Education and Infrastructure

School Capital Planning Workshop

February 21, 2018 – Calgary

February 22, 2018 – Edmonton

Welcome address

Curtis Clarke

Deputy Minister of Education

Shannon Flint

Deputy Minister of Infrastructure

Introductions

School Capital Projects

• Since 2011:

- Over 250 school capital projects announced, with an

estimated total provincial capital commitment of over

$4.5 billion

- Over 800 modular classrooms approved as part of the

Modular Classroom Program

• Currently over 80 projects are in various

stages of planning, design, and construction.

Report of the Auditor General of

Alberta, April 2016

• October 2015 announcement that many

projects would not meet anticipated

completion timelines

• Office of the Auditor General asked to

examine why, and to advise on improvements

• April 2016 report: Education and

Infrastructure – Systems to manage the

School-Building Program

Report of the Auditor General of

Alberta, April 2016

• Recommendations covered many aspects of

the program, e.g.:

– Clarification of roles and responsibilities

– Planning and approval processes

– Systems to manage and control projects

– Change management procedures

– Communication

– Reporting and key performance indicators

– Cash flow and capital funding requests

Report of the Auditor General of

Alberta, April 2016

Number one recommendation:

• Clarify Roles and Responsibilities—We

recommend that the Department of Education

improve its oversight of the school-building

program by:

– working with the Department of Infrastructure to clarify

the roles and responsibilities of each department and

establishing supporting policies and procedures

– developing clear decision-making authorities for the

program

• Our response – a new Memorandum of

Understanding between the two departments

Education and Infrastructure

School Capital Program Management

• Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

– signed February 17, 2017 by both ministers

– addresses April 2016 OAG report recommendations

• Capital Program management remains status

quo until transition (April 1, 2018)

Governance Structure:

• Address OAG recommendations

• Clarity of roles and responsibilities

• Key performance measures - school projects:

– On-time

– On-budget - supported by a high degree of accuracy in

estimating and forecasting

– Facilities meet the educational needs of students

MOU:

• Defines high level ministry accountabilities

• Education is responsible for:

– Capital Planning and project scope

• Infrastructure is responsible for:

– Implementing assigned school projects

– Providing oversight for jurisdiction managed projects

– Procuring modular classrooms

– Communicating project performance and reporting

School Capital Program Management

Transition

• Program transition includes:

– Budget transfer for active projects announced since

2011, modular program, and future project/modular

approvals

• Close out of completed projects (schools and modulars)

• Capital Program financial reconciliation

– Process updates

– Organizational structure realignment

– School Capital Manual amendment

Transition Implementation by

April 1, 2018:

INFRASTRUCTURE:

• Accountable for project implementation in

support of the School Capital Program

New accountability:

– Oversight for grant funded school projects

– Grant payments, includes FFE and modulars

Enhanced accountability

– Program Reporting – includes reports to Education and

Treasury Board

– Project Communication

Transition Implementation by

April 1, 2018:

EDUCATION:

• Planning/program role of Education and

school jurisdictions remains unchanged

• Infrastructure Maintenance and Renewal

Program (IMR) with Education

Accountability Alignment:

• Inter-organizational oversight/leadership

– Joint Steering Committee – ADM level

– Joint Operations Committee – ED level

• Developing supporting documents

– Redevelopment of School Capital Manual

• Alignment with Capital Planning Process

– Reporting framework and measures review

• Improved support for jurisdiction managed

projects during planning and implementation

• Transparent cash flow and portfolio

management, using standard protocols

Summary

Program transition includes:

• Budget transfer for active projects, modular

program, and future project/modular

approvals

– Close out of completed projects (schools and modulars)

– Capital Program financial reconciliation

• Process updates

• Organizational structure realignment

• School Capital Manual amendment

Infrastructure Updates

Organizational changes

effective February 12, 2018

• Capital Projects Delivery Division

- Brian Fedor – retired

- ADM – Neil McFarlane

• Learning Facilities Branch

Process updates

• Grant Process – overview

• Key contacts / Website links

• Financials

• Reporting

• Modular Classroom Program

• School Capital Manual

• Infrastructure Maintenance Renewal (IMR)

• Area Capacity Utilization (ACU)

Grant Process

Project Approval

• Joint announcement by Education and Infrastructure

Infrastructure accountable for management of:

• Grant Agreements

• Grant Agreement Amendments

• Design and Tender process

• Payment process

Jurisdictions maintain project responsibilities during the

pre-tender, tender, project delivery stages, and project close out.

Key ContactsEducation – Capital Planning Sector is responsible for:

• Capital Planning

• Capital Funding Requests

• IMR Program

Infrastructure – Learning Facilities Branch is responsible for:

• Approved Capital Plan – project implementation

• Project Management Support

• Project Design (meets approved scope)

• Cost Analysis

Website Access: https://education.alberta.ca/school-

infrastructure/planning-school-projects/everyone/resources/

Financials

Payment process

• Prior to April 1, 2018 – status quo

- Year end process

• As of April 1, 2018

- Request For Payment submissions to Infrastructure

o Shared email address

- Request For Payment form

o Changed form

o Required to process F&E, CTS payments

- Payment inquiries – Infrastructure

Financials cont’d

Statement of Final Cost (SFC)

• As of April 1, 2018

SFC process managed by Infrastructure

- Purpose

- Submission process – shared email address

- SFC form updated

Reporting

Purpose / Challenges

Infrastructure reports for Jurisdictions

• Monthly reporting continues

• Report format changes

• Education SharePoint site

School Capital Projects website

Next Steps:

• Capital Infrastructure Dynamics (CID)

Reporting (cont’d)

Jurisdiction project updates

• SCRS – status quo for project data updates

• Cash Flow Forecasting (12 months, future years)

Existing SCRS Cash Flow data

ID

Grant Agreement Number

Project Name

Notes Risks

% of Construction Completed

Anticipated Construction Completion Date

Anticipated Occupancy Date

Anticipated Status As of April 2018 Date

Life To Date Expenditure As of March 31, 2018

2018 APR

2018 MAY

2018 JUN

2018 JUL

2018 AUG

2018 SEP

% $ $ $ $ $ $ $

% $ $ $ $ $ $ $

New SCRS Cash Flow data requirement

ID

Grant Agreement Number

Project Name

Notes Risks

% of Construction Completed

Anticipated Construction Completion Date

Anticipated Occupancy Date

Anticipated Status As of April 2018 Date

Life To Date Expenditure As of March 31, 2018

2018 APR

2018 MAY

2018 JUN

2018 JUL

2018 AUG

2018 SEP

2018 OCT

2018 NOV

2018 DEC

2019 JAN

2019 FEB

2019 MAR

2019-2020

2020-2021

2021-2022

% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Additional 6 months / future year totals

Modular Classroom Program

• Modular allocation – Education

- Priority list

- Annual Modular Classroom Approval

o Approval letter:

Jointly signed by Education and Infrastructure

• Budget Approval (Project) – Infrastructure

• Challenges

School Capital Manual (March 2015)

• Addendum to be issued – effective April 1, 2018

- Amends priority clauses/sections to align with changed

accountabilities and processes

- Replaces some Sections and Appendices

• School Capital Manual update

- Review to commence after April 1, 2018

- Major update

- Collaborate with Jurisdictions

Infrastructure Maintenance and Renewal

(IMR)

Changes in Process

• IMR Actual Expenditure Reports are now to be

submitted to Education

- Format and deadline is unchanged

- Jurisdictions are still required to report through VFA

Area Capacity Utilization Reports (ACU)

Changes in Process

• ACU reports will now be generated by Education

- The ACU report will no longer have the gross area information

included.

• Updated Utilization Formula Instructional Area forms with

Small Scale Plans need to be submitted to Education to

allow for the updating of instructional area.

BREAK

Capital Planning Gated Approval

Process and Project Readiness

Alberta Education

Outline

• Alberta Education Capital Planning Gated

Approval Process

– Phase 1: Capital Plan Submission

– Phase 2: Project Evaluation & Prioritization

– Phase 3: Project Definition

– Phase 4: Budget & Scope

– Phase 5: Provincial Capital Planning Process

• Project Readiness

– Why Is Project Readiness Important?

– Project Readiness Evaluation

• Questions

Capital Planning

Gated Approval

Process

Capital Plan Submission

Gate 2

Gate 3

Gate 4

Project Definition

Budget & Scope Development

Provincial Capital Planning Process

Between6-18 months

Approx. 6 months

Phase

Gate

Gating Criteria

Alberta Education Capital Planning Gated Approval Process

All projects must meet all the requirements specified at each gate before proceeding to the next gate

Project Evaluation and Prioritization

Gate 1

Phase 1: Capital Plan Submission

• Activities

– School Board

Submission

o Meeting

Submission

Requirements

• Purpose

– Project

Justification &

Supportability

– Overall Planning &

Management

Capital Plan Submission

Gate 1

School Authority’s Three-Year Capital Plan – April 1 submission deadline

Information provided is complete

Capital Plan Submission (April 1st)

Phase 2: Project Evaluation &

Prioritization

• Activities

– Assessment of

Capital Projects

– Prioritization of

Capital Projects

o Based on Project

Driver Criteria

o Based on Level of

Need Criteria

Gate 2 Projects have been assessed and prioritized based

on the criteria as established by Education Capital Planning Sector

Project Evaluation and Prioritization

Capital Plan Submission

Project Evaluation & Prioritization (3 Months)

Phase 2: Project Drivers

Health & Safety

• Health and Safety issues that require resolution may include serious structural deficiencies, presence of hazardous materials, documented air quality issues, etc.

Building Condition

• There are demonstrated and documented deficiencies in the key areas of structural, envelope, interior, mechanical, electrical, building codes and/or standards compliance issues due to age that could not be resolved through the use of Infrastructure Maintenance and Renewal (IMR) funding.

Enrolment Pressures

• Enrolment Growth: The school authority’s existing facilities are insufficient to accommodate current and future students within a specified geographical area.

Functionality & Programming

• Project provides new and/or improved program space functionality through reconfiguration, relocation, or technology.

Legal

• Projects are evaluated on legal rights for equity of access and assessed regarding existing legal judgement or potential legal action (e.g. Rights to Francophone education under Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms).

Phase 2: Level of Need

High Need

(Tier 1)

• Projects that will address school facilities that are unsuitable, unsafe or pose a high risk to students and/or staff.

Medium/High Need

(Tier 2)

• Projects that are considered immediate need. An active mitigation strategy may be in place to address the immediate need.

Medium Need

(Tier 3)

• Projects that are considered to have emerging needs.

Low Need

(Tier 4)

• Projects that may be addressed in the long-term future (i.e. seven to ten years).

Phase 3: Project Definition

• Activities

– Preliminary Site

Assessment

– Value Scoping

Sessions

Gate 3

Project Definition

Needs Validated Passed readiness assessment test

Capital Plan Submission

Project Evaluation & Prioritization (3 Months)

Project Definition(6-18 Months)

Phase 4: Budget & Scope

Development

• Activities

– Functional Plan

– Scope and Budget

Development

Gate 4

Budget & Scope Development

Alignment with GoA Priorities Project Scope & Budget Summary

Document Complete Provides value for money Functional Plan has been

developed

Capital Plan Submission

Project Evaluation & Prioritization

(3 Months)

Project Definition(6-18 Months)

Budget Scope & Development

(6 Months)

Phase 5: Provincial Capital Planning

Process

• Activities

– Recommendation to Treasury Board & Finance

– Approval & Implementation Phase

Capital Plan Submission

Project Evaluation & Prioritization (3 Months)

Project Definition

(6-18 Months)

Budget Scope &

Development

(6 Months)

Provincial Capital

Planning Process

Project Readiness

Why is Project Readiness Important?

• Identifying and Mitigating

Risks

• Implementation ‘Ready’

• No Surprises!

Project Readiness Evaluation

Project ReadinessEvaluation

Legal

Adequate Size

Access

Site/Area Hazards

Geotechnical

Scope

Development

Functional

Plan

MGA Amendments

& Link to School Act

Joint Use and Planning Agreements

(JUPAs)

Background

• On April 10, 2017 Bill 8, An Act to Strengthen

Municipal Government was introduced to

amend the MGA

• Significant consultation was conducted with

school boards across Alberta on potential

changes to be included in Bill 8

• One of the changes in Bill 8 that is relevant to

K-12 Education in Alberta is:

– Mandatory joint use and planning agreements for

school boards and municipalities

Bill 8 & Vision for the MGA

• A new vision for the MGA is based upon three

pillars:

– an enhanced partnership relationship with municipalities

in providing effective and responsive governance to

Albertans;

– strengthened accountability mechanisms to allow

Albertans to hold their local governments accountable;

and

– a shift away from competition to collaboration, with new

tools to ensure that municipalities work with

neighbouring communities to better serve their

collective residents.

Bill 8 & Vision for the MGA

• A Joint Use Agreement (JUA) between

municipalities and school boards is voluntary,

which allows for flexibility to address matters

that are of mutual interests

• In the absence of a JUA, a subdivision

authority determines the land allocation for

reserve lands based upon the needs of the

municipality and each school board(s) within

its boundary.

Cu

rren

t

Bill 8 & Vision for the MGA

• Municipalities will be required, within 3 years

of the requirement coming into force, to have

JUPAs with school boards that are operating

within the municipalities’ boundaries.

• JUPAs will establish a process to discuss

matters related to:

– the planning, development, use, (including the matters

relating to the maintenance of facilities and fields),

transfer, disposal and servicing of school sites

– the municipality and the school board work

collaboratively together, including a process for

resolving disputes and

– A time frame for regular review of the agreement

New

Bill 8 & the School Act

• Key Consequential School Act Amendments:

– All boards operating within municipal boundaries must

enter into a JUPA within three years of the requirement

coming into force

– More than one board may be a party to an agreement

– Agreements may be amended from time-to-time as

necessary

New

Bill 8 & the School Act

• Key consequential School Act Amendments

continued:

– In section 197 of the School Act, subsections (a) and (b)

are retitled subsection (1) and the following is added:

o Subject to the regulations, subsection (1) does not apply to

JUPA’s

o The Minister may make regulations respecting the extent to

which subsection (1) applies to JUPA’s

New

Bill 8 & the School Act

• Next Steps

– Education to determine whether a regulation will be

developed under Section 197 of the School Act

Questions

Closing

Remarks

Thank you