Category Archives: Fix Our Schools

Victoria earthquake an urgent wake-up call

January 15, 2016

The editorial by Benjamin Perrin in the Globe & Mail of January 8, 2016 entitled, “Victoria earthquake an urgent wake-up call” puts forward this scathing review and call to action:

“It is unconscionable that Premier Christy Clark’s government, which is ultimately responsible for the safety of our schools and hospitals and earthquake preparations, has been unable to get this job done. Progress has been lethargic and half-hearted. The Premier needs to make it a top priority, with tight timelines and funding on the table. Her government might look to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for a hand with these major infrastructure investments.”

Perrin points out that, “dozens of schools, attended by thousands of children, are ranked as “high risk,” meaning that their century-old brick-and-mortar construction would collapse like a house of cards, killing and injuring students, teachers and staff if the quake struck while school is in session. Most of the handful of seismically upgraded or rebuilt schools are at full enrolment. Progress on making the others safer is slow – or not happening.”

Publicly funded schools in Canada are a critical element of our society’s infrastructure. All levels of government in this country must prioritize fixing our schools.

Get public schools on the agenda via the federal pre-budget consultation process!

January 12, 2016

Federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s pre-budget consultations provide an opportunity to urge our federal government to prioritize school buildings as critical infrastructure. Please engage in this process by:

Asking questions at the the in-person pre-budget consultation in Toronto this Thursday, January 14 @ 7 pm at St. Margaret’s of Scotland Church, 222 Ridley Avenue (near Avenue & Wilson)
Provide written feedback on Facebook
Provide written feedback via the Government of Canada feedback form
Tweet using the hashtag #pbc16

Here are some bullet points to help make it easy to ask questions in-person or provide written feedback!

Schools must be considered critical public infrastructure in this country. Yet, we’ve allowed publicly funded schools from coast to coast fall into states of gross disrepair.
In Ontario alone – there is $15-billion of disrepair in publicly funded schools, $1.7-billion of which has been identified as urgent and critical by the Ontario Auditor-General.
The Auditor-General has also confirmed that $1.4-billion per year is needed to maintain Ontario public schools, yet for the past five years our provincial government has only allotted between $150-500-million.
When your government was elected in October, you committed a significant increase in infrastructure spending. Premier Wynne was thrilled, stating this will allow Ontario “to do more – and to do it faster!”
My question is: “How will you work with provincial governments to ensure that publicly funded schools across Canada are considered critical public infrastructure and funded appropriately to ensure that the buildings in which children spend six hours each day are safe and well-maintained?”
I recognize that public education is a provincial jurisdiction but the infrastructure funding, policies and approach provided by our federal government can certainly impact how disrepair in public schools is prioritized and addressed by Canada’s provincial governments.

Children deserve more. Let’s Fix Our Schools

January 10, 2016

What we know:

School conditions impact student achievement.
$1.7-billion of the total $15-billion of disrepair in Ontario’s schools is deemed urgent and critical.
$1.4-billion each year is needed to maintain Ontario’s school in a state of good condition, yet actual provincial funding over the last five years has only been $150-500-million.

Our children deserve more. Let’s Fix Our Schools.

When will our provincial government allow all school boards to access Education Development Charges?

January 6, 2016

Our provincial government must take responsibility for the $15-billion of disrepair that has accumulated in Ontario’s schools. The 2015 Auditor-General’s report confirmed that $1.4 billion per year is needed to maintain Ontario schools in a state of good repair. However, actual annual funding in the last five years has ranged from only $150 million to $500 million. This gross underfunding of school infrastructure by our provincial government means that an unacceptable level of disrepair has accumulated in our public schools and will continue to worsen…unless funding solutions are found.

One avenue for new funding sources would be for the provincial government to change O. Reg 20/98, which guides the collection and use of Education Development Charges (EDCs). The existing regulation is now antiquated and prevents many school boards from receiving money from new condo/housing/commercial developments within that board. Furthermore, the existing regulation only allows school boards to use EDC money for purchasing new land – not for building new schools or building new additions or repairing existing schools.

Therefore, in Fix Our Schools’ Submission to the Ministry’s 2016/17 Funding Consultation, we recommended that the Ministry of Education change O. Reg 20/98 so that every School Board can benefit financially from new residential and commercial development within its boundaries; and can use Education Development Charges (EDCs) for repairs, capital projects, or purchasing new land.

All 72 publicly funded School Boards in the province face capital repair backlogs, for a total of over $15-billion of disrepair in Ontario schools. The $11-billion in capital grants to School Boards over ten years that Premier Wynne and her government have committed is simply insufficient to address this issue. New funding solutions must be found. Given the ease with which a provincial regulation can be changed, when are Premier Wynne and Education Minister Sandals going to prioritize changing Regulation 20/98 as a new potential revenue source for many school boards in this province? Certainly, EDCs do not hold the potential to be the complete solution… but any new funding for school infrastructure in this province would be beneficial!

The two million children who attend Ontario public schools deserve safe, well-maintained schools that are conducive to learning, as do the adults who work in these buildings every day.

Auditor-General’s 2015 Report: How disrepair in Ontario’s public schools is assessed

December 30, 2015

We’ve copied and pasted the following section on how disrepair in Ontario’s public schools is assessed from page 13 of Chapter 3 of the 2015 Auditor-General’s report, since there is a lot of interesting information for people concerned with the state of disrepair in Ontario’s public schools:

“In 2011, to quantify the current backlog of renewal needs for all Ontario schools, the Ministry of Education hired a company specializing in asset management to conduct condition assessments on all schools five years and older. The assessments are being done over a five year period covering about 20% of the schools per year. The assessors visit each school and conduct a non-invasive inspection of all major building components and systems (for example, basement, foundation, and HVAC systems).

School portables, third-party leased facilities, equipment and furnishings, maintenance shops and additional administrative buildings are not assessed as part of this exercise. Currently, with 80% of the schools assessed, the Ministry is reporting a total renewal need of $14 billion, $1.7 billion deemed as critical and urgent (i.e., renewal work that should not be postponed due to risk of imminent failure).

An investment of about $1.4 billion per year based on an industry average of 2.5% of the $55 billion replacement value is estimated to be required to maintain the schools in a state of good repair. But actual annual funding in the last five years had been $150 million a year, increasing to $250 million in 2014/15 and $500 million in 2015/16.

The Ministry allocates this funding to school boards based on a percentage calculated by dividing the school boards’ individual needs by the total renewal need of $14 billion. Distributing the funding in proportion to individual school boards’ critical needs should be considered to at least ensure that the critical needs are met.

The assessments made during the first year of the condition assessment exercise are now five years old. Therefore, any further deterioration or repairs that might have been undertaken on those schools over this period have not been captured.”

Auditor-General’s Report: Overcrowding + underfunding = big problems in Ontario schools

December 27, 2015

According to the 2015 Auditor-General’s report, our children’s reality in public schools looks like this:

Over HALF of Ontario schools are at least 40 years old.
Over 100,000 Ontario students are in portables.
1 out of every 10 schools in Ontario is overcapacity, operating at 120% or more utilization.

Yet, our provincial government’s actions have looked like this:

Over the last five years the Ministry of Education has approved only a third of the building projects that school boards have required (to address overcrowding and age).
The Auditor-General estimates that $1.4 Billion per year is needed to maintain schools in “a state of good repair,”. Yet in the last five years, the provincial government has allocated only $150-million – $500-million, amounts that equal only 10%- 35% of what is actually needed.
For the most part, new projects are favoured over repair and renewal of existing buildings, despite evidence that it should be the opposite.
In 2011, the Ministry of Education hired a firm to inspect and assess the conditions of all schools that were five years and older. Total disrepair in Ontario public schools is estimated to be over $15-billion, with over $1.7-billion deemed as critical and urgent (i.e., renewal work that should not be postponed due to risk of imminent failure).
The Ministry of Education allocates funding for school renewal based on an overall provincial formula rather than distributing the funding in proportion to individual school boards’ critical needs. The Auditor recommends changing that.
School boards can raise additional funds by selling schools with low enrolment, but many boards – for a variety of reasons and competing interests – are reluctant to do that.

We need our provincial government to take a leadership role in addressing both disrepair and overcrowding in our children’s schools.

2015 Auditor-General’s report: a synopsis on school repairs falling behind from People for Education

December 17, 2015

The following excerpt is an excellent synopsis from People for Education on the 2015 Auditor-General’s. It was provided in People for Education’s December 4, 2015 E-newsletter

School repair falling far behind

Among the findings in the report, focused on education:

There are currently over 100,000 Ontario students in portables and 10% of schools are operating at over 120% capacity.
Approximately $2.6 billion worth of building projects to address overcrowding are submitted to the Ministry of Education by school boards each year, but over the last five years only a third of them have been approved.
Over 50% of schools are at least 40 years old.
The Ministry of education estimates that $1.4 Billion per year is needed to maintain schools in “a state of good repair,” but actual funding over the last five years has averaged approximately $250 million annually.
For the most part, new projects are favoured over repair and renewal of existing buildings, despite evidence that it should be the opposite
In 2011, the Ministry of Education hired a firm to inspect and assess the conditions of all schools that were five years and older. Eighty per cent have been assessed and the Ministry now estimates a total renewal need of $14 billion, with $1.7 billion deemed as critical and urgent (i.e., renewal work that should not be postponed due to risk of imminent failure).
The Ministry of Education allocates funding for school renewal based on an overall provincial formula rather than distributing the funding in proportion to individual school boards’ critical needs. The Auditor recommends changing that.
School boards can raise additional funds by selling schools with low enrolment, but many boards – for a variety of reasons and competing interests – are reluctant to do that.

To read the full report, click here

To read the Auditor’s press release on infrastructure spending, click here

Open letter to Minister of Education on school repair backlog

December 15, 2015

NDP Education Critic Lisa Gretzky sent this open letter to the Minister of Education on the repair backlog plaguing Ontario schools.

MPP Gretzky states: “Organizations like Fix Our Schools have brought these issues to your attention time and time again” and goes on to say, “the Auditor General’s report makes it clear that years of neglect by your government have left schools across the province in a state of disrepair. Student and families should have access to quality community schools but your government continues to fail to deliver on even the fundamentals. Minister, it’s time to start listening to the Auditor General and fix our schools.”

Disappointing response from Province

December 15, 2015

While Fix Our Schools appreciates a response from the Minister of Education to the letter we sent on October 27, 2015, we were disappointed in its content. Click here to see formal response letter from Minister Liz Sandals.

The tone is dismissive, placating and lacks any urgency to fix our schools. The content is surprising given the recently released 2015 Auditor-General’s report confirmed $1.4-billion/year is needed simply to keep schools in a state of good repair (never mind the $15-billion repair backlog that has been allowed to accumulate under the provincial government’s funding model and watch!).

We found Minister Sandals’ response to be completely insufficient for the following reasons:

She points to a $1.25-billion investment in schools over 3 years via the School Condition Improvement grant as a positive accomplishment. However, the 2015 Auditor-General’s report confirmed that $1.4 billion per year is needed simply to keep schools in a state of good repair. Therefore, the amount that Minister Sandals is highlighting actually constitutes gross underfunding of buildings in which children spend 6 hours each day.
She says, “these historic investments have led to significant improvements in Ontario’s infrastructure.” Minister Sandals fails to acknowledge that under this Liberal government’s watch, the total disrepair in Ontario’s schools has grown to a total of $15-billion – which is surely not a “significant improvement”?
The $11-billion committed over 10 years to school infrastructure is simply insufficient. This funding commitment is earmarked for not only addressing the $15-billion repair backlog but also for building brand new schools and building new additions. As noted in the 2015 Auditor-General’s report, “the province’s current 10-year capital plan for infrastructure spending proposed by the ministries has only about one-third of funding allocated to renewal, and the remaining two-thirds to new projects.” Therefore, only $3.7-billion over 10 years is really allocated to addressing disrepair in Ontario schools. Compare this amount to the existing $15-billion repair backlog and we have a situation where school conditions will continue to deteriorate in our public schools unless new funding solutions are found.
Finally, Minister Sandals doesn’t answer the one question asked in the letter: How much of the federal infrastructure money that is expected to flow to provincial coffers from our new Liberal Federal Government will you commit to repairing and rebuilding Ontario’s public schools?”

Overall, a huge disappointment. We have shared this disappointing response with media contacts, both provincial Education Critics and will be following up with the Province, highlighting the inadequacy of their response, urging them to take the Auditor-General’s report seriously and increase capital funding to school infrastructure in this province immediately.

Auditor-General’s Report: What condition are we striving for in schools?

December 9, 2015

The 2015 Auditor-General’s Report raises the concern that there are no guidelines for the desired condition at which facilities should be maintained. There is also no consistent standard for how Ministries ought to measure the condition of assets such as highways, bridges, schools and hospitals.

A bit shocking that the provincial government has gone so far as to log all the disrepair in schools but has not concerned themselves with setting an actual goal to measure success.

Here is an excerpt from page 11-12, Chapter 3 of the 2015 Auditor-General’s Report: which provides examples of how various Ontario Ministries approach determining asset condition and also provides the example of how Alberta approaches this issue in a more transparent, solution-oriented manner:

Assumptions Vary in Calculating Asset Condition

Ministries generally use the Facility Condition Index (FCI), an industry-standard measure of a building’s condition at a given time, to determine if their assets are in good, fair or poor condition. The FCI is calculated by combining the total cost of any needed or outstanding repairs with the renewal or upgrade requirements of the building, divided by the current replacement value. In essence, it is the ratio of “repair needs” to “replacement value,” expressed as a percentage. The higher the FCI, the greater the renewal need.

However, ministries make different assumptions in estimating their repair needs. In its 2015/16 submission to the Secretariat, for example, the Ministry of Education identified an FCI of about 36% for its schools overall by including its current repair backlog and five years of future repair needs in its calculation. In contrast, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care included its current repair backlog and only two years of repair needs in its calculation, and arrived at an average FCI of 23% for its facilities. Because these two ministries assessed the conditions of their respective assets differently, it is difficult to determine which of them has a higher priority need overall.

For highways and bridges, the Ministry of Transportation takes a different approach in assessing their condition. It classifies its highway pavements and bridges as being in good, fair, and poor condition. Pavements and bridges are considered in good condition if they will not require any rehabilitation work for six or more years. Based on this assessment, the Ministry has classified 77% of the pavements and 83% of bridges that they are responsible for to be in good condition.

In comparison, Alberta uses a government-wide standardized FCI as a common measure to enable ministries to compare condition ratings across facility types (schools, post-secondary institutions, government-owned buildings and health-care facilities). It calculates its FCI using current backlogs and five years of future repair needs.

Alberta has targets for the percentage of facilities to be in good, fair and poor condition for the different sectors, and it reports the actual percentage in each category publicly each year, along with the progress made towards achieving each sector’s targets. It uses the following definitions:

• Good—the facility’s FCI is less than 15%, is adequate for intended use and expected to provide continued service life with average maintenance.

• Fair—facilities with an FCI between 15% and 40%, inclusive, have aging components nearing the end of their lifecycle and require additional expenditures for renewal or refurbishing.

• Poor—facilities with an FCI greater than 40% require upgrading to comply with minimum codes or standards, and deterioration has reached the point where major repairs or replacement are necessary.