School Facility Condition Index
The content in this section is copied from the FCI page of the Parents section of the Ministry of Education website.
Find the most recent Asset Condition Assessment Report for Stratford Central (not yet released by the Ministry) linked at the bottom of this section.
Please note: this assessment report does not include the requirement to make roof structure repairs estimated at $2M. This type of cost would be outside the scope of recommendations the assessors would make. They would only recommend an engineering study, which we had already completed at the time of the assessment. Facilities have entered this requirement into the ministry database along with the engineering reports.
Making sure that Ontario’s school buildings are in a good state of repair is essential for supporting student achievement and well-being. Doing so requires a significant ongoing investment.
The Government of Ontario is committed to increasing the transparency of its historic investments in school infrastructure so that Ontarians can see the importance of this funding and the results it yields over time. That is why the Ministry of Education is ensuring that the most recent results from its School Condition Assessment Program are readily available to the public. Through this program, independent, third-party facility inspectors conduct assessments to obtain data on the current condition of all open and operating schools across the province. The Facility Condition Index (FCI) is derived from the information that is collected through this process.
What is the Facility Condition Index (FCI)?
The Facility Condition Index is a warehouse of data on each and every school’s state of repair. Information on the condition of Ontario schools is gathered in five-year cycles, the first of which took place from 2011 to 2015. The program is currently in year two of its second cycle (2016 to 2020).
How is data gathered for each school?
To get detailed information, the Ministry of Education hires independent, third-party facility inspectors. Each assessment team is comprised of two engineers — one with expertise in building design and construction, and the other with expertise in building systems (e.g., mechanical and electrical).
The inspectors review essential structures and systems for each school building. They also review wear and tear to building interiors.
How does the Ministry of Education determine a school’s FCI rating?
Based on the findings of each school inspection over a five-year period, the ministry can determine a school’s repair and renewal costs. The cost of a school’s repair and renewal needs are then compared against the cost of rebuilding that same school from the ground up. The results of this comparison — fixing a school or rebuilding it — give the school its FCI, which is measured as a percentage.
Example 1: If the ministry estimates that rebuilding a school would cost $1 million, but repairing it would cost $100,000, that school would have an FCI rating of 10 per cent.
Example 2: Alternatively, if repairing that same million-dollar school were to cost $900,000, it would have an FCIrating of 90 per cent.
It should be noted that the ratings are a snapshot in time as of the date of inspection. The renewal needs and FCI rating can vary from the time of assessment for many reasons, such as investments made by a board to address renewal needs since the inspection.
What is the difference between a school with a low FCI and a high FCI rating?
A school with a low FCI rating needs less repair and renewal work than a school with a higher FCI rating.
Why do schools have a high FCI rating?
Ontario has nearly 5,000 school buildings, the average age of which is 39.4 years old. Some of these buildings date back to the 1800s and early 1900s. These schools are a proud part of our province’s heritage, but as you can imagine, the older a building is, the higher its repair and renewal needs will likely be. As a result of Ontario’s aging school buildings, and a legacy of underinvestment in school infrastructure between 1980 and 2003, the average school’s FCI is 28%.
Read the engineering reports related to the structural problems at Stratford Central Secondary School. The reports have been combined into one document with a summary at the beginning, and then the reports following in chronological order.
All reports are from Pow Peterman Consulting Engineers.
The reports included are as follows:
- January 2018 – Summary of 1958 Concrete Roof Slab Review
- October 2014 – Report following review of structural condition of roof framing
- November 2014 – Memo regarding review of recommendations in previous report
- May 2016 – Report following two site visits in April 2016 to review roof slab conditions
- August 2017 – Report from follow-up review of roof slab conditions March 2017
Note: the advice and recommendations portions of the reports have been withheld (MFIPPA s.7).
Enrolment Projections and Accommodation Review Data
Enrolment Projections and Accommodation Review data inform planning and decision-making across our organization. These reports show information such as historic enrolment trends in Stratford, projected enrolments for the Stratford area, school capacities, and utilization of space in schools.
15 Year Enrolment Projections
Enrolment projections inform planning and decision making activities in all departments. They form the basis of the annual preliminary accommodation report to the Board and various Ministry reporting requirements.
New projections are produced in years when new census data is published. Otherwise, generally, updates to the projections are performed every 2 to 3 years, between census years, and may be based on significant accommodation adjustments and changes. The most recent census occurred in 2016.
Total elementary projected enrolments decline slightly over the next 5 to 6 years. Beyond the 6-year period, district elementary projections indicate a slight increase but do not recover to current levels until 10 years out. Total elementary enrolment between 2015/16 and the projected 2025/26 year shows a resulting increase of 5 students. Reviewing individual planning areas reveals similar trends; however, South Huron indicates a slight decline beyond the 10-year period.
Total secondary enrolment continues to decline with a moderate increase during the last three years of the projection. Total secondary enrolment between 2015/16 and 2020/21 declines by 387 students. Looking out to 2025/26 a cumulative decline of 550 students is projected. Reviewing the secondary planning areas individually, similar trends are derived in the long term with some variation between planning areas in the short term. The most significant decline is noted for the Central Huron planning area. Significant decline is also noted for the Stratford Northwestern SS planning area.
Preliminary Accommodation Analysis Report for 2017/2018
Declining enrolments remain the Board’s biggest financial challenge. As enrolment declines, so does revenue. As a result, the Board must continue seeking efficiencies in its operations to free up financial resources which facilitate the achievement of Board goals.
The Ministry of Education’s priority focus on “right sizing’’ of schools, and related grant changes is pushing boards in the direction of consolidation. Changes in school accommodation must remain an option in the Board’s plan to ensure that it is fiscally responsible and accountable and provide the best possible programs for its students.
Staff continues to explore partnerships and alternate use of empty space in an effort to sustain the viability of vulnerable schools. In rural areas, municipalities are likely the best, if not only, partnership opportunity. Board staff will continue to explore these possibilities through our annual municipal partnership meetings that provide opportunities for exploration, as well as discussions that have occurred regarding shared library space.
Staff will continue to explore innovative approaches to program delivery at secondary schools to sustain the quality of the secondary school experience for students as enrolment declines.
Staff did not recommend any schools for further review at this time. Please read the report below.