Hitching a Lift

Building Design, 26 September 2003

The NHS’s Lift programme is promising to improve healthcare facilities nationwide, but will it deliver? asks Lia Hattersley.

Ill health is bad enough, but what can really tip the balance for sick people is if they feel let down by their healthcare. The inconvenience of outpatient visits, hours spent in dingy, uncomfortable waiting rooms and poor communications between different areas of patient care can be extremely distressing.

Having spent a year in a wheelchair myself, I know how depressing it is to be ferried from one hospital appointment to another, wrestling narrow corridors and heavy swing doors. In my case I also had a new baby to care for but my GP’s surgery had no established route for arranging help from social services. I found the whole system pretty arbitrary and chaotic.

Things could be set to improve however, as the government is trying to address problems like mine as part of the new nationwide NHS Lift programme (Local Improvement Finance Trusts). The whole country has been divided into 42 areas, each targeting priority schemes set to revolutionise local healthcare facilities.

As well as commissioning new buildings, the NHS is bringing more practitioners, such as dentists, school nurses, alternative therapists and social services under one roof with GPs and establishing better working practices between them. With new modern facilities, GPs will be able to oversee simple operations and diagnostic procedures such as endoscopies and ultrasound scans, relieving pressure on hospitals and saving patients from having to travel so much.

Communities in west London will be among the first to benefit from £47 million of investment under the new programme. Architects Buschow Henley and Penoyre & Prasad are working together on seven projects, with the first three of these due to start on site next year. The projects are Wandsworth Bridge Primary Care Centre in Fulham, Thelma Golding Health Centre in Hounslow and Cloister Road in Acton.

The practices are part of a consortium, Building Better Health, which has secured preferred bidder status for the Ealing, Hammersmith & Fulham and Hounslow Lift.

Like other consortiums around the country, it is awaiting the results of its bid for other Lifts, due in coming weeks. Nationally, 16 Lifts have reached preferred bidder status, with one scheme in the East London & City Lift, having reached financial close.

Craig Linnell of Buschow Henley, project architect on the Fulham project, sees Lift as a great opportunity for the practice’s “people-centred” design approach and explains how architecture will be central to plans to enhance local surgeries.

“We want to make the process of being cared for as easy as possible,” he says. “To use light in wonderful ways, to have double-height waiting spaces, lots of colour and to make the buildings much more visible in the community.”

While Linnell acknowledges that costs and time are tight, he says that by applying the same overall structural grid and design of clinical areas to all three projects, money has been made available for better quality finishes, internal gardens and extra public space.

“For all clinical spaces there are NHS standards, but there aren’t standards for things like how the building deals with physiological and emotional well being,” he says.

By concentrating on what Linnell calls the “in between” spaces the architects want to make the buildings calming and uplifting. They aim to provide a simple and legible layout with as few obstructions as possible and space to ensure privacy.

While it is too early to measure their achievements, the architects’ enthusiasm to respond to patients’ needs appears irrepressible.

“It’s amazingly refreshing,” says Linnell. “It feels good to be working in the process of making people well.”

But others working in the healthcare design field raise concerns about Lift, which if valid suggest Buschow Henley and Penoyre & Prasad may find themselves working against the odds. Even if they achieve their goals, these projects may not be typical of what is built nationally if the process is as vulnerable as some believe.

At a recent seminar, entitled Lift Going Up or Going Down?, the Architects for Health group, most of whose members are involved in Lift, discussed these problems. Ann Noble of Ann Noble Architects, the group’s chair, explains that with a general election in the offing, the Lift programme is driven by a political timeframe that is already impacting on design.

“The waiting process is very long, the design process is very short,” she says.

Indeed, others frustrated by the timeframe include Sunand Prasad of Penoyre & Prasad as he expressed in Building Design earlier this month [see Design teams in a hurry for Lift, BD September 5]. Noble describes how lack of time is even pressurising some consortiums into choosing unsuitable sites because these are certain to be made available quickly.

Each Lift shortlists three consortiums which then work up three sample schemes, before a preferred bidder is announced and the other schemes are ditched, meaning some architects may not be properly recompensed.

“Everything else is thrown away,” says Noble. “It’s a most irresponsible way of wasting resources. I think it’s quite upsetting.”

Noble is also concerned that the public sector user groups that help brief designers and select schemes may have limited architectural understanding. She worries they will make decisions based on the “wow factor” rather than appreciating that qualities such as sufficient air changes and provision of private space are vital in healthcare design.

Crucial to Lift is the idea of harnessing private money to improve public healthcare. While the government has invested an initial £200 million through a specially set up body, Partnerships for Health, a further £800 million will come from the private sector, with more investment due as new projects are announced. As each Lift company is jointly owned publicly and privately, relationships are complex.

Tim Challis, a senior Partnerships for Health official, accepts that timeframes are short, but argues that later projects will benefit from what is learnt today.

Month by month, Lift areas are now choosing the consortiums they will be contractually obliged to work with for at least the next 20 years. Important relationships and standards are being set. With so much at stake for NHS patients, surely the timeframe must be set to a process-led agenda rather than a political one, if something truly worthwhile is to come out of Lift.

This article is reproduced here by kind permission of Building Design.

NHS Estates Patient Environment Workshop

Jane Riley, Director of Policy & Development, NHS Estates

Leeds, 24 June, 2003

Recent and current research presented at this workshop included several presentations by Roger Ulrich which, with one exception, are currently available as published papers.

In introducing the workshop Jane Riley, Director of Policy & Development, NHS Estates, gave an overview of the current context within which the patient environment is being considered. She has kindly made this available to AfH to publish on our website.


INTRODUCTION

1. Thank you Bill. Good morning ladies and gentlemen.

2. I would like to echo Bill’s thanks to you all for coming. When the NHS Plan was launched three years ago this week, the “patient environment” seemed like a new idea, a wholly revolutionary concept. Many at the time dismissed it as a gimmick, flavour of the month, something that would soon pass.

3. Looking round the room at the people who are here today, both on the platform and in the audience, I believe we have the evidence that it is not a gimmick to want to provide a decent environment for staff and patients. It is not a fad to want to make the most of our investment. It is not a passing phase to want to create buildings we can be proud of. Today I can see many of you who have worked for many years to demonstrate the value of good design. And many of you have been an essential part of the progress we have been able to make in just three years. I would like to thank you all for your commitment.

WHAT HAVE WE ACHIEVED SO FAR?

4. Later, we will be talking about what more we can do, but I think it is worthwhile us considering what progress we have been able to make so far.

5. Many of you here today will be familiar with our programmes to deliver a better patient environment. The NHS Plan sets out a 10 year programme for investment in the NHS. It is the first government strategy to put such a great emphasis on the environment for patients and staff. It was built on the results of a consultation exercise with patients, the public and staff. They told us that they wanted decent buildings in which to work and to receive their care.

6. We have responded by producing a design action plan – raising the profile, developing partnerships, providing support to the NHS, and improving the processes.

7. In delivering that action plan, we are very fortunate to have the considerable support of a range of Design Champions. Our Ministerial Design Champion, Lord Hunt, was wholly committed to raising the standards of design, and I have no reason to think that his replacement will be any less committed. Each Trust has been asked to nominate a Design Champion at Board level, and we have held events to support them. And HRH Prince Charles has done us the honour to be the NHS Design Champion.

8. In addition, we have forged a range of partnerships, for instance with CABE, the Prince’s Foundation, the King’s Fund and many individuals through the establishment of the Patient Environment Steering Group of which a number of you are members.

9. The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment has set itself the agenda to make design count right across government. We welcome the involvement of CABE. Indeed for over two years now we have had a joint initiative with CABE, making use of their enabling service to help NHS Trusts work through the complex issues that design raises. Although CABE has rightly been critical of some of our hospitals, I am glad to say that they are seeing more examples of hospitals that they like. Jon Rouse, CABE’s chief executive, recently publicly praised the process by which one Trust had developed its design specification, and the results that they had achieved. That Trust is Southern Derbyshire Acute – and I am delighted to see many members of the team here today.

10. We have produced a range of documents for the NHS. Better Health Buildings sets out a strategy for the NHS. The AEDET – our design evaluation tool – was launched in 2001, and is now being refined to reflect feedback from users. We are adapting it for primary care. This tool aims to help non-specialists understand design decisions and to explain what they want to see in a building.

11. We are also responding to feedback from the NHS about the type of guidance people want. As a result, we have set up a Modernising Guidance project, with the steering group chaired by Professor Ray Moss, whom many of you will know. Ray is joined by a number of NHS project directors and policy makers who are keen to help us ensure that we provide the support that the NHS needs.

12. We have also set up the Design Review Panel, which brings a wide range of experts – with more years of expertise than I think some of them wish to admit to – to help NHS Trusts evaluate designs for our new hospitals. Feedback from the NHS has been good. People want to talk about design. They want to get it right. And we have to work out how can help them.

13. One such initiative is the work of the Design Brief Working Group. The Group has produced the “Advice” document – the chairman of that group, Richard Burton, is here today, along with Kate Trant who did much to pull it together. Richard is now a design adviser to NHS Estates and is currently looking at another publication, on the environment to support those who are suffering.

14. I was very heartened to see at the weekend that there is yet more evidence of the important of a good environment, in the perhaps unlikely covers of JK Rowling’s new Harry Potter, the Order of the Phoenix. In this book, she explains that whilst the Ministry of Magic is buried deep underground, the wizard hospital cannot be so buried – for health reasons – a clear indication that the wizarding world also recognises the importance of a natural environment.

15. We must translate our ideas into reality. To that end, we have in NHS ProCure 21 a construction programme that focuses more on design quality. That programme has identified integrated supply chains with which the NHS can work. Those chains include leading architects, such as Nightingale Associates – I know Richard Mazouck is here today. We are working closely with the author of the report on which the Government’s Achieving Excellence programme is based, Sir John Egan, now President of the CBI. We are also working with the RIBA and Architects for Health on an initiative to raise standards and bring greater numbers of architects into the healthcare field through accreditation, mentoring and other support.

THE ENVIRONMENT FOR CHANGE

16. Unprecedented changes are taking place within the NHS landscape. They present us with an exciting opportunity to make innovative improvements to often outdated hospital accommodation. The drive for modernisation has never been more determined than under the current programme. We are supporting the delivery of a massive redevelopment of the NHS’s infrastructure. We are working to deliver the largest building programme in the NHS. Within 10 years, over a quarter of our healthcare buildings will have been replaced or upgraded.

17. I know that some of you will feel that some of the most recent examples of hospital architecture are not the leap forward we had all hoped. There is more to do. Today, we are talking about how we can make that move forward. I believe we have the environment for change. I also believe we can demonstrate that the environment is a significant tool in the clinician’s armoury, in fighting disease and distress.

18. The advent of Foundation Hospitals and the rise in public expectations will both have major impacts on the way we operate. Citizens will be more involved and have a greater say in the running of their local health services. They will increasingly expect care to be delivered in well-designed, managed and maintained environments. This rising demand has stimulated considerable debate on the kinds of environments most appropriate for healing. It has raised issues about the environments for staff, to help them do their jobs well and to give them the most supportive environment we can.

THE EVIDENCE COUNTS

19. We are starting to see more and more facilities where design is making a more obvious contribution to better clinical results. NHS Estates is working with the King’s Fund to make their initiative available across the country. Many of you will be familiar with the work of the King’s Fund’s Enhancing the Healing Environment initiative. If ever it was true that “a picture paints a thousand words” it is true of the results of their work with the NHS.

20. I cannot stress enough the importance of having sound evidence on which to base our arguments if we are to combat those who see “the price of everything and the value of nothing”. And today is very much about that evidence, and how we can use it.

21. NHS Estates and our colleagues and partners in bodies like the Modernisation Agency and the National Patient Safety Agency are aiming to improve decision-making in the NHS by identifying best practice. In our discussions with NHS Trust Design Champions, one of the most frequently heard requests is for evidence with which to argue for a design and an environment that reflects these aspirations. I look forward to the time when we do not have to argue the case for good design.

22. Today’s workshop is an opportunity for you to hear about some of the latest research. And for you to share your reactions, and to give us your thoughts on how we can take it forwards.

BEFORE WE MOVE ON……

18. Before we move on, I should like to say something about someone who has devoted his entire career to making the environment fit for purpose. The purpose of supporting patients and staff.

19. Whilst it is difficult to pick out one person when there are so many people here today who have made such significant contributions to the debate and to driving forward change, I should like to say a few words about our chairman today – the chairman of NHS Estates – Bill Murray. Bill will be embarrassed by this, but I feel safe with so many witnesses here.

20. I must say that Bill has been an example to us all. By profession, Bill is an engineer. In addition, for some years he has been one of our leading General Managers, a figure greatly respected by his peers. Someone who knows a considerable amount about how you create the environment, and what happens if you cut corners. Bill has recently spent a considerable amount of effort in developing the new James Cook University Hospital for Middlesbrough. Bill retires from the Trust later this year, but I hope that he will continue to work with us. Given his life-long commitment to this area, I felt it was appropriate today to pay tribute to Bill’s contribution.

21. As I said, we have much more to do. I am sure that today we will be given much to think and talk about. Please let us have your views on how we can continue to shape the programme, and take it forward.

22. I hope that you enjoy your day.

[ENDS]

Chairman’s Report 2002

  1. We have had another busy and active year and our membership continues to increase. The Executive meeting has been held monthly to try to benefit from as many as possible of the opportunities as are offered to us.
  2. AfH has been actively working to get better sponsorship (but always welcomes any suggestions or approaches) to provide AfH with some paid support to:
    • free up more time for executive committee members to be more proactive in developing new initiatives and to be involved in more activities on the society’s behalf
    • make the outcomes of our events and endeavours more available to a wider audience
  3. This year AfH is represented on the NHS Estates Design Knowledge Group and NHSE Patient Environment Group. The Knowledge Group Information Network is ambitious and has the potential to be very good in terms of making design and research guidance widely available.
    • We have also participated in four of the Prince’s Foundation Workshops with Trusts undertaking PFI schemes – Pinderfields Hospital Wakefield, Ryhope Tyne & Wear, Salford and Lewisham
    • We sent six display boards to Japan for exhibition at the 31st Healthcare Engineering Association of Japan Annual Conference and Exhibition 12 – 15th November 2001. Contributing practices included: Avanti Architects Ltd, Devereux Architects Ltd Michael Hopkins & Partners, Nightingale Associates and Tangram Architects and Designers Ltd
    • I attended the third GUPHA Forum in Genoa on behalf of AfH, making and renewing many useful contacts. “The focus of current activities of GUPHA is ‘Global Hospitals 2050′, which will outline the global healthcare environment including hospitals, in the year 2050.” GUPHA is an International Forum of Academics looking to the future and sharing research
    • Paul Mercer and I had an interesting meeting at the RIBA with Richard Hastilow and colleagues with the Health Client Forum – attempting to rationalise the roles and relationships of the two organisations
    • Dermot O’Reilly and Paul Mercer met with Richard Hastilow and senior representatives of a number of the Royal Colleges and the NHS Confederation, Modernisation Agency with the purpose of attempting to bring together the theoreticians, the practitioners and the designers in the alliance. Again an interesting meeting was held and we look forward to a follow-up
  4. Our interest in furthering the education of young architects, and raising awareness of healthcare design was developed by holding a two-day workshop at the RIBA (Interbuild) Conference in Birmingham. On each day three groups of part III students were briefed by the client for the Sandwell LIFT Initiative. “A brief introduction to some general planning principles (and encouragement to challenge them) led to a debate about the service content as expressed in the existing project specification. Each group considered the design implications and potential for one of the three projects, each of which was expected to be a sample scheme in Tranche One of the LIFT programme. Members of AfH worked with each group and many architects attending the RIBA conference watched and participated in the process. The groups all came up with different approaches and different levels of design solution. The amount they achieved in one day was impressive. At the end of each day the students presented their work to the Client representatives and an impressive panel of critics. The event was a great success. Thanks are due to Richard Nugent and his team from the PCT, to the members of AfH who facilitated and participated in the workshop and made the event a success, and not least to those practices who released their staff for the day: Abbey Holford Rowe, MAAP, Mason Richards, Nightingale Associates, Peerless + Noble Architects, Percy Thomas Partnership, Swanke Hayden and Tangram Architects and Designers Ltd.
  5. Our year’s programme of events has been very successful and well attended. This year’s Reform Club Debate, “This house believes that a good architect and an informed client are all you need for good design”, took place on 28th February 2002. The motion was proposed by Health Planner Gavin Maxwell, seconded by Richard Burton of ABK, and opposed by the RIBA President Paul Hyett, seconded by Stan Hornagold, of Hornagold and Hills.On 23rd April one of our members Peter Senior, the Director of Arts for Health at Manchester Metropolitan University, who recently received the Chevalier des Arts et des Lettres medal from the French government for services to French healthcare, addressed us on the creation and development of the whole arts in healthcare movement at the RIBA.Dermot O’Reilly organised a visit to Swindon and Marlborough PFI Hospital. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Dermot, who is retiring from AfH for his work on the Executive Committee and to wish him luck in sorting out the Welsh Assembly.On 11-12th June 2002 the RIBA Conference, the Design Workshops at the NEC in Birmingham when the part III students’ event and the Sandwell LIFT Briefing took place.NHS Estates Design Workshop was held at Skipton House on 28th June 2002. NHS Estates invited a diverse selection of groups and individuals to the session. The purpose of the session was broadly to inform NHS Estates of the scope and aspirations of some of the healthcare environment initiatives which are currently in train around the country. Fifteen different groups, including Architects for Health, made presentations. We reported a doubling of membership over the last two years, an increasingly successful and adventurous events programme, links with healthcare architects across the globe and aspirations to become engaged with education and research. Presentations from MARU, the NHS Modernisation Agency, CABE, the Kings Fund and many others were useful in setting out current plans and allowing a quick view into associated worlds. NHS Estates have promised to collate the presentations from the day and to arrange further sessions along the same lines.On 17th September 2002 an A+E [Clinical Services] Services Event was held at the RIBA and new approaches to the intractable problems of A&E provision were considered. The main speakers were:
    • Karen Castille, Director, Emergency Services, NHS Modernisation Agency
    • David Cheesman, Director of Emergency Care, Whipps Cross University Hospital
    • Doug Wantling, Director of Estates and Facilities, also at Whipps Cross

    The Panel Members were:

    • Mr John Heyworth, President of the British Association for Accident and Emergency Medicine
    • Susanne Senhenn, GP in practice in Epsom
    • Lynda Holt, Chair of the A+E Nursing Association of the Royal College of Nursing
    • Aidan Smyth, Health Planner with the Northern Ireland Health Estates Agency

    On the 5-7th November 2002 “The Way Ahead” Conference was held in Solihull and a paper was given by Richard Burton and supported by AfH.

    The NHS Estates/IHEEM Conference – Lunchtime Open Discussion on Health Associated Infection, chaired by Paul Mercer, was held on the 12th November 2002 and attracted some thirty delegates. Susan Wainwright of Tangram Architects gave an introduction to her work at the Epsom General Hospital Unit, South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre (SWELOC). Research in USA at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York, covering among other things: careful theatre design with an inner sanctum of cleanliness around the table, additional theatre suits for surgeons and others.

  6. Former AfH Chair Ray Moss reports on the Howard Goodman Bursary as follows: “One of the most important things I have learned over the past couple of years is that the speed of an endeavour like this is governed by the committee that meets least frequently. That said, and building on last year’s progress report, I am happy to tell you that a positive outcome is within our grasp. The amount of money raised is now considered sufficient, by our advisors, to make a confident start and, as I mentioned last year, Imperial College has indicated its willingness to accommodate us. Putting these two things together it is proposed that the official launch of the project and the advertisement inviting expressions of interest in the post of Research Fellow will happen in December of this year. Following this it is hoped to make an appointment early in the New Year but please watch the press for further details. This is a crucially important time in preparing for the future success of the work and I would be glad to hear from anyone who has an interest in contributing. Hopefully the next report will come from the unit itself!
  7. Future events include:
    • The AfH Northern branch which will be holding an event at CUBE (Centre for the Understanding of the Built Environment) 113-115 Portland Street, Manchester commencing 6.00 pm on Tuesday 10th December 2002on the new Manchester Royal Infirmary PFI Scheme. There will be presentations by Helen Jackson of the Central Manchester NHS Trust, Ken Schwartz of Anshen Dyer and Michael Davis of Catalyst Healthcare.
    • Next year’s Reform Club debate is on February 27th 2003. The motion is still being agreed.
  8. We are very pleased with what we have achieved and would like to record our thanks to all those who have helped to make our events a success, including the AfH Executive, our sponsors Polyflor and HBG Construction, as well as our event sponsor for this evening Ege Carpets, and our hosts, the Richard Rogers Partnership. We are delighted to report that we have received five nominations for the four vacancies on the Executive Committee.

Ann Noble
November 2002

James Chapman: PFI and Design Quality

The following is a reprint of a paper given by Mr James Chapman F.R.I B.A., R. James Chapman and Partners, Architects, Manchester. At the Design Quality Forum on Primary and Intermediate Care, R.I.B.A. London, 1998.

PFI and Design Quality: Architects for Health Occasional Paper No 98/102

The Minister, in his introduction, stressed the need for partnership within the Health Service and that the Government were reviewing the efficacy of PFI within the healthcare sector, for smaller schemes batching and sharing were being considered as alternatives to the mechanisms for the larger projects, as these were taking time to develop and evaluate.

Before the last election in 1997 the President of the RIBA said:

    “Politicians and Architects share one vanity – the belief that their actions can make this a better country in which to live.”The Institute called on the next Government to:

  • establish procurement procedures using a quality based selection procedure
  • reform this procedure – the Private Finance Initiative to make quality of design a key criterion
  • create a post of Government Architect to work With the Treasury to set standards of Government procurement
  • train the civil servants responsible for building procurement
  • procure major public buildings through competition,but no reference was made to understanding the meaning of quality and added value.

What is PFI, the Private Finance Initiative?

Simply it is a way for Government to buy vital services for public use.

A way to transfer ownership of assets and direct provider of services, to become a purchaser of those services from the private sector.

An apolitical concept, to achieve an improved service at a ‘better` price.

What does quality mean?

In the White Paper December 1997, The New NHS Modern Dependable

The Prime Minister in his introduction states, “For the first time the need to ensure that high quality care is spread throughout the service will be taken seriously. National standards of care will be guaranteed. There will be easier and swifter access to the NHS when you need it. Our approach combines efficiency and quality with a belief in fairness and partnership.”

Six key principles underlie these changes:

Principle 5 states – ‘to shift the focus of quality of care so that excellence is guaranteed to all patients, and quality becomes the driving force for decision-making at every level of service’. I cover the process later in this paper.

In the section on ‘driving change in the NHS’, the Paper states that quality and efficiency must go hand in hand throughout the service Everyone who works within the NHS should take responsibility for working to improve quality. This must be quality in its broadest sense, doing the right thing at the right time and this must apply to the procurement and briefing process as well as the operation of the units. The objective being to provide a quality experience for patient, staff and visitor!

The report continues to focus on quality stating that, ‘quality standards will be central to the new local service agreements…

What will be the funding mechanisms?

The intent is that NHS money will flow around the system to support both quality and efficiency, thus

  • Allowing clinicians to influence the use of resources by aligning clinical and financial responsibilities. An intimate relationship between user and designer, a chance to build on innovation.
  • Funding of major capital programmes through PFI, expansion of public/ private partnerships. A need to understand and make the most of the process.

Is the PFI system working for the larger projects?

There are 4 major projects on site:

Norfolk and Norwich
Carlisle
Dartford
South Bucks

All these projects have taken a long period in the gestation phases and there has been considerable criticism in the professional and technical press of the procurement process. The need for the facility management skills is untried and many schemes have undergone significant changes in personnel and companies, as a consequence of understanding the provision of the wide range of services required by the NHS.

If we are to consider batching for the delivery of intermediate care, as described earlier by the Minister, then we need to study what has happened in the education sector and learn from those successes.

The accompanying tables indicate some of the changes in responsibility and additional risks if PFI is to be implemented. The loss of professional design skills from the Health Service has emphasised these differences and the need to have defined project sponsors with commitment and knowledge cannot be undervalued. (The presentations earlier today have demonstrated the benefit of this approach resulting in quality solutions, particularly those with dedicated individuals who understand the service and process and have clear quality goals).

Procurement route to manage the process OJEC notices 4 stages

  • Pre Information notice, purpose to advise of your intention to do something (1 year)
  • Restricted Procedures notice, define services and need (37 days)
  • Shortlist and tender (40 days)
  • Contract award notice

Independent professional advice

PFI requires changes to the normal method for appointing consultants.

There will be a need for financial, technical and legal advice to support the in house team.

Project Management

PFI projects are complex, you will require the right person with the necessary experience at the beginning of the project.

If this person is in-house, look for continuity for the duration.

Look for flexibility in approach as well as design. The solution PFI negotiations are complicated.

In the attached diagram 1 I have compared the traditional design stages with the equivalent PFI stages

How do you achieve and monitor design quality in PFI projects?

A significant challenge for the in-house team, as you are not only seeking an immediate design service to understand the need of your clinical team and establish the brief together but to provide an ongoing service to run the completed facility.

Within the client team there ought to be an experienced Estates Director supported by a consultancy team of quality and experience who are responsible for preparing the brief.

The PFI contracting team and their Consultants will be required to respond to this brief and make a competitive bid, which will be evaluated by the client team. This evaluation process is a complex activity and relies on a close understanding of the need and the service required.

See diagram number 2

At Norwich, quality of design and form was an objective established with the planning authority and taken further by the Royal Fine Art Commission, both the form and use of materials were established before the bids were made. This helped to. reduce uncertainty of quality at the bidding stage.

Determine quality issues for users, at Norfolk and Norwich this involved the creation of departments and room loaded sheets as part of the detail design, and a powerful in-house facilities management team. If you keep quality with the user at this stage the trust minimises risk.

As one of several initiatives to understand quality standards, NHS Estates and the Prince of Wales School of Architecture have begun a three year research programme on design quality.

Building Magazine has been running a series of articles on the ‘success’ of PFI and its approach to quality. Concern has been expressed in the delayed publication of guidance aimed at improving design quality. This work was considering not only the aesthetics of design but also the design could become an integral part of the process. See the attached diagrams.

My PFI experience both inside and outside the Healthcare sector confirms that the sooner design advice is gained and quality standards established, the, more likely the project will achieve the objectives. It is not easy, as With other advice it costs money and you need high calibre input.

Design competitions are an ideal starting point for many projects. The competitors should receive a fee, the winning bidder could pay this fee. (it happens elsewhere in Europe).

Well run competitions enable innovation to be brought back into the Health Service and should invigorate both the building and quality of care.

In summary the public sector client must see design as critical, and we designers and our teams must demonstrate the added value.

RJCA 13-04-98

References

  1. The New NHS Modem Dependable
  2. Opportunities in Intermediate Care NHS Anglia and Oxford
  3. Can the NHS afford the Private Finance Initiative BMA December 1997
  4. Future Premises for Primary Care RIBA/NHS Estate December 1996
  5. Building for the Future RIBA April 1997
  6. Building 20-02-98

QUOTATIONS

There is a central quality which is the root criterion of life and spirit in a man, a building, or a wilderness. This quality is objective and precise, but it cannot be named.
Christopher Alexander – ‘The Timeless Way of Building’

Quality is never an accident, it is always the result of intelligent effort. There must be a Will to produce a superior thing
John Ruskin

All excellence is equally difficult
Thornton Wilder

Quality, above all, is about care, people, passion, consistency, eyeball contact and gut reaction. Quality is not a technique no matter how good.
Tom Peters – ‘A Passion for Excellence’

To fight against the shoddy design of those goods by which our fellow men are surrounded becomes a moral duty.
Nikolaus Pevsner

Mammoth hospitals, built like dreary office blocks on a devastatingly function basis, depress the spirits, however good the healthcare.
HRH The Prince of Wales – in a ‘Vision of Britain’


DIAGRAM 1

PFI STAGES DESIGN STAGES
1 Establish Business Need Create Project Team
2 Appraise Options Site Appraisal
THE BRIEF
3 Business Case and Market Sounding Concept Design
Capital Cost Estimate
Outline Design
4 Create the Project Team
5 Deciding Tactics
6 OJEC Notice Design Team Selection
7 Pre-Qualification
8 Shortlist
9 Revisit and Refine Original Proposal
10 Invitation to Negotiate
Information on Capital Costs
Refined Design Brief
(including functional content and
Design Presentations areas)
Criteria for Evaluating Design
EVALUATE PROPOSALS
12 Section of Preferred Bidder
FULL BUSINESS CASE
13 Negotiate Final Close
14 Award Contract Design Review
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
15 Contract Construction Management and
Contract Facilities Management
Develop Detailed Designs
Check Design Meets Brief
Check Building Meets Design
In Use Evaluation Post Project Evaluation

GOOD HOSPITAL DESIGN SHOULD:

  1. CREATE A USER FRIENDLY, HEALING ENVIRONMENT
  2. REFLECT APPROPRIATE HEALTH BUILDING STANDARDS
  3. BE EFFICIENT
  4. BE FLEXIBLE
  5. BE ECONOMIC
  6. FIT INTO ITS SURROUNDINGS
  7. SPECIFY APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTIONAL STANDARDS
  8. PROVIDE A SAFE AND SECURE ENVIRONMENT
  9. PROVIDE EASY ACCESS

DIAGRAM 2

DESIGN QUALITY IN PFI PROJECTS: PFI STAGES

Information Required by: Trust Bidder
OUTLINE BUSINESS
CASE
Brief
Design Concept
Capital Costs
INVITATION Facilities/Design Output Specs
Function Content
Schedule of Accommodation
Site Data
Performance Specs
Capital Costs
INTERIM SUBMISSION Scheme Concept/DCP
Functional Relationships
Sketch Impressions
FINAL SUBMISSION Model
1:200 Key Areas
Elevational Treatment
EVALUATION Comparison with OBC
Facilities Specification
Specification/Materials
Risk Reduction
Value for Money
Life Cycle Costings
SELECTION
FULL BUSINESS CASE Capital Costs
Functional Content
Schedule of Areas
DCP, 1:200 plans
CONTRACT
DESIGN
DEVELOPMENT
1:50 Loaded Plans
Elevations
Interior Schemes
Final Operational Policies
Agreed Layouts
DESIGN BUILD
PROCESS CHECKS
Programme Overview
Specifications
Materials Samples
Production Drawings
Site Visits

CRITICAL FACTORS FOR SUCCESSFUL PROJECTS

  • SPONSOR
  • PROJECT STRATEGY
      NEEDS AND OBJECTIVES
      TIME AND COST
      MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE
  • SELECT PROCUREMENT ROUTE
  • INDEPENDENT PROFESSIONAL ADVICE
  • MANAGE PROJECT