Level B: Generally neat and orderly few complaints: $1.55 range Level C: Routine daily service a few more complaints: $1.35 range

27 25 Level D: Reduced frequency of service Complaints common: $1.15 range Level E: Minimal cleaning, debris evident, frequent complaints: $.95 range Note that the UCFSD will spend $2.09 per square foot (including all benefits) following the recommended reduction of staff while achieving a Level A + service. This is important to note because it is the experience of the Study Team that a contracted service would not be able to provide this level of service at the cost projected following reduction of staff. Recommendation #2: The Study Team recommends a reorganization of staff so there is only one day custodian working at each building. It would not, however, be uncommon for two day custodians at the secondary level. Recommendation #3: The Study Team recommends considering moving the head custodians at each building to the 2 nd shift. This would allow them to be in the building to provide proper supervision when other district officials are not present. This move also supports the use of the buildings after the regular school day. Recommendation #4: The Study Team recommends detailed time studies be conducted for each custodian. Examples are included in Appendix A of this report. Recommendation #5: The Study Team recommends standardized custodial supplies and procedures at each building. Dispensing systems: Cleaning chemical dispensing systems are in use at every building, which is a best practice that insures that cleaning solutions are being dispensed at the proper dilution ratios and minimizes both wasted materials and labor. Cleaning Chemical Standardization: The Study Team observed at least three chemical systems being used throughout the District. It would be a best practice for the District to select one cleaning / floor finishing system and make it a District-wide standard. Improved operations would include an economy of scale by being able to purchase materials in larger quantities and enhanced staff training by using the same materials district wide. Cleaning Technique: Cleaning quality and technique varies across the district. We observed cleanliness from outstanding to adequate. It was the general observation the middle school was the only building that was not outstanding. The level of the cleanliness at the high school was outstanding considering construction activities. Several schools exceed outstanding cleaning levels. Recommendation #6: The Study Team recommends an ongoing standardized training program for all custodians. We believe that a large reason for the difference in cleanliness between buildings is the result of differences in experience, job knowledge, and training. This was evidenced when we observed a day shift custodian at Chadds Ford Elementary cleaning glass exactly like a glass cleaning professional with an 18 inch window mop and squeegee. Later at Pocopson Elementary we observed a custodian cleaning glass using a spray bottle and cleaning cloths. Both custodians were working hard but one was twice as productive as the other. The district should be adopting cleaning technique and frequencies district wide in order to make the

28 26 entire staff more efficient. This can be accomplished by holding staff training on a regular basis, monthly if possible. Recommendation #7: The Study Team recommends the development of a staff handbook for custodians. Providing a handbook is a best practice. The handbook can be used as a handy reference for custodial / maintenance staff on how to handle routine day to day issues and sets a standard of expectation for the staff. COMMENDATIONS Commendation #1: The Study Team commends the Supervisor of Buildings & Grounds for his superior job knowledge. The department is well run and many best practices were observed. Commendation #2: The Study Team noticed a formal Right-to-Know program in place. Commendation #3: The Study Team recognizes the District for developing an alternating schedule so many weekend events are covered without the need for overtime. Commendation #4: The Study Team observed exceptional cleanliness within all elementary buildings. Commendation #5: The Study Team observed best practices related to waste water treatment, including knowledgeable staff. Commendation #6: The Study Team discovered the overall quality of care in all buildings is outstanding. Commendation #7: The Study Team observed that a quality recycling program is in place. Commendation #8: The Study Team was made aware that the District is beginning a Demand Response Program. This is a best practice in utility management. Commendation #9: perform their jobs. The Study Team found that custodians were adequately equipped to Commendation #10: The Study Team noticed the used of 2-way radios for communication in the buildings. This is a best practice in facilities management. Commendation #11: The Study Team commends the entire staff for providing safe and healthy buildings for children and staff. We mention this because this demonstrates a caring and knowledgeable leadership and staff. Commendation #12: The Study Team observed washers and dryers in each of the buildings visited along with supplies of recently laundered cleaning cloths. This is a best practice in custodial operations.

29 Commendation #13: It was reported that staff meetings with Head Custodians and Head Mechanics were being held every six weeks or so. This communication tool is a best practice for which the Buildings & Grounds leadership is to be commended. 27

30 28 D. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS - GROUNDS RECOMMENDATIONS It is the recommendation of the Study Team that the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District keep the grounds operations in-house with improvements. The team completed a detailed visual inspection of the High School and Middle School athletic fields along with a more general review of the grounds at Chadds Ford and Pocopson Elementary Schools. The maintenance facility, agronomic program, equipment inventory, staffing levels and budgetary data were also reviewed. Interviews with Paul Herron, the Heads Groundskeeper, along with other staff and administrative employees were also factored into the review process. Balancing the data collected with our observation of outdoor facilities, the team believes that significant cost savings can be achieved through staff reductions. While savings could likely be projected through contracting turf grass mowing services and snow removal, the sports field preparations and other services performed by the grounds crews would either be lost or forced to be achieved through additional expenditures. In order to maintain the quality of facilities and services currently enjoyed, and to improve efficiencies, the following recommendations are offered. Recommendation #1: Benchmarking data suggests the overall staffing levels for the grounds operation is high. The Study Team recommends the reduction of one full-time grounds staff. The recommendation would result in an annual savings of approximately $60,000, including benefits. This recommendation is further discussed below under the heading Staffing Levels. Recommendation #2: The Study Team recommends a detailed agronomic program. An outline of an agronomic program and suggestions for improvement can be found in Appendix B of this report. Recommendation #3: The Study Team recommends a documented playground inspection program. An example of a playground inspection form is found in Appendix C of this report. Recommendation #4: Mowing: The District is currently mowing all of its turf grass at 2.5 inches, which is a good utility height if only one height of cut is feasible. It is reported that this occurs twice a week on sports fields. It was also verbally expressed that fields are cut on game days, which may be effective but opens some irregularity into the program. Considering the district s equipment inventory, certain fields could be customized in terms of height of cut and frequency. For example, if on a baseball infield, the height of cut were lowered to 2 inches and frequency of cut were increased, dramatic improvement to that field would likely be realized. (Coupling this with increased fertilization would also be advised). Conversely, if the height of cut at an Elementary building were raised to 3.5 inches, the frequency of cut could be reduced and the health of the grass would improve. It was further reported that blades are sharpened on rainy days. A regular blade-sharpening schedule should be implemented, with 2 sets of blades

31 29 for each mower being employed to maintain effective scheduling of the activity. Mowing is the most frequent ground management activity and sharp blades are essential to healthy turf. Recommendation #5: Integrated Pest Management (IPM): The District employs licensed applicators and has an established policy, which would be considered worthy of commendation. In practice, however, several areas of concern were observed. The District performs annual grub control. This should occur only when the need is determined through careful monitoring. Recommendation #7: Safety and Training: It was reported that the insurance carrier inspects playgrounds every 3 years and that the staff does spot inspections. Daily inspections should be done at first light, each day by custodians looking for vandalism, debris (like broken glass) and other unsafe conditions. Additionally, monthly inspections should be completed by maintenance staff looking for worn parts and other defects. A checklist or some other form of documentation should be maintained. Grounds crew were observed operating mowers with the discharge chute in the raised position. Mowing equipment was stored in the shop with the guards in that position as well. Safety training should be provided in order to insure sure staff is aware that all safety guards must remain in place. The field of agronomy is an evolving science and the staff should be given on-going training in this area. It was apparent that much of the educational information received was from vendors. While this can be an important tool, objective information from institutions like Penn State should be the primary source for agronomic training. COMMENDATIONS Commendation #1: Unionville-Chadds Ford School District should be proud of its investment in a quality grounds program. While our limited visit could not ascertain the year-long continuum of field conditions, the general health, density, and vigor of the turf sward that we observed were indicative of a thoughtful and well implemented program. General landscape areas, such as playgrounds, and hard surface areas, such as tennis courts and parking lots, were equally well maintained. The Study Team extends our commendation to the entire grounds department. Commendation #2: The District has a good maintenance facility and an adequate inventory of grounds equipment. In order to continue managing an effective grounds program, care should be exercised to maintain funds for equipment replacement as needed. Staffing Levels While the grounds are generally well maintained, the department is slightly over staffed. The grounds staff of six currently maintains 130 acres, yielding an average of 21.7 acres per FTE. Based on PASBO benchmarking data, the median acres maintained per FTE at the state level is 49. The District average of 21.7 acres per FTE places it in the lowest third of districts reporting at the State Level, the Regional Level, and those of similar size. In addition to the benchmarking

32 30 data, the Study Team s assessment of the size of the district vs. the staff in this department yielded a consensus that staffing was high. The position of head groundskeeper is an important role for any school district, but particularly so for a district operating a scholastic sports program at the Quad A level. While the current head groundskeeper is performing well in his duties, his responsibilities for wastewater management at Hillendale, Pocopson, and Chadds Ford consume roughly half of his daily duties. As the District considers the recommendations that follow, particularly those related to the agronomic program, it should carefully review these responsibilities and possibly make changes to allow the head groundskeeper more time for the core grounds activities. A series of suggestions and strategies are offered below to help reduce grounds staffing. It may not be feasible to implement every strategy, but the District should be able to utilize some combination to develop its own plan for this area. The District should be commended for the limited use of overtime and implementation of reductions should be carefully monitored to insure that this is not compromised. It was reported that some groundskeepers are spending portions of their day as crossing guards. While on the surface, several staff members spending 30 minutes in the morning and 30 minutes in the afternoon may not seem onerous, but when this is coupled with multiple demobilization and remobilization efforts at each change of tasks, the impact can be significant. During the hectic spring and fall seasons, this is certainly impacting staffing and work productivity. The district should consider reallocating this task or hiring part time hourly staff, without benefits, for these duties. It was reported that grounds staff also fills in for custodians and paints classrooms. It is assumed that these tasks occur during the winter season in which case, it is a great use of resources. If this practice is occurring during the spring or fall seasons it should be ceased. In other sections of this report, the allocation of dayshift custodians is discussed. In many districts, the dayshift custodians aid with grounds maintenance, which generally does not happen at UCFSD. Typically a dayshift custodian can accomplish a small amount of grounds work within a portion of the day, while still being on-call for emergency and unexpected clean-ups. This aids in managing the size of the grounds staff as well as offering increased ownership to the building staff. By deploying a string trimmer, small push mower, and a few simple grounds tools, the building staff could be responsible for the small lawns immediately adjacent to the building. The use of this strategy will have to be balanced with any adjustments made to dayshift custodial staffing. Another suggestion for savings in the grounds management area would be to reduce cutting of the large, unused grass banks in front of the Pocopson Elementary Building. As the general public has come to embrace the concept of sustainability, the idea of reduced maintenance for passive lawn areas has been implemented at many public and private institutions. While the look is somewhat different from a mowed lawn, the savings in both labor and gas makes the change very palatable. Additionally these areas can be used to promote study of varied environments and ecosystem. Some facilities have engaged in specialized plantings in these areas, while others

33 have simply let the existing grass and weeds take a more natural progression of development. Typically these areas are only mowed once or twice a year. One example facility that has used this strategy very successfully is the Geisinger Medical Clinic in State College. In a medical setting, that in the past would typically be expected to portray a more manicured landscape, this sustainable practice has been embraced. Photos are shown below: 31

34 32 The concept of documentation and planning are echoed throughout the previous sections of this report. This would also help guide the process of improving productivity and reducing staff levels in the grounds department. By better defining a district wide field mowing schedule, and assigning typical times to the each mowed area, the base work allocation for each week could be established. During sports seasons, the field set-ups would be the next planned activity. Any other known tasks for the week would then be subtracted from the base hours for the week. The remaining man-hours would vary by week. These would then be planned for field improvement activities and other functions as outlined in the agronomic plan. Obviously, weather and other irregularities require changes and adjustment; however, by starting with a disciplined and defined plan, the grounds staff can function in more productive manner. A typical problem issue for many districts is the use of grounds staff for non-core related activities such as deliveries. While this is unavoidable, better documentation can help improve in this area. As the district works to reduce costs, frequent evaluation of hours spent on each activity will be an invaluable tool. By utilizing some combination of the above recommendations, the team believes that one groundskeeper could be eliminated. This would leave a total of 5 FTE in that department. Assuming that the wastewater component of the tasks assigned to this department are 0.5 FTE, and another 0.5 to 1.5 FTE are assigned to building activities such as painting and custodial substituting during the winter months, an FTE of 4 could be used fairly in comparing the benchmarking statics. This would raise the acres per FTE to 32.5 (within the middle third for the region).

35 33 E. BEST PRACTICES IN SCHOOL FACILITY MANAGEMENT UTILITY MANAGEMENT Unionville-Chadds Ford should continue its strong energy management practices. Below are a few additional recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS Comprehensive Energy Policy The Study Team recommends Unionville-Chadds Ford School District administration and board consider a comprehensive energy policy as noted below. Benefits of a comprehensive energy policy include: Reduces the energy consumed in schools Saves money because energy is a major source of avoidable spending in schools Shows responsibility to tax payers and redirects money towards educational needs Supports the operations & maintenance staff in daily operational decisions and preventive maintenance Preserves the environment Educates students and staff in wise energy habits ASHRAE Standards The foundation of the comprehensive energy study is temperature set points as recommended by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). ASHRAE recommended heating and cooling set points for schools as follows: Heating Classrooms, libraries, offices and staff lounges: 68 F 70 F Gyms, auditoriums, kitchens, restrooms, and cafeterias: 65 F Hallways and storage areas: 62 F Cooling Air-conditioned spaces should not be cooled below 75 F Recommended Comprehensive Policy Goals 1. Conserve energy so that the instructional program and support services can be effectively delivered while conserving energy dollars.

36 34 2. Educate every student and staff member to contribute to energy efficiency in the District. Accountability The building Principal and Operations & Maintenance staff shares the accountability for ensuring that this policy is followed. All operations of District facilities shall be governed by the following. Participation is mandatory for all staff and students of UCFSD.. Lighting 1. All lights will be turned off in any area, which will be unoccupied for a period in excess of fifteen (15) minutes except in corridors, stairwells and at exits as required by code. Lights in all gymnasiums, cafeterias and auditoriums will not be left on unless the area is being utilized. 2. During design and re-lamping projects, consideration should be given to provide lighting within the following range: a. Classrooms and offices foot-candles (fc) but not less than 50 fc. b. Corridors: 20 fc but not less than 10 fc c. Storage: Not less than 10 fc d. Gyms: fc but not less than 30 fc 3. Natural lighting shall be used were possible to attain lighting levels within the above ranges. 4. For cleaning during off hours and in the morning when the building is being opened, the custodial staff shall only turn on lighting where needed. All building should be fully illuminated no more than ½ hour before the normally scheduled arrival time for teaching and administrative staff. Temperature Control 1. For the heating season, which generally runs from October 15 through May 15, temperatures in classrooms and offices will be maintained at a 68 F 70 F set point in occupied mode and at 55 F in unoccupied mode. Set points will be 55 F at the close of the school day or scheduled facility use. 2. Air conditioned spaces will be maintained at a 76º F occupied set point with a 82º F unoccupied set point maintained during the cooling season, which generally runs from May 15th to October 15 th. The cooling systems in auditoriums shall maintain a 74º F occupied set point.

37 35 3. For areas with humidity control, the targeted relative humidity should not average greater than 60% for any 24-hour period. 4. Non-classroom warehouse and garage facilities will be maintained at 55º F during the heating season when unoccupied by personnel. 5. School personnel will not obstruct ventilation ducts or return grilles with books, charts, furniture or plants, or the like. 6. All windows and doors must be kept closed during the heating season or when air conditioning units are in operation. 7. Entrances and exits to all buildings shall be limited in their use, when possible, to minimize heat loss. 8. Broken windows, doors, non-functioning door closers, missing or damaged weather stripping, and the like, shall be reported to the building custodian in a timely manner. 9. Unauthorized personnel or students found tampering (e.g., placing ice or wet towels on thermostats) with temperature regulating devices, such as thermostats or valves, will be subject to disciplinary action. 10. Portable space heaters or air conditioners of any kind are banned from use within district facilities, except where provided by the Supervisor of Buildings & Grounds. 11. Employees and students are encouraged to wear sweaters, sweatshirts or similar clothing during the heating season. Scheduling 1. Small group activities will not be scheduled in large areas such as auditoriums and gymnasiums. The use of such areas will be coordinated with the custodial staff to enable the reduction of lighting and heating requirements during periods of non-use. 2. At the end of the school or office day: all windows shall be closed, the blinds or shades drawn to approximately ¾ the distance from the top of the window to the windowsill, and the lights turned off. Cleaning staff will turn lights on only for the period when a specific area is being cleaned. Other 1. The domestic hot water temperature set point will be 110 F. Food Services operations requiring higher water temperature levels by code (kitchen: 140 F, dishwashers: 180 F) shall use booster units or dedicated water heaters. All domestic hot water re-circulating pumps will be turned-off during unoccupied times.

38 36 2. The swimming pool shall be kept at a temperature of no less than 78 F, but no warmer than 82 F, consistent with the recommendation of the National Federation of State High School Association for School Pools. 3. Office Equipment such as copiers, laminators, and the like, shall be shut down at the end of the day. Computers should utilize energy savings options within the operating system. All classroom PC monitors and local printers will be turned off during time periods when the buildings are un-occupied. 4. The use of personal appliances such as electric coffee makers, microwaves, refrigerators, toaster ovens, pizza makers and/or other cooking or refrigeration appliances will not be allowed without the prior approval of the Superintendent. Refrigerators, microwaves and coffeepots are permitted only in faculty/staff lunchrooms. Toaster ovens, toasters and hot plates are not permitted in the buildings. 5. Request for exemptions and hot and cold complaints must be addressed in writing to the Facilities Manager, at which time he/she will investigate the complaint or request for exemption. If the issue cannot be resolved while adhering to the energy policy, the Supervisor of Buildings & Grounds shall make the determination as to what action, if any, will be taken. The Supervisor of Buildings & Grounds reserves the right to adjust set points up or down in a given area to provide the best overall performance of the HVAC system. 6. Only energy efficient vending machines will be allowed within the District. WORK ORDERS The District uses on-line work order system that can be very effective and should serve the District s needs well. The District is to be commended for this system. The Study Team recommends that the District attempt to capture all non-cleaning work via work order and also begin logging costs associated with each ticket. At a minimum, costs should include hours worked and supplies purchased. With this data, the system could be used to generate reports that would aid in evaluating departmental efforts. The Study Team further recommends improving the work order system by providing feedback to the service requester and also expanding the work order system as a tool to generate preventive maintenance work orders for things like fire extinguisher maintenance and filter changes. In general, work order systems provide the communication vehicle for school districts to request work and to follow-up on work. The work order system may be basic or complex, but all systems should provide the users with the following minimum capabilities: Work order to request work

39 37 Approval process (typically from the requester to the building principal to the Director of Facilities) Scheduling process and setting of priorities Assignment of the work Track time and labor expenses Acknowledge completion of work Work orders are also used to create a work history for equipment. The work history identifies trends that are used for budgeting and estimating upgrade and/or replacement costs. The Concept of Work Order Flow Work Order Approval Assignment Monitoring and Completion EVALUATIONS Performance reviews are conducted annually for all operations and maintenance employees. This is a best practice. Included with this report is a copy of a monthly checklist for cleaning levels that would improve the evaluation process (Appendix E). STAFF TRAINING Custodial and maintenance staff training is critical to the success of the short-term and long-term Operations & Maintenance program for the Unionville-Chaddsford School District. Major benefits of training include, (1) increased worker competency, (2) increased worker safety, (3) improved cost control, (4) increased customer satisfaction, (5) increased employee motivation and (6) improved facilities. The observation of the Study Team is that regular and ongoing documented custodial training should improve. In addition, there should be a formal training process for all new custodial employees. This is not a reflection on the quality of care for the buildings and grounds. In fact, the Study Team found the level of care to be outstanding. Documented training is a best practice for Operations & Maintenance programs. For assistance in identifying O & M staff training topics, here is list of training programs provided to the custodians at the Southern York County School District over the last few years

40 38 (this training has been conducted on a monthly basis and two full days each summer for all custodians): 1. What is School Custodianship? 2. Why is the Custodian so Important? 3. Doing the Job: Tasks, Responsibilities and Expectations 4. Custodial Evaluations 5. Working With Others 6. The Custodian and the Public 7. The Custodian and Other School Personnel 8. The Custodian and Administrators 9. The Custodian and the Teachers 10. The Custodian and Other Support Staff 11. The Custodian and Students 12. Why should the Custodian be Concerned with Safety? 13. How Can Custodians Work With Safety? 14. Safety Areas Chemical 15. Safety Areas Electrical 16. Safety Areas Fire 17. Safety Areas Physical 18. Physical Safety Lifting - Illustration of Lifting Technique 19. Physical Safety Falling 20. Physical Safety Cuts and Wounds 21. Physical Safety Access for the Disabled 22. Physical Safety Hand Tools 23. Particular Hazard Areas in Schools 24. First Aid 25. Accident Reporting 26. Sample Notice of Injury Form 27. Material Safety Data Sheets 28. What are Sanitation and School Housekeeping? 29. Equipment 30. Cleaning Agents 31. Tools, Equipment and Supplies 32. General Surface Task Frequency 33. Ceiling Surface Cleaning 34. Wall Surface Cleaning 35. Windows and Window Fittings Surface Cleaning 36. Cleaning Special Surfaces 37. Cleaning Furniture 38. Cleaning General Use Areas 39. Hallways, Offices, Other 40. Stain Removal: Food Stains and Non-Food Stains 41. Sanitizing 42. Cleaning and Sanitizing

41 43. Sanitation Terms 44. Cleaning and Sanitizing Restrooms 45. Cleaning Restroom Fixtures 46. Cleaning and Sanitizing Food Areas 47. Cleaning Other Critical Areas 48. Special Cleaning Problems 49. Body Fluid Control 50. Blood borne Pathogens 51. Waste Disposal 52. Pest Control 53. Importance of Floor Care 54. Cleaning Different Types of Floors: Wood, Resilient, Masonry, Carpeting, Synthetic/Epoxy 55. Manual Sweeping 56. Dust Mopping 57. Dry Vacuuming and Power Sweeping 58. Non-Carpeted Floors 59. Non-Carpeted Wet Mopping 60. Non-Carpeted Deep Scrubbing 61. Hard Surface Spray Buffing 62. Hard Surface Stripping 63. Carpet Cleaning 64. Dry Extraction 65. Hot Water Extraction 66. Bonnet Cleaning (Carpet Mopping) 67. Carpeting-Common Carpet Challenges 68. Carpeting-Repair 69. Odor and Bacteria Control 70. Carpet Cleaning Tips 71. Equipment (Micro-fiber Technology Stick Brooms Push Brooms Wet Mops Flat Mop Technology Mop Wringers Mop Rack Floor Squeegee Vacuum Cleaners Back-pack Vacuums Bagless Technology Floor Machines) 72. Miscellaneous Tools (Spray bottles Pump-up Sprayer Cellulose Sponges Scrub Sponges Garbage and Trash Cans Measuring Cups Door Wedge) 73. Cleaning Substances Water Other Cleaning Agents Abrasives Emulsifying substances Alkaline Soap Neutral Soap Oil or Soft Soaps) 74. What is Safety? 75. Safety Areas: Chemical, Electrical, Fire, Lifting, Falling, Cuts and Wounds 76. Understanding Electricity 77. Troubleshooting 78. Power Distribution 79. Fuses/Circuit Breakers Replacement of Damaged Plugs 80. Troubleshooting For Malfunctioning Appliances 81. To Replace A Female Plug 82. To Replace A Male Plug 83. Incandescent & Fluorescent Bulbs 39

42 Troubleshooting Chart For Fluorescent Tubes 85. Replacing Bulbs 86. To Remove A Broken Light Bulb or Tube From Its Socket 87. Simple Wiring Dollar Limitations for Bidding and Quotes PURCHASING IN OPERTIONS The Public School Code establishes the legal requirements to be followed in the purchase of materials, supplies, and equipment for use in public schools. Unionville-Chadds Ford School District applied for a waiver applicable to purchasing limitations under 24 PS 7-751a in 2006 and was approved. The district should be commended for taking this action which resulted in the purchasing thresholds below. Purchases of $15,200 or more may be made only after public notice has been given by advertisement once a week for three weeks in not less than two newspapers of general circulation, with bid specifications, public opening, and award to the lowest responsible bidder. The opening does not have to be at a school board meeting, but award must be made by a majority vote of the Board. In a bid situation, approval of the Board is clearly required, and the purchasing function (agent or business official) does not have the authority to bind the District to a contract. For purchases of supplies between $5,800 and $15,200 a quotation process may be used. Written or telephonic quotations must be obtained and retained for three years. A memorandum containing the date of the quote, the name of the vendor and vendor representative, the supplies quoted, and the quoted price, must support the telephonic communication. Presumably the District must accept the lowest responsible quote unless there is legitimate reason to reject. The Board may authorize the Board Secretary or other designee to make decisions about such awards, preferably in a board policy. It is not a requirement for the Board to be involved in the quotation process. For purchases under $5,800 it is not necessary to bid or quote. The purchasing decision can be made outside of the formality of a bid, or the semi-formality of a quote. The purchasing authority of the administration should be defined in a board policy. A trend in purchasing involves the use of statewide, consortium, or catalog bidding. Such vehicles are not exceptions to the bid law. Such bids are operated within the rules, but districts may participate under provisions in the law that allow for cooperative buying. Exceptions to the Bidding Rules Most of the things purchased for operations and maintenance are subject to the bidding rules. Certain classroom supplies are exempt from the bidding requirement: maps, music, globes, charts, educational films, filmstrips, prepared transparencies and slides, pre-recorded magnetic tapes and disc recordings, textbooks, games, toys, prepared kits, flannel board materials, flash

43 41 cards, models and projectuals, and teacher demonstration devices. This exemption applies regardless of the size of the purchase Generally speaking, the procurement of services is not subject to the bidding or quotation requirements of the Public School Code. A Request for Proposal process is often used, but not required. Examples of service procurements in which a facility manager would be involved are: trash hauling; electricity and natural gas; architecture and engineering; maintenance contracts; testing and calibration; computer software. These items do not require bidding, regardless of size.

44 APPENDIX A CUSTODIAL STAFFING TIME STUDIES AREA MINUTES Classroom/carpet 25 Classroom/tile 20 Bathroom 4/fixtures Art room 30 Conference/seminar 21/1000 sq. ft. Corridor 20/1000 sq. ft. Library 22/1000 sq. ft Gymnasium 6/1000 sq. ft. Stage 8/1000 sq. ft. Cafeteria 32/1000 sq. ft. Kitchen 35/1000 sq. ft. Dish room 35/1000 sq. ft. Elevator 12 Auditorium 22/1000 sq. ft. Lobbies 24/1000 sq. ft. Music classroom 25/1000 sq. ft. Stairs 10/flight Dust library shelves 15/1000 sq. ft. Locker room 30/1000 sq. ft. Office 15/1000 sq. ft. Dining area 31/1000 sq. ft. Lab storage 5 Nurse/health room 25/1000 sq. ft. Dark room 16/1000 sq. ft. Shower Area 50/1000 sq. ft. Storage 7/1000 sq. ft. Lounge 21/1000 sq. ft. Computer room 19/1000 sq. ft. Shop 10/1000 sq. ft.

45 APPENDIX B: OUTLINE OF AGRONOMIC PROGRAM While the fields are generally in good repair, this valuable resource could be improved with a detailed and well-executed agronomic program. The following excerpt is from PASBO S Elements of Facilities Management: Maintaining quality grounds and athletic fields begins with the agronomic program. An agronomic program contains at minimum: 1) Inventory of fields 2) Planned yearly fertilizer applications 3) Plan for preventative pesticides (if applicable) 4) Monitoring activities for pests (weeds, insects and diseases) 5) Plan for cultural practices such as aeration and soil amendments 6) Plan for seeding (if necessary) 7) Capital Improvement needs The current district program is a non-specific 1.5 page document that only generally describes the tasks that are completed throughout the year. The scope of this study is not to develop an agronomic program for the district; however, comments and suggestions are offered to aid in this endeavor. (The numbers below correspond to the above-mentioned categories.) 1) It appears the district has good inventory of fields. This data should be integrated into the agronomic plan and referenced for specific data collection and planning purposes. 2) The district indicated that they completed soil tests and used this data to plan for spring and fall applications. Little specific fertilizer application data was made available, other than a fertilizer order that had recently been placed. While a good first step, soil testing should be used to establish a long-term, field specific fertility management program. This program should chronicle the historical applications, the previous soil test data, and planned future applications for the upcoming growing season. With 2 fertilizer applications occurring per year, it could be surmised that nitrogen levels of 2 to 2.5 pounds per year were being maintained. While this is a good general rate, certain fields could benefit from increased fertility. Typically, a baseball infield in Southeastern Pennsylvania would thrive at 4 to 5 pounds of nitrogen per year. 3) Preventative pesticides would include pre-emergent weed control and pre-emptive insecticide applications. The district is using pre-emergent weed control in the flowerbeds, but not on the grass fields. This strategy appears to be working effectively but should be evaluated annually. The team was told the Merit insecticide is applied annually for grub control. This type of application should not be a routine task. Insect activity should be monitored as part of the agronomic program and pesticide applied only when necessary.

46 4) The grounds staff does monitor for pests but this activity should be formalized and documented with some simple checklists. 5) The district aerates twice a year, and periodically applies mushroom soil as an amendment, which appears to be working effectively. 6) The district seeds frequently. Based on the seeds mixtures in use, equipment being employed, and turf conditions, this program is effective but could be better documented. 7) An outdated capital improvement program is detailed in a separate capital document. This document should be updated and the relevant portions should be integrated into a comprehensive agronomic plan.

47 APPENDIX C PLAYGROUND INSPECTION FORM Inspections should be conducted on a monthly scheduled basis. Visible crack, bending, warping, rusting or breakage of any component. Deformation of open hooks, shackles, rings, links, etc. Worn swing hangers and chains. Missing, damaged, or loose swing seats, heavy seats with sharp edges or corners. Broken supports/anchors. Footings exposed, cracked, loose in ground. Accessible sharp edges or points. Exposed ends of tubing that should be covered by plugs or caps. Protruding bolt ends that do not root, have smooth finished caps and covers. Check for bees and other intruders. Splintered, cracked or otherwise deteriorated wood. Lack of lubrication on moving parts. Loose bolts, nuts, etc. Broken or missing rails, steps, rungs, seats. Worn bearings. Surfacing material worn or scattered (in landing pits, etc.). Chipped or peeling paint. Vandalism (broken glass, trash, etc.). Tripping hazards such as rocks or other environmental obstacles. SCHOOL: DATE CHECKED: SIGNATURE:

48 NAME: BUILDING: SHIFT: DATE: LEVEL 5 UNKEPT NEGLECT Floors & carpets are dirty, molding is dirty General Comments: APPENDIX D MONTHLY CUSTODIAL CLEANING LEVEL INSPECTION FORM CLEANING LEVEL INSPECTION AREA LEVEL 1 SPOTLESSNESS LEVEL 2 ORDINARY TIDINESS LEVEL 3 CASUAL INATTENTION LEVEL 4 MODERATE DINGINESS Floors & Base Moldings Shine and/or are bright & clean Shine and/or are bright & clean Swept clean, but dust & stains can be seen; molding is dirty Swept clean, but molding is dirty Corners & Along Walls Bathroom/Shower Fixtures, floor & Supplies Trash Containers & Pencil Sharpeners Desks, Unit Ventilators & Other Surfaces No Buildup No buildup Buildup of dirt &/or dust Gleam and are odorfree; supplies are adequate Empty, clean, odorfree Freshly cleaned or polished appearance and no accumulation of dirt Gleam and are odor-free; supplies are adequate Empty, clean, odor-free Clean, bus dust, and marks are noticeable with close observation Most fixtures are clean, supplies are not adequate Empty, clean, odor-free Noticeable buildup of dirt &/or dust Fixtures are dingy, supplies are not adequate Old trash; trash containers are stained, marked & smell Obvious dirt, dust Obvious dirt, dust & smudges Obvious build-up of dirt &/or dust Fixtures are dirty, supplies are not adequate Overflowing; trash containers are stained & smell Major accumulation of dirt, dust, & smudges; it is evident that no cleaning is done on these surfaces Evaluator s Name :