New South Wales Department of Education and Communities
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010
Florence Ramstead Award Report
The educational leadership, authority
and accountability of principals in New
South Wales public private
partnership schools
Kerry Poole
Principal, Ironbark Ridge Public School
New South Wales, Australia
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010
Florence Ramstead Award Report
The educational leadership, authority and accountability of
principals in New South Wales public private partnership
schools
CONTENTS
Page
Executive summary
3
1. Overview of the research study
4
2. Background information
4
3. Research questions
6
4. Research methodology
6
5. Findings
7
6. Implications for leadership
9
7. Recommendations
10
Acknowledgements
11
Bibliography
12
Appendix
13
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
2
Executive summary
This research explores the role of the principal in public private partnership schools in
New South Wales. It focuses on the ability of principals in these schools to exercise
authority and to determine if the project, as is often claimed, frees principals to
concentrate on the educational leadership of their new school community.
The study surveyed principals of New South Wales and Victorian public private
partnership schools followed by school visits and interviews. Three public private
partnership schools in South Australia were also visited. Interviews were conducted
with key departmental personnel in each state Department of Education, in New
South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. The Hon John Aquilina MP, who provided
the political impetus for the project in New South Wales, was also interviewed.
Data collected confirmed the complexity of the role of the principal in establishing a
strong community of learners in new schools. Principals of public private partnership
schools report benefits in having well built and maintained schools; however, they
question the extent of the concept of a ‘partnership’ as each of the main players:
Departments of Education, State Treasuries, the private consortium and school
principals; have different goals.
Perceived difficulties in exercising educational leadership and balancing authority and
accountability, can be overcome by Departments of Education using the knowledge,
skills and understanding of current principals of public private partnership schools,
both to induct and to support, principals subsequently appointed to these schools.
Principals’ implicit and explicit knowledge, developed over the length of the contract
(now seven years in New South Wales) should be used to inform any subsequent
public private partnership projects. A starting point could be the development of a
profile of that explains the role of the principal, drawn from the expertise of the
experienced public private partnership principals. Of benefit could be the organisation
of a national conference of public private partnership principals and department
administrators to share their experiences and the understandings gained.
The context of principals’ work in all schools, including public private partnership
schools, is complex. The Department’s current focus on the assets management
aspects of the role and responsibilities of public private partnership principals does not
recognise the complexity and range of accountabilities stretching beyond assets
management. This research indicates that a broader and more co-ordinated
departmental approach is needed when public private partnership schools are
established that recognises this complexity and also makes better use of the project’s
potential for maximising student enrolment in local public schools.
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
3
1.
Overview of the research study
This research was undertaken by Kerry Poole, a recipient of the State Leadership
Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award, awarded by the then New South
Wales, Department of Education and Training, Deputy Director-General, Schools.
This study focused on the educational leadership, authority and accountability of principals
in the New Schools Public Private Partnership Projects in New South Wales. The research
findings can been used to develop a profile of effective skills and strategies for school
leaders in these schools. This will have particular significance as the first cohort of public
private partnership principals retire or seek promotion and are replaced by principals new
to this type of school.
The study also explored the implementation of public private partnership models in South
Australia and Victoria in order to provide information which may assist the Department of
Education and Training to improve and refine the model further in New South Wales.
2.
Background information
Since the 1980s there has been a world-wide trend towards private sector investment
in public education (Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, Guaqueta, 2009). The rationale for
public private partnership schools in education is based around a political imperative
to shift financial risk away from the Government whilst providing core public services.
The Report of the Executive Board of the Education International, 2009, found that:
‘Public private partnership schools were firstly promoted strongly under the
banner of bringing value for money... and higher efficiency in running quality
public services, as well as risk transfer and innovation. Today, the emphasis
seems to be more on affordability and value for money.’ (Page 11)
This is supported by the New South Wales Treasury’s post implementation review of
the public private partnership in December 2005
‘...schools were delivered some two years earlier, on average, than would have
been possible had traditional public sector funding been used.’
There are a number of models of public private partnerships in education as
summarised by Latham (2002) and Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, Guaqueta, (2009).
(Appendix1). In each of the three Australian states included in this study an
infrastructure services model has been used:
‘The private sector finances, designs and constructs public schools following
standards established by the Department of Education and also provides
cleaning, maintenance, repair, security, safety, utility and related services for
buildings, furniture and equipment until 2032. Private operators receive
performance-related monthly payments. At the end of the contract, the
buildings will be transferred to the public sector.’
Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, Guaqueta, page 81, (2009)
Public private partnership school projects are relatively new in Australia. The building of
schools through the New Schools Public Private Partnership commenced in New South
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
4
Wales in 2003. A total of 20 public private partnership schools were completed by 2009.
Similar schools opened in Victoria, South Australia and Queensland in 2010, with more
school openings planned for 2011. In New South Wales the consortium in partnership with
New South Wales Department of Education and Training comprises Axiom, Spotless as
utilities manager and Hansen Yunken (builders of primary schools) and St Hilliers (builders
of high schools). The project is underwritten by the Bank of Scotland.
The Hon. John Aquilina, Minister for Education from 1995 to 2001, researched public
private partnership schools in the United Kingdom, becoming convinced that this was a
viable option for New South Wales, particularly to enable the provision of public schools in
high population growth areas. In an interview, he stated that the New South Wales
education budget was not adequate to cope with the growth pressures for new schools.
This form of public private partnership contract provides the infrastructure but even more
attractively a 30 year guarantee for provision of security, cleaning and maintenance;
aspects that the education budget always struggles to keep pace with in existing schools.
Although the main driver of the public private partnership project was financial, Hon. John
Aquilina, expressed the belief that being principal of a public private partnership school
with security, maintenance and cleaning managed by a utilities company, administrative
demands on principals would be reduced but not their ‘control’ of important decisions
impacting on their school. This reduced administrative burden would free the principal to
concentrate on ‘educational provision’.
A joint New South Wales Secondary Principals’ Council and New South Wales Primary
Principals’ Association survey (2008) found that principals believed that multiple levels of
accountability intensify their workload:
‘Schools now have much more complex systems of communication within
Department of Education and Training directorates and regions. This complexity
has had its greatest impact on the principal, a person expected to understand,
implement and be accountable for all policies and requirements in the school.’ New
South Wales Secondary Principals’ Council Position Paper (2009) The Role,
Authority, Leadership and Accountability of the Principal, page 4.
The impact of the infrastructure services model of public private partnership on the role of
the principal has not been evaluated in Australia. It could be argued that as the point of
interface between the private consortium and the public education system, principals of
public private partnership schools have an even more complex administrative task in terms
of authority and accountability than their colleagues in non-public private partnership
schools.
This research study explored the practical experience of principals in public private
partnership schools in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia in order to gather
information that could be used to profile skills and strategies that these principals have
found to be effective in their role as educational leaders in public private partnership
schools. Given that in many of these new communities, private and catholic schools are
also being established, it may be argued that the public private partnership is positioning
public schools to ensure ongoing viability by helping to maintain and extend quality
educational environments.
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
5
3.
Research questions

What evidence exists to support Department of Education and Training claims that
principals of public private partnership schools will be able to concentrate on
educational leadership to a greater degree than their counterparts in non- public
private partnership schools?

What evidence exists to suggest that the gap between accountability and authority
is narrower for principals of public private partnership schools compared to those of
non- public private partnership schools?

Is there evidence to suggest that public private partnership schools positively
position public education for market share in population growth areas and thus
make public schools more viable in the long term?

How have South Australia and Victoria used a public private partnership school
model to improve viability of school communities and strengthen the link between
principal accountability and authority?
4.
Research methodology
Applied research techniques provided the basis of this research using qualitative
ethnographic tools including:





National and international literature review of public private partnership projects;
Surveys of New South Wales and Victorian public private partnership principals;
School visits and interviews with principals in public private partnership schools
were conducted; eight in New South Wales, two in Victoria and three in South
Australia;
Mr Mathew Lundgren and Mr Andrew Major of the Victorian Department of
Education and Early Childhood Development and Mr Ross Treadwell of South
Australian Department of Education and Children's Services were interviewed;
Interviews conducted with the Hon. John Aquilina MP and Mr Alastair Hunter,
Deputy Director General, Finance and Infrastructure, New South Wales Department
of Education and Training.
Principals, public private
partnership schools: NSW,
Victoria, South Australia
– Deputy Director-General, Finance
and Infrastructure, NSW Department
of Education and Training
– Director Capital Programs and Asset
Services, South Australia
Department of Education and
Children's Services
– Contract Administrator, Partnerships,
Victoria in Schools, Department of
Education and Early Childhood
Development
Hon. John Aquilina, MP
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
6
5.
Findings
Every principal surveyed or interviewed in New South Wales, Victoria and South
Australia agreed that the benefits of being the principal of a public private partnership
school outweighed any concerns or frustrations that they experienced. In all systems,
the relationship between individual principals and their associated Public Private
Partnership Units within the Departments of Education was overwhelmingly positive.
The same could not be said, however, for the relationship of the principals with the
utilities management companies that tended to be the arm of the consortium with
which they most closely dealt. There is a clear issue of trust: principals generally do
not trust the consortium to act in the best interests of their school communities. There
is a widespread belief that given the opportunity, the utilities management company
will cut corners. For this reason, principals felt that they needed to spend a
considerable amount of time monitoring the compliance of the utilities management
company.
5.1
Are principals of public private partnership schools in New South Wales able
to concentrate on educational leadership to a greater degree than their
counterparts in non- public private partnership schools?
The general consensus amongst principals surveyed and interviewed was that the public
private partnership does have potential to free principals from assets management
concerns.
The provision of an on-site handyman or manager who deals with minor maintenance
issues was viewed as the most positive aspect of the public private partnership. It is ironic
that in New South Wales, it is not a requirement in the contract for there to be a site
handyman and the threat of the withdrawal of that person was often pointed out to
principals by the Public Private Partnership Unit as a reason for not complaining,
especially when site managers took leave and were not replaced.
Key findings from interviews with New South Wales public private partnership principals:



89 per cent believe that the project supports the role of the principal as an
educational leader
85 per cent felt that being principal of a public private partnership school enables
them to devote more time to leading teaching and learning than in a non-public
private partnership school
38 per cent believed that the commercial focus of the project sometimes got in the
way of educational decision making; however 37 per cent thought that it did not,
while 25 per cent were undecided.
How principals responded to this last question seemed to be largely dependent on their
personal relationship with the utilities management company. There is a perception,
supported by observation, that procedures are not applied consistently across all schools
and that some schools are treated differently with respect to, for example, project
approvals and the co-funding of projects.
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
7
5.2
Is there a gap between authority and accountability for principals of New
South Wales public private partnership schools?
The following Department of Education and Training accountability areas are
consistently raised as matters of particular concern to principals:
1.
2.
3.
Occupational Health and Safety: difficulties in compliance due to
contractual specifications not matching Department requirements including
Emergency Management Plan compliance.
Finance: initial issues with access to funds during the school set-up phase;
ongoing issues with audit, procurement policy, Treasury Managed Funds
and Curriculum-Based Furniture and Equipment purchases and
replacement.
Assets Management: policies and procedures do not take into account the
contractual organisation of public private partnership schools.
In each of these areas many principals indicated that there was a lack of clarity and
consistency in the application of procedures to public private partnership schools. The
Deputy Director-General, Finance and Infrastructure, Mr Alastair Hunter also
highlighted this as an area of concern.
Key findings from interviews with New South Wales public private partnership
principals



86 per cent indicated that the lack of understanding about public private
partnership in other directorates of the Department made their work more
complex and time consuming
50 per cent believe that as principal they had the same authority in a public
private partnership school as in a non-public private partnership school in all
areas of accountability, however 50 per cent disagreed or were undecided
67 per cent found that being a principal of a public private partnership school
added an additional layer of bureaucracy to negotiate.
Surveys and interviews with experienced private public partnership principals in NSW,
Victoria and South Australia confirmed that while accountabilities are the same for
principals in all schools, they believe that their authority in key areas is not as clear.
5.3
Are public private partnership schools positioned positively to maximise
market share in population growth areas?
Enrolment growth has been strong in all public private partnership schools, indicating
positive strategic positioning of these schools; however, principals do not believe that
being a public private partnership school has anything to do with strong enrolment growth.
Most principals interviewed believed that their communities enjoyed the new facilities and
were happy that they were well maintained. They reported that their communities were
unfamiliar with the public private partnership concept and were more likely to be interested
in the quality of teaching programs on offer.
There is little evidence to suggest that New South Wales Department of Education and
Training is working systemically or strategically to alert prospective parents about the
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
8
opening of new schools. This is left largely to principals during a short establishment
period. Principals see that there is potential for maximising the positioning of public
schools, as opposed to private schools, in their areas. However, much stronger, wellfunded marketing programs would be required.
5.4
Do we have anything to learn in New South Wales from the Victorian and
South Australian models?
In Victoria and South Australia, the departments of education have taken a proactive
approach to informing the community of the establishment of public private
partnership schools. This includes dedicated, informative websites and regular media
releases with updates such as announcements about the appointment of principals.
Principals of public private partnership schools are appointed at least two terms prior
to the opening of the schools in Victoria and considerably longer in South Australia.
This provides a more appropriate lead time to establish the new schools, hold
community meetings and establish a community presence for the school. In Victoria,
principals have flexibility in selecting appropriate furniture and equipment for their
particular schools.
In South Australia current public private partnership schools replace or amalgamate
existing schools. This model of community consultation and input into purpose built
school design could be further explored should situations arise in New South Wales in
which a number of schools in an area are no longer sustainable in terms of enrolment
or have reached the point of requiring maintenance beyond the means of the system.
Other findings
A partnership implies that all parties in the relationship have a common goal. This is
never likely to be the case in the New South Wales public private partnership project.
The Department sees the public private partnership schools project as a means of
establishing schools in areas of rapid population growth and ensuring their
maintenance over the length of the contract. The Public Private Partnership Unit aims
to make sure the utilities management company adheres to output specifications to
satisfy Treasury. The private consortium has a financial imperative to maximise
financial returns for its investors.
Principals are primarily educational leaders. They feel compelled to spend substantial
time ensuring the contractor meets its contractual obligations. As the Hon. John
Aquilina pointed out, each of the “main players” have different interpretations of how
the relationship should work.
6.
Implications for leadership
Principals of public private partnership schools in New South Wales are uniquely
placed to engage in effective, strategic leadership of new school communities. The
New South Wales New Schools Public Private Partnership Project has the potential to
substantially free the principal from many of the aspects of organisation, in particular,
security, cleaning and maintenance to enable them to concentrate on leading teaching
and learning in their school communities. Current principals of public private
partnership schools have developed skills and understandings that can be
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
9
documented and form part of the induction for newly appointed principals of public
private partnership schools, thus enhancing the leadership capacity of newly
appointed principals.
Currently, those who make decisions about public private partnership contracts in
New South Wales are experts in the field of assets management and tend to see the
operation of the schools from this filtered perspective. The reality for principals,
however, is that their leadership crosses multiple directorates in the Department, all of
which impact on the ability of principals to lead their schools effectively. Contradictory
advice, for example, in Occupational Health and Safety compliance issues and
unclear advice, such as in the case of finance, results in confusion and mistrust. Time
taken by principals to seek clarity and compliance with Department policy in the
organisational domains takes valuable time away from educational and strategic
domains.
The current apparent independence apparent independence of Department of
Education and Training Directorates has contributed to principal frustration. This,
however, could be overcome if principals were given a formal voice along with Public
Private Partnership Unit personnel in the regular meetings with the consortium.
Principals’ knowledge and experiences as educational leaders could be used to
inform future public private partnership contracts in New South Wales to work towards
achieving greater effectiveness.
7.
Recommendations
That the New South Wales Department of Education and Training:
1. develop a profile of useful skills and understandings of the public private partnership
project using the expertise of experienced principals in partnership schools
2. develop an induction program for newly appointed public private partnership
principals that is delivered with input from experienced partnership principals
3. organise meetings of all public private partnership principals four times a year
4. include principal representatives in regular meetings with the consortium
5. demonstrate national leadership in this field by co-ordinating a national conference
for principals and Public Private Partnership Units, drawing on the specific expertise
of personnel in each state
6. recognise the complex and pivotal role of the principal in establishing a new school
by ensuring that it is a non-teaching position
7. assist new public private partnership schools to market the schools prior to opening
by providing assistance from the Corporate Communications Directorate and
Regional Promotions Officers.
That the Public Private Partnership Unit (Infrastructure and Finance Directorate):
1. consult with principals to evaluate the New Schools Public Private Partnership
Project to identify educational outcomes and inform future contracts
2. develop in consultation with partnership principals, consistent, clear, compliant
policies and processes in conjunction with all relevant Department directorates,
especially Occupational Health and Safety and Finance, and with principal input to
ensure that public private partnership principals have authority over the aspects of
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
10
school accountability for which they are responsible and to ensure transparency
and consistency of application.
That the New South Wales Primary Principals’ Association and Secondary
Principals’ Council:
1. better utilise existing Department consultation mechanisms to ensure that
principals of public private partnership schools have a voice in decisions that
affect their schools
2. advocate, on behalf of public private partnership principals, with the
Infrastructure and Finance Directorate to emphasise the importance of tri-level
reform in relation to the public private partnership schools project
3. support leadership sustainability for new principals in public private partnership
schools by advocating with the Department to ensure that an effective induction
program is undertaken utilising the skills and knowledge of experienced
principals from these schools.
That the public private partnership principals:
1. develop “Guidelines for newly appointed public private partnership principals”
which can form part of the principals’ induction program
2. establish collegial support networks across all public private partnership
schools, both nationally and between schools in the same region
3. urgently and strongly request that they have representation at regular meetings
with the consortium and that they have input into any future contracts in the
project
4. work strategically with the Corporate Communications Directorate of the
Department to develop effective marketing and set-up strategies for future
public private partnership schools
5. actively encourage the development of newly appointed principals in public
private partnership schools by providing professional support and advice in
order to enhance leadership capacity and strategic planning so that demands
of educational management and leadership are balanced
6. work with the Department to build effective learning environments in new
schools that allow educational leaders to focus on developing school cultures
with student learning outcomes at their centre.
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge the generosity of the principals in public private
partnership schools in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia who gave freely
of their time and shared their expertise and knowledge. I would also like to
acknowledge the willingness of personnel in each state’s education departments for
their openness and willingness to participate in this research and The Hon. John
Aquilina for his time and ongoing commitment to public education in New South
Wales.
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
11
Bibliography
Caldwell, Brian J. (2003) A New Vision for Public Schools in Australia. Paper presented at
Economic and Social Outlook Conference, Melbourne
Dresscher, Walter and Harris, Bob (2009) Public Private Partnerships in Education. Report
to the Executive Board of Education International
Edsall, Sally (2003) Initial Report on PFI Projects in England, Scotland and Canada.
Report to New South Wales TF Council
Hall, David, de la Motte, Robin, Davies, Steve (2003) Terminology of Public-Private
Partnerships (PPPs). Public Services International Research Unit
http://education.qld.gov.au/seqschoolsproject/
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/management/infrastructure/partnerships.htm
http://www.educationworks.sa.edu.au
Latham, Michael (2002) Achieving Public Private Partnership in the Education Sector.
Power point presentation
NSW Department of Education and Training (2003) NSW New Schools Privately
Financed Project Summary of Contracts. NSW Department of Education and Training
NSW Department of Education and Training Public Private Partnership Unit (2009)
PPP School Principal’s Reference Manual. NSW Department of Education and
Training
NSW Secondary Principals’ Council (2009) The Role, Authority, Leadership and
Accountability of the Principal. Position Paper
NSW Treasury (2005) New Schools Privately Financed Project Post Implementation
Review. NSW Treasury
Patrinos, Harry, Barrera-Osorio, Felipe and Guaqueta, Juliana (2009) The Role and
Impact of Public-Private Partnerships in Education. The World Bank, Washington DC
Patrinos, Harry and Sosale, Shobhana (eds) (2007) Mobilising the Private Sector for
Public Education. The World Bank, Washington DC
State Government Victoria (2009) Partnerships Victoria in Schools Project summary.
DEEC in conjunction with the Department of Treasury and Finance
Sheil, Christopher (2002) The trouble with Public Private Partnerships: An un-holy
alliance. Paper presented at the Evatt Foundation's Breakfast Seminar on Public
Private Partnerships at the Southern Cross Hotel, Sydney
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
12
Appendix
Appendix 1: Public Private Partnerships School Models.
Model
Examples of Private
Sector Involvement
Private Schools
Private tuition
Examples of school
systems
1. Delivery of education
Australia, Canada
by private providers with
(Alberta), Venezuela,
government support
India
2. Private operation of
Public schools operated
Argentina, Bolivia,
public schools
by private organisations
Ecuador, Colombia
3. Private sector supply
Supply of textbooks,
Egypt, Belgium
of inputs into education
canteen services, build
(Flanders), Germany,
process
and operate buildings
Australia, Greece,
United Kingdom,
Canada
4. Education vouchers
Governments or
Belgium, Chile, Czech
and scholarships
foundations provide
Republic, Denmark,
funding
Gambia
From:Latham (2002) and Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, Guaqueta, (2009).
Appendix 2: List of most often mentioned issues impacting on principals’
leadership of schools (interview and survey)









Lack of understanding about the Public Private Partnerships Project throughout
the Department including School Education Directors and other principals
Lack of trust in consortiums to make sound decisions affecting schools
Constant changing of personnel in Public Private Partnerships Unit and
Spotless
Lengthy delays on project approvals for minor works such as installation of
letterboxes and moving noticeboards
Inability to make decisions about equipment and capital works
Lack of transparency around decisions that impact on schools
Lack of perceived consistency in application of decisions across all Public
Private Partnerships Project schools
Different financial policies and procedures that do not “fit” with Department
expectations
Unresolved and ongoing cleaning issues.
State Leadership Fellowship 2009–2010 Florence Ramstead Award Report: Kerry Poole
13