Page 2954 - Week 07 - Thursday, 7 June 2012

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

---

The final scores for October 2011 to March 2012 period have not yet been determined. The scoring for this period is to be agreed upon at the next Joint Consultative Committee meeting which is scheduled for 1 June 2012.

Housing ACT—maintenance services
(Question No 2264)

Ms Bresnan asked the Minister for Community Services, upon notice, on 2 May 2012:

(1) In relation to the contract for the Provision of Total Facilities Management Services between Spotless P&F Pty Ltd (Spotless) and the Commissioner for Social Housing Volumes 1 and 3 and given that at pages 67, 93 and 119 of Volume 1 and pages 10, 24, 39, 44 and 45 of Volume 3 of the contract, Spotless has committed: to conduct publicly advertised information sessions for preferred tenderers; market test the schedule of sub-contractor rates each year, including publicising the public tender process in a way that gives all suppliers a reasonable opportunity to be aware of the procurement activity; achieve greater than 5 percent decrease in average expenditure on maintenance per dwelling; provision of superior management of quality assurance including; reduction in the average value of responsive work orders through better monitoring of sub-contractor works; channelling additional funds towards planned rather than responsive works; reduction in the number of BIF’s and NCN’s; undertake a comprehensive review of SOR’s to achieve significant cost savings and to review SOR’s annually; implementation of planned maintenance management and delivery programs that achieve World’s Best Practice for maintenance expenditure, optimal asset performance, reliability and availability, extended asset life and predictable maintenance budgeting, have publicly advertised information sessions for preferred tenderers been undertaken in each year of the contract; if not, why not.

(2) Has Spotless undertaken a public tender process during each year of the contract to market test sub-contractor rates and have such processes led to a reduction in sub-contractor rates.

(3) What has been the average expenditure on maintenance per dwelling, over the life of the contract.

(4) If a 5 percent decrease in average expenditure on maintenance per dwelling has not been achieved, how has the Directorate performance managed Spotless to require them to meet agreed target levels.

(5) How has the Community Services Directorate assessed the veracity and robustness of the Spotless quality assurance arrangements, including their efficiency and effectiveness.

(6) Did Spotless undertake a comprehensive review of SOR’s in the first year of the contract and has this also been undertaken in each year subsequent and how has the Directorate assessed whether this has led to cost efficiencies and what the dollar value of these cost efficiencies was.

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video