SER PRESENTATION

BACKGROUND

BACKGROUND

1. GENISIS of SER

2. GOVERNANCE of SER

The GENISIS of SER

1. 1992 Scottish self-certification Regulations – weakness

2. Study by BSD/ICE/IStructE working party3. Certification Scheme/Provider/SER4. Why did IStructE set up SER?

The GOVERNANCE of SER

1. A Trading Company owned by IStructE2. Company Location3. Company Structure

Company Structure

SERBoard

Dr Sue DoranJohn Littler

Oliver Ricketts

IStructEResource

SRB JRB

Audit Pool6 Members

11 Members

5 Members

1. A Trading Company owned by IStructE2. Company Location3. Company Structure4. Making Contact5. SER’s Client6. Finance7. Company Ethos

The GOVERNANCE of SER

SER AUDIT PROCESS

Available at www.ser-ltd.com

Audit Feedback Reports

February 2008

October 2009

Survey Monkey:

Audit manual – procedures for auditing

1.1%0%8.3%32%48.6%9.9%

Not aware of its existence

Not Helpful

Could be improved

AdequateVery Useful

Excellent

Audit feedback reports

1.1%1.1%16%30.9%42.5%8.3%

Not aware of its existence

Not Helpful

Could be improved

AdequateVery Useful

Excellent

Since auditing commenced in 2007:• 276 approved bodies have been audited under

‘routine surveillance’

• 472 approved certifiers have been audited under ‘routine surveillance’

• 151 follow up audits on approved certifiers

• 24 Certifiers suspended and 4 removed

WHY SER AUDIT

• Requirement of our contract with government

• Instil public confidence that professionals can self regulate

Bonus

• To disseminate good practice

• To identify training or guidance requirements

Survey Monkey:

Auditing is an essential tool for ensuring a common standard of certification

1.1%0%4.8%18.6%37.8%37.8%

No Opinion

Strongly Disagree

Don’t AgreeGenerally Agree

AgreeStrongly Agree

Auditing ensures that individuals without the necessary competence will be removed from the register

1.6%0.5%11.2%30.9%38.8%17%

No Opinion

Strongly Disagree

Don’t AgreeGenerally Agree

AgreeStrongly Agree

AUDIT CRITERIA

Audit criteria are items that have been identified for the purpose of the audit– while they represent key elements of the design process they are not intended to be an exhaustive list of

every aspect of the design

Survey Monkey:

The list of audit criteria covers sufficient spread of important aspects relating to the design of a project

2.3%0%3.5%29.7%50%14.5%

No Opinion

Strongly Disagree

Don’t AgreeGenerally Agree

AgreeStrongly Agree

NON-CONFORMANCES

• Major non-conformances (med/high risk that persistent failure will result in injury)

• Improvement Issues (low risk that persistent failure will result in injury)

• Comments (not sufficiently serious to attract one of above)

Non-conformance classification

• Need for consistency

• Always apply defined criteria from audit manual

• Don’t introduce “good ideas”

• Apply discretion at the end of the process

TARRIFF SYSTEM

0Comment

1Improvement issue

3Major non-conformance

Weighted score

Example: two major non-conformances, three improvement issues and two comments would attract and audit score of 9

Survey Monkey:

The SER approach provides a good method of assessing how well a project has been certified

1.1%0%4.8%18.6%37.8%37.8%

No Opinion

Strongly Disagree

Don’t AgreeGenerally Agree

AgreeStrongly Agree

The weighting of failure to apply criteria are appropriate

4.7%1.2%22.1%44.2%24.4%3.5%

No Opinion

Strongly Disagree

Don’t AgreeGenerally Agree

AgreeStrongly Agree

AUDITOR RATING

Serious concern (may result in removal from membership of the scheme)

E

Failure to understand or apply scheme requirement (may result in suspension)

D(Sub cat: D1 or D2)*

Inconsistent application of scheme (may result in reaudit)

C (Sub cat: C1 or C2)*

General conformance with scheme objectivesB

High standard with examples of best practiceA

* Being introduced in next revision

Multiple occurrences

• Same issue repeated across several projects

• Same issue repeated but with different level of seriousness

• Linked non-conformances

AUDITOR DISCRETION

•Auditors are expected to exercise a degree of professional judgement however this must not be at the expense of consistency:

• Recommendation to adjust final grade score

• Use of “comment” classification

Survey Monkey:

Opening meeting led by lead auditor

1.7%0%1.7%20.8%46.1%29.8%

Not aware of its existence

Not Helpful

Could be improved

AdequateVery Useful

Excellent

Closing meeting and explanation of findings

2.2%1.1%6.2%27.5%37.1%27%

Not aware of its existence

Not Helpful

Could be improved

AdequateVery Useful

Excellent

POST AUDIT PROCESS

Auditee enters corrective actions on audit report

Audit report on agenda of SRB meeting –recommendations of lead auditor debated

SRB Decision reported to SER Board

Final Decision of SER Board communicated to auditee

The audit will focus on information that is provided on the warrant plans

Conversions

• Schedule 2 to regulation 4 provides definitions of what constitutes a conversion.

• Examples in guidance to regulation 4

• Regulation 12 sets the standard to be achievedFor structure “so far as is reasonably

practicable”

Certification of Conversions

One alteration certificate required

Case 3: Building is to be altered and use changed but not a conversion

One conversion certificate required

Case 2: Building is to have use changed, which is a conversion, but no construction work but loading implication for example.

Two certificates required: alteration

and conversionCase 1: Building is to be converted and alteration works undertaken

Liabilities & Risk Management

Audit item AB2B

Auditors are required to check that appointments are being made on the basis of a realistic assessment of risk and that contractual terms and conditions have been introduced to manage the risk.

Guidance Note 6 – Responsibilities & Liabilities

Completion Certificates & Form Q

Building Scotland Act 2003 Section 17 (1) After the completion of the work or conversion in respect of which a building

warrant has been granted, the relevant person must submit to the verifier a completion certificate certifying:

(a) that the work was carried out …… in accordance with the building warrant, and

(b) …….the building as constructed complies with building regulations

(c) … the building as converted complies with building regulations.

“……SER is satisfied that the vast majority of Approved Certifiers and Approved Bodies are doing a good job and that the public can have confidence that the scheme is delivering improved levels of safety. Most items that have been identified in this report as being deficient, whilst important, relate to secondary structure and low risk situations”

EXTRACT FROM SER AUDIT FEEDBACK REPORT

OCTOBER 2009

Administration

Staff

• Dr Sue Doran – Head of Certification• Dr John Littler – Manager Registration Schemes• Oliver Ricketts – Registration Scheme

Administrator

Applications

• Completed on-line – supporting documentation uploaded

• Completed form printed off for signature• Administrative checks carried out • Assessed by 2 members of the SRB• Further information requested or interview

arranged – where required• SRB makes recommendation to the SER Board• SER Board makes final decision

Annual renewal

• Renewal automatic on payment of annual fee• Prompt sent by e-mail – 2 months before

renewal due• Opportunity to update details

5 year renewal

• Update of declared levels of experience and competence required – prompt sent by e-mail 3 months before renewal due

• Where the member has been audited and, in the case of an Approved Certifier, has made their CPD returns, renewal is automatic on payment of the annual fee

• If no certificates issued during 5 year period a completely new application is required – prompt sent by e-mail 3 months before renewal due

Admin/Technical support

• Contact via admin@ser-ltd.com or by phone

• Changes to certificates• Linking of certificates for amendment to warrant• Changes to Approved Certifier/Approved Body• Queries

Scheme Documentation

• Scheme Guide• 6 Technical Bulletins• 10 Guidance Notes• Available for download from the SER website• Issued in hardcopy to all new members of the

scheme• New issues and revisions circulated to all

members electronically

Suspensions

• Audit outcome letter sets out what the member needs to do in order for SER to consider lifting the suspension. Usually:– Submit revised procedures in writing– Attend an interview with members of the SRB

• All suspended members are offered a meeting with a member of the SRB

• SER informs Building Standards Division (BSD)• BSD informs affected Verifiers

Suspensions

• The interview panel makes a recommendation to the SER Board

• SER Board makes final decision• SER informs BSD of reinstatements. • BSD informs affected Verifiers• A follow-up audit is usually carried out after

reinstatement

Planned improvements to the web site

• On-line facility for linking certificates for amendment to warrant

• 1-click payments• Auto-fill for 2nd and subsequent stage certificates• FAQs

Liaison with other organisations

• BSD• SABSM• Other Scheme Providers

Complaints & Disciplinary Procedures

• Published as part of the Scheme Guide and also separately on the web site

• Conduct Panel – decides whether there is a case to answer

• Disciplinary Panel – decides whether the rules of the scheme have been broken, and if so makes a recommendation on the sanction.

Statistics - Applications

As at 30 September 2011, since November 2004• 678 applications to be an Approved Certifier

have been processed of which 49 were rejected• 403 applications to be an Approved Body have

been processed of which 8 were rejected

Statistics - Queries

• Each week the administration staff deal with around 125 e-mails and phone calls from scheme members, applicants, building control officers and clients

Continuing Professional Development

“The systematic maintenance, improvement and broadening of knowledge and skills, and the

development of personal qualities necessary for the execution of professional and technical duties

throughout your working life.”ICE 3006A

The Building (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2004. Section 36(2) (e)

that, in relation to members of the scheme, regard must be given to

“…their knowledge, experience and understanding of the role and responsibilities of certifiers.”

SER CPD Required Standard

• Provide and annual return in standard format

• Minimum of 20 hours each year

• Directly relevant to certification activities

Guidance Note 7

Return Assigned To Two SRB

Assessors

Approved

Failed To Meet Standard

(Approved with reservations)

Refer to SRB

Not Approved

Invited to discuss with member of

SRB

If 2 years running

Further Information

SER Monitoring Returns

4346794(21%)

327 (75%)

2009

43751165(15%)

356 (81.5%)

2008

435510113 (26%)

307 (70.5%)

2007

TotalNot Submitted

Not Approved

Failed to meet the required standard

ApprovedYear

Common Problems

• CPD Not relevant to certification role

• Insufficient information to assess relevance (learning outcomes)

• Too much information on non relevant CPD

• Lacking in variety

• Same CPD two years running

SER Additional Guidance

• NCE / Journal General Reading• Training / Mentoring/Lecturing• CDM / Safety Training• IT / Software Training• SER Audits• Sustainability• SUDS / Flooding• Work Based Learning

Refer to 2009 Feedback Report

ICE mandatory CPD introduced 2011

• Two year period(year 1 DAP followed by PDR in year 2)

• 10% random selection each year• No prescriptive time

“Enough to develop and maintain the professional knowledge, skills and competence that you need”.

IStructE mandatory CPD introduced 2011

• Be able to demonstrate continuing competence

• Members now expected to undertake at least 90 hours CPD over a three year period

• Random auditing commencing in 2012.

Some Issues under consideration

Is 100% monitoring of CPD returns on an annual basis necessary?

Is it sufficient for only one member of SER to undertake the assessment?

Can we utilise the mandatory returns being made to the Institutions?

Can we link the scope and time requirements to individual workload?

Should the time frame be extended to average the number of hours over a

period of several years?

SER - THE FUTURE

1. To embrace England & Wales2. Wales/Northern Ireland3. Widening Scope4. Efficiencies5. Training