Security Project Questions and Answers The following are frequently asked questions and answers generated from the seven regional meetings SFD and FEA held throughout Wyoming in September and October 2015.
Procurement Procedures Q: Is there a priority list to be remedied? A: No, the 8 elements have the same expectations for being addressed, no one element is more critical than another. The methodology of condition scoring is somewhat different vs. that of security terminology; all security scores below a 5 need to be addressed. Q: Is it okay to use District contracts or do we have to use State Contracts? A: Yes, the use of District contracts is acceptable but State Contracts are encouraged. Some of the projects are larger scope and dollars so the use of the District / SFD contracts on the SFD web site could help expedite the Directors Authorization Letter (DAL). Q: Can the Districts do a bulk purchase for materials? A: Yes, the statewide procurement services can be utilized to get better price points. Q: Can districts bundle proposals for element remedies in a school or across a district at one time? (e.g. all classroom locks or two‐way radios for the district) A: Yes, that is the intent and a preferred method of submitting invoices. Q: Are Districts required to do the assessed security items? A: This is not a mandated action. The security initiative is a legislative Statewide project to address a prioritized process per SF0057 Enrolled Act No. 89. Sixty‐third General Session 2015. It is an accepted responsibility that we all have a role in making our educational buildings as safe as possible. Q: Have the security standards been officially adopted by the School Facilities Commission? A: October School Facilities Commission meeting of 2014. Q: Is the State’s goal to bring each of the 8 identified elements for 2015‐2016 to a score of 5 at each building? A: Yes, that is the intent of the money and resources spent in this assessment. There may be situations where an “alternative” solution would meet the intent of the element and SFD and FEA are available to review those situations as needed. Q: What should districts do if a building has been remodeled / changed building type / or demolished? A: SFD and FEA can review and advise as needed on a situational basis. If the district feels reassessment is needed, please provide building information (e.g. age, square footage) to help us estimate efforts needed for reassessment.
Q: How does a project start and are projects funded to start the DAL process in AIM / CPPM? A: Yes, the projects are ready to start the (DAL) Director Authorization Letter process. The security projects are to be initiated in CPPM with an email to Taner Norton, SFD Project Manager to identify the project number, scope and budget outline. Q: Will Taner be the only person reviewing and approving DALs and pay applications? A: Taner will be the person reviewing and approving all DALs and pay applications as it currently stands. Where possible it is encouraged to consolidated documents to make the process easier for both parties. The review process may be revised as SFD incorporates personnel changes. Q: Can the “proposed” invoices be above the allocated budgets from CPPM? A: Yes, but it is requested that the proposed invoices be as clean and as close the budgeted project value as possible. Q: If and when the security remedies are implemented, would it be possible for a security consultant (e.g. Paul Timm of RETA Security) to come speak at a community forum? A: Yes, if the district thinks that would be helpful to engage and inform the community about the security improvements we will work towards arranging something. Q: If major maintenance funds are used to supplement a project, should the districts use the remedy element code (e.g. D7101) in AiM to identify how the money was spent? A: Yes, that would be the appropriate way to note how and where the major maintenance money was spent. Q: If square footage is added to a building to create a secured vestibule, does that mean it will be considered an enhancement? A: Potentially. SFD will address those situations as they come up as it depends on how the committee will respond. The intent of the remedy for a secured vestibule in this assessment is to be constructed on the interior of the building’s existing footprint. Funding Q: Can a District get reimbursed for materials on hand being used toward the security elements. A: Yes, material invoices can be paid for from the Cap Con account. Q: Can a District get reimbursed for District labor to install the security elements. A: District personnel is paid from the General fund. Q: Was hired labor costs or in‐house labor used in the cost models?
A: The labor costs were based on hired labor rates from RS Means for the type of work to be completed. It is encouraged to use in‐house labor to complete the remedies when possible as the additional money intended for labor can be applied to the remedy. Q: How will the Design aspects of the Security projects be funded? A: The Security cost models do not include any design or soft costs. The funding account is set up with a soft cost element to cover the design aspects. Q: How were the remedy costs developed? A:
For the majority of the condition ratings (condition rating 1, 2, 3, etc.) for an element, cost model relationships were developed based on building size and remedy cost. Data from model elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, a minimum sized school, and a maximum sized school were used to develop "best fit" cost models. Typically costs (on a square foot basis) for smaller schools will exceed costs per square foot for larger schools. From these models, a cost per square foot was determined based on building size. Some element remedies were based on a cost per each item, independent of building size. The unit of cost was indicated on the cost model information sheets provided for elements within this remedy guide.
Q: Were project budgets created by element, building or by district? A: The funding rubric follows the Standards and Guidelines prioritization of each element. The elements funded are considered most critical to be addressed with the available funding. Budgets for each element are referenced in the remedy guide and are based on RS Means cost data. Q: Is there additional money for post‐processing score/remedy changes? A: No, the $9M has been allocated based on the data given to the SFD after district reviews were requested. If additional changes have been made based on district responses after that time, they were not included in the data for dollar allocation. There is contingency money available to be spent at the SFD’s discretion. Q: Can Major Maintenance be used to supplement the Security Remedies? A: Yes, MM funding is allowed to supplement the available funding for security remedies. Q: If my security element project comes in under the budget do I get to keep those dollars and use them to cover other projects within my District? A: The security appropriation is established as a Statewide account for the Standards and Guidelines element remedies that are currently funded (D7101, D7103, D7105, D7201, D7202, D7203, D7204, D7301) for 2015‐2016. The balance of the project element line budget will be monitored as each project is addressed. The Statewide security contingency is intended to cover overages as approved by SFD and any underage will return to the appropriation to help backfill exhausted contingency funds. Q: Is there a timeline for completion and/or does the funding have an expiration date? A: Ideally, the 2015‐2016 round of funding projects would be completed by the summer of 2016, before the anticipated 2016‐2017 round of funding is available and a second round of projects begin. Currently, there is no expiration date for the 2015‐2016 funding. Q: If provided funding only covers a portion of the element remedy (e.g. multiple part elements like D7301), is it okay to not address the “guidelines”? A: It is not required that guidelines are implemented. SFD and FEA would advise that districts implement as much of the remedy as possible with allocated or approved funding. Q: Are both standards and guidelines within the 8 identified elements funded in 2015‐2016? A: Yes, both standards and guidelines are funded for 2015‐2016 and anticipated to be funded in 2016‐ 2017. Q: Is there a method in place to record where “enhancement” dollars are spent versus where “security” dollars are spent? A: SFD will create a way to record where and how the dollars are spent and create a report in case that information is requested by the committee.
Assessment Procedures Q: When assessing Modular buildings how are they scored? A: Modulars on a campus are scored as a classroom of the overall main building and Modulars as a stand‐alone educational facility are scored as an independent facility. Q: Will there be someone coming around after the project is reported to be complete to verify the work? A: We (FEA and Taner N) will make visits as much as possible to help generate remedies in a collaborative nature. The finished Project verification closure is up to the Districts submitting a report of invoices and taking pictures to document completion and to help other Districts achieve their remedies as example remedies are provided and shared. Q: Will the field assessors’ notes (other than the notes in the score sheets) be available to the districts? For example: If an assessor noted 5 exterior doors did not lock (D7103). Will districts have access to additional notes indicating which doors did not lock? A: No, that level of detail from the assessors was not required and additional notes taken were used on an individual basis to assist in generating scores. It is encouraged that districts walk through their buildings and determine what the current conditions are for elements like classroom locks and exterior door locks, as the conditions may have changed since the time of the assessment. Q: Can districts still return score sheet comments? A: Yes, it is encouraged. While the allocated funding for each element will not change, FEA will submit a final data set to SFD and would like all comments incorporated by that time. We request that all score sheet review comments be returned by October 30, 2015. If you do not know how to access your district’s score sheets, please contact Sara Johnson with FEA,
[email protected]. Q: How were administration buildings with classrooms in them addressed? A: If the building was classified as “Educational” by the State, then any of the 8 remedies required would have funds allocated. If the building was classified as “Administration” by the State, then there would be no remedy funds allocated for the administration or educational portions of the building. SFD and FEA can review buildings on a situational basis. If needed, a follow up security assessment will be completed. Please send email request for any additional assessments. D7100 Series – Locking Systems/Hardware Q: Why wasn’t D7102‐Classroom Door Inside Locks included in this round of funding? Economically, doesn’t it make more sense to install interior locking doors now than to spend money replacing classroom locks that do not meet the intent of this element? A: Statewide there was not enough funding to include this element in this round of funding. If a district wants to use their D7101‐Classroom Door locks remedy dollars toward interior locking hardware, they may do so and supplement the difference in cost with major maintenance funds.
Q: For D7105, are districts mandated to change the locks on expired keying systems? A: Not necessarily. If a building scored a 1 for this element, funding was allocated to replace 100% of locks based off cost model. This element, however, was difficult to score because FEA relied upon the answers from district personnel as patented key systems are not visually identifiable. In some cases, the districts were not aware that their patented key systems had expired at the time of the assessment. If that were the case, the building would not score a 1 and there would be less or no funding allocated. D7200 Series – Access Control Q: For element D7201 – Are entry communication devices (e.g. AIPHONE) needed at entrances to ancillary buildings on a site (e.g. Ag shop)? A: It is up to the district to decide how they want to secure ancillary buildings on a situational basis. The SFD and FEA can review situations and provide advice for solutions as needed. Q: Does D7201 Point of Entry remedy only one entry or multiple points of entry? A: The remedy for this element covers the one singular point of visitor entry. D7206 entry control covers the other points of entry. Q: Does the D7202 Secured Vestibule, apply to all identified points of entry? A: No, D7202 applies to secured vestibule at the main visitor entry only. Q: What kind of secured vestibules are intended for existing buildings? A: The intent is to provide a monitored entrance where the visitor can interact with the staff on the outside of locked set of doors and outside of the weather. The preferred arrangement is to create a vestibule consisting of an exterior set of doors and an interior set of doors, with the interior doors secured/locked. This is considered a Standard for new construction and a Guideline for existing buildings. In any case, interaction with school staff is intended to occur on the exterior side of the door set that remains locked. Each district should assess the main entry points of their buildings. In some cases, it may not be feasible to create a secured vestibule as described. In such cases, each district should review the most effective arrangement to facilitate interaction between staff and visitors. Where creating a secured vestibule, as described, is not possible, the exterior entrance doors should remain locked and all communication and staff interaction should occur outside of the building (outside of the exterior locked doors) to meet the visitor/staff interaction intended by this element. Q: For element D7204 ‐ Is a picture required on the visitor ID badge? A: It is up to the district to decide what they would like shown on the visitor ID badges. Ideally, the visitor’s name and picture would be shown.
Q: Is the software cost included in the D7205 Visitor management software? A: The D7205 software element was not funded but the D7204 visitor management systems are addressed. The intent is to initiate interaction and visitor identification between staff and visitor before entering the building. Q: Why should districts spend money on a partial solution for D7204 when the software for D7205 is not that much more expensive? A: It is up to the district as to how they would like to handle the implementation of D7204 or upgrading to D7205. Although it is not funding in 2015‐2016 or 2016‐2017, SFD is okay with remedy dollars from D7204 being applied toward a visitor management software. The main intent is to initiate interaction with staff and provide visitors with a colored, breakaway lanyard and visitor badge. Q: Does any of the element remedies include the moving of an office in order to address line of site? A: The D7207 Main Office to Main Entry Visibility is not included in this round of funding or the anticipated 2016‐2017 funding. D7300 Series – Mass Communication Q: Element D7301 includes 5 items – Why do some assessor comments indicate they scored based on 4 items? A: Assessors were instructed not to include “Front Entry Communication” in their assessment for this element because it had been covered in elements D7201 and D7202. Q: For element D7301, is there a preferred number of channels/frequencies the two‐way radio personnel should use?
A: There is no “one size fits all” recommendation for number of channels. A small district may be just fine with two channels (e.g. one for security/emergency use and one for facilities personnel use). Typically, the larger the school/district, the more channels they need so that they do not have to listen to the chatter of subgroups (e.g. administrators, custodians, athletics). Whatever the case may be, we recommend that the security/emergency channel be reserved for security/emergency use and not everyday operations.
Q: For D7301, can cell phones and cell phone boosters be implemented in lieu of two‐way radios?
A: No, the intent is to use two‐way radios because personal cellular phones are notoriously unreliable (e.g. poor service area, low battery) and require numerous actions (e.g. unlock phone, press calling icon, enter 10 digits, hit send, wait for response) to reach one individual who may or may not answer the call. District‐issued two‐way radios provide one‐button, immediate communications with an entire group of strategic individuals (e.g. administrators, facilities personnel). Q: For D7301, were repeaters including in cost models? A: No, the of cost repeaters was not included in the cost models. From the assessment process, it would be difficult to determine where repeaters would be needed. Each school or district will have to determine if a repeater is needed in their situation.
