2. Panel Participants
Marty Abrams, Program Co-Chair
John Wisniewski, CDF, Program Co-Chair
Stan Polmateer, Program Creator
Carl Thurnau, PE, SED Liasion
Judith Johnson, Superintendent (retired),
Peekskill City SD
3. Origin of the Program
• Began in 1999
• To-date, completed 30 Assessments
• Variety of Districts Served
oLarge districts – Peekskill City SD, Yonkers
oSmall districts – Canastota, Panama CSD
oBOCES – Monroe BOCES I, Nassau BOCES
4. Details of the Team
Tailored to districts’ needs and goals
◦ align them with team members' particular strengths,
customizing each Assessment
Team includes:
◦ Seasoned, experienced facilities professionals
◦ Certified Directors of Facilities (CDFs)
◦ NY State Education Department, Office of Facilities
Planning staff member (including Carl Thurnau, PE)
◦ Director of Strategic Planning and Development
5. Details of the Site Visit
A Team of Education and Facilities professionals
travels to district
tour the buildings and grounds
interview district stakeholders
The Team works closely with the district's
facilities management staff throughout the
Assessment to discuss and review standards and
best practices.
6. The Analysis
Conducted using accepted standardized criteria and
data (comparative indices, work standards, systems
analysis, safety and health requirements, managerial
practices, and so on)
General areas of analysis include:
• Range of facilities services • Energy management
• Budgeting • Safety and security
• Organizational structure • Health and environmental
• Staffing levels issues
• Work planning • Expectations of
• Capital planning stakeholders
• Space requirements for • Quality of service
facilities functions • Relationships with school-
• Equipment needs based and community
• Automated systems organizations
7. The Result – A Road Map
The end product = comprehensive set of
recommendations for an improved,
systematized, efficient and cost effective facilities
management organization
Designed to help each unique school district
benefit from efficient and effective facilities that
support an inviting environment for teaching,
learning, and sports programs and community
activities
9. Case Study: Peekskill City SD
• Why a Facilities Assessment with SBGA?
• Post Assessment - What recommendations
implemented?
• How Program benefited the district?
11. The view from the Ground to
Shovel Ready
GOAL: Safe, Sound, Contemporary
Schools that address the needs of all
students
Facilities that support the opportunity for
all students to learn to high standards
12. The Process
• Citizens committee
• Budget analysis
• External expertise
• Staffing Analysis
• Staff interviews
• Data Collection
• Bonds for Capital Projects
13. Continuos Improvement
vs. Stagnation
Costs vs. Savings
Energy Efficient environments
Safe environments
Staff competencies
Field Conditions
Aligning facilities to program needs
Reactive vs. Anticipate
14. The Options: Repair, Renovate,
Restore, Replace
Repair - upgrade technology systems
Renovate - the fields, science labs, carpeting,
media center, auditorium
Restore - Artifacts
Replace - roofs, a building, a pool, lockers,
carpets, boiler equipment, security systems
