The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

EVALUATION
BUILDING OUR FUTURE: SCOTLAND'S SCHOOL ESTATE

3 KEY POINTS

SCOPE

1. Local authorities will need to consider what scope of evaluation they wish to undertake. This will depend upon a number of issues, such as the resources and time available, and what they wish to achieve from the process. In some cases policy commitments may determine a level of consultation to be undertaken. In other cases a particular form of evaluation may be set out in the contractual arrangements for the project.

2. Ideally, a rolling programme might involve a broad, initial evaluation of each completed project, from which specific issues may emerge which could be investigated further in separate studies. The case study at Section 4 of this guidance illustrates one method of evaluation, using an independent specialist to consult a range of stakeholders in a series of focus groups. The outcomes include a number of recommendations, some of which would involve further study. The example on the following page describes a less structured form of evaluation, however the basic principles are the same. Local authorities will need to consider what can be achieved within the resources available, however any form of evaluation and feedback is preferable to none at all.

TIMING

3. The optimum time for conducting a building evaluation will vary, depending on its purpose. There are benefits in conducting a major evaluation after a new school has been occupied for at least 12 months, so that the changing demands on the building throughout a full school year (including holidays) and a full climate cycle will have been experienced.

4. A more focused evaluation to assess some immediate issues, such as security arrangements or testing the settings of the building services systems, may be appropriate within the first three months of operation. However, in all projects, there will inevitably be a 'bedding-in' period for users to adjust to their new environment, and sufficient time should be allowed before any formal evaluation process is undertaken.

5. A project review, which is intended to examine the procurement process rather than the design of the building, may be conducted much sooner after the building is handed over. These evaluations often rely on the direct experiences of the project personnel involved, and it may be more difficult to gain information from the key players after the team has been disbanded.

REPRESENTATIVES OF PUPILS, STAFF AND OTHERS

6. An important consideration for the local authority is who will be consulted in the evaluation study. Many people have an interest in our school buildings and, ideally, all stakeholders should be represented. A comprehensive school building evaluation is therefore likely to take account of the views of:

• students
• parents
• staff
• community users
• project team professionals
• contractors
• local authority staff.

7. Depending on the project, a wider range of community stakeholders may also be invited to participate. In some cases the scope of the study may suggest that technical specialists such as sustainable building experts, or special needs access specialists, may be appropriate contributors.

FACILITATOR

8. The most appropriate person to conduct an evaluation will also depend upon the scope of the project. For most larger evaluations, there are clear advantages of engaging an independent specialist to conduct the exercise. Many local authority and project team personnel are likely to participate in the evaluation process, and an independent consultant may be invaluable in maintaining a significant degree of objectivity. In smaller studies, where the cost of engaging an independent consultant may be prohibitive, a suitably experienced in-house education or building professional may be more appropriate. In more focused technical studies, an expert in the particular field may be required to conduct the study and interpret the results.

CONSULTATION

9. Participants should be briefed prior to taking part in the building evaluation so that they are aware of what the exercise is for, what the roles of the key players are, and how the findings will be managed. In some cases, providing prior information about the building or project may be appropriate, however efforts should be made to avoid influencing decisions or opinions of the participants.

10. In many cases, participants (particularly building users) will be representing a wider group of stakeholders, and it may be appropriate to encourage these participants to canvass views of the wider group prior to the evaluation. It should be made clear that participants are invited to provide both positive as well as negative feedback.

11. The evaluation should be an engaging experience, with a process which avoids being too bureaucratic or time-consuming for participants. Ideally, participants should consider it an enjoyable and worthwhile exercise, so they can promote the evaluation process and would be keen to participate in it again.

12. Careful consideration needs to be given to how recommendations or conclusions are to be drawn from the outcome of the evaluation studies. In some cases opinions may differ among participants on a particular issue, and it should be clear from the outset how information or comments will be recorded, who or what group will decide on the recommendations, and in what format and how widely the outcome of the evaluation will be circulated.

13. In some cases it may be appropriate for the facilitator to draw up their own recommendations, however in other cases the commissioning client may seek to influence how these are developed, depending on what actions are likely to be taken forward.

LEARNING AND IMPROVING

14. A fundamental consideration for local authorities before embarking on any building evaluation is to be clear about what actions they intend to take following the event so that this can be communicated to participants.

15. Many issues raised in the evaluation may well be addressed by 'fine tuning' of the building or services. In some cases this may be achieved within existing contractual arrangements. In cases where a separate budget may be required, an indication of the available resources should be provided if possible at the outset of the exercise so that recommendations can be prioritised and the expectations of participants can be managed. Schools themselves should be prepared to make changes to operational and management arrangements.

16. Some issues raised in the evaluation may be referred to 'focus groups' or recommended for more detailed study. These will require time and effort to be followed through, and arrangements for managing this process should be considered. In some cases the outcomes of an evaluation will only be able to inform future project briefs and, if known, this should be acknowledged at the outset.

17. Finally, an established building evaluation process should have a review system to identify improvement possibilities in the process. Participants should be asked their comments on the evaluation process, but it is important that this assessment process does not intrude on the principal task of conducting the building evaluation itself.

« Previous | Contents | Next »