Debated in Parliament on 14 Oct 2024.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development (a) what are the key performance indicators used to measure the success of Integrated Facilities Management (IFM) contracts entered into by Ministries; (b) how have IFM contracts improved the efficiency and quality of facilities management services; (c) whether there are provisions for contract price adjustments or cost escalation clauses to renegotiate these contracts when circumstances change; and (d) if not, what is the process for renegotiating IFM contracts.
Integrated Facilities Management (IFM) seeks to achieve higher quality and more efficient facilities management (FM) services by integrating various services, such as maintenance, cleaning, security and landscape management, under a single contract.
Typical key performance indicators used by Government Procuring Entities (GPEs) to measure quality and efficiency of FM services include response time for resolving issues, energy and water savings and manpower productivity.
With IFM contracts, FM companies can avoid duplicative efforts between functions. They can also deploy workers to handle a wider range of tasks, instead of having separate systems and teams for different FM functions. IFM also brings about better coordination across various FM services, so that service requests can be managed in a more timely and responsive manner.
Government procurement guidelines allow GPEs to insert provisions in their contracts to adjust the Schedule of Rates, if they are found to be grossly excessive or inadequate after a tender is awarded. GPEs, such as Housing and Development Board and JTC Corporation, have clauses in their IFM contracts that allow the awarded Schedule of Rates to be updated to fair market rates where needed or cater for regular reviews to assess the need for such adjustments. FM companies may also raise rate adjustment requests and accompanying justifications to their respective GPEs, who will assess these requests accordingly.
PAPERCUTS