Your attention is likely to be drawn at least seven years out to hand back for specific PFI contract issues. Yet from an internal control perspective, it is likely that you will start to identify, publish, and promote a commissioning and mobilisation plan for the return of the asset with about two years remaining.
Accordingly, with two years out you are likely to focus on the strategic issues relating to how you will use and operate the asset.
At one year out your focus is likely to turn to the tactical arrangements in place to ensure an appropriate service delivery model will be in place when required.
Finally, within the year of transfer, your attention will turn to operational arrangements to bed in the re-commissioning of the asset within your own service line, management team, and delivery methodologies.
You will also notice here, references to option appraisal in order to ensure that appropriate financial value for money decisions are being made.
This option appraisal needs to be undertaken to comply with a green book and that the approach allows you to recognise and compare value for money position which is capable of auditing. You certainly shouldn’t underestimate preparation time to ensure that continuity of service remains and that existing building users see no practical difference in terms of the operation and how they use the building.
Over this timeline the two key areas for consideration should be in respect to the asset and how it is impacted by handover and the service continuity provision, to ensure that building users receive the same standard of service and support.
In terms of ownership, it is worth noting that this may not be straightforward.
For instance, the facility could be a shared asset such as a blue light building shared between different emergency services. In this instance who has overall control. How do the interests of the other party differ or are considered in the change solution?
The transferring asset could also be a school which will have governing body agreements within the internal managing arrangements. The school could be with an academy trust and any school agreement setting out the responsibilities between the authority and the trust will obviously change. What does this mean, and what measures need to be put in place to ensure continuity of operation?
If the transferring asset is a hospital or medical centre there may be other third-party interests or leases and licenses that require alteration such as a ward being used for a private patients unit for instance.
Therefore, in summary, you will need to ensure that any legal review will consider the ownership position and the impact that this may have for other operators and users, or third parties, is known and catered for on hand over.
Also, early confirmation of the asset funding position will be required to help you set out the various commissioning and mobilisation plans that will need to be worked through.
If you are struggling to recognise the corporate intention for the handover at senior management or cabinet level, then I would suggest that alarm bells should be ringing.
In terms of service continuity, please don’t run down the clock to the point that you have no flexibility to determine an alternative best value operational position.
PFI contractors will be glad to offer you alternative arrangements, in terms based on the same service delivery, which whilst not as a PFI arrangement, is likely to contain many of the characteristics of the previous model.
Whilst there may be some advantage in this, I would be particularly worried that authority might not have the capability of staffing levels to determine an alternative service provision, it may prove expensive, and particularly as the PFI contractor recognises you have little choice but to agree a solus position.
