BIM IN ASSET MANAGEMENT MONTHLY FORUM 09-04-2025
RICHARD FREER We’ve got quite a packed agenda as usual this week. We’re going to g through a summary throughout the meeting of what’s actually going on with the workstreams. I think that all of the workstreams have met over the last month, in fact the Impact workstream has met twice, so they’ve all got a bit of updating to go on that. George, I’ve got Regulation 38 declarations.
GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, really this particular session, we’re very much looking for some feedback from people as to how they’re getting on with the Building Safety Acct and complying with it. And in particular, complying with Regulation 38 because it’s one of the ones that is more straightforward to actually comply with because it’s the fire safety one. We’re working on the basis that if people can get the fife safety side working properly, then there’s a chance that we might be able to do some of the more complex ones. So, what I’d like to do is just talk through that a little bit and get feedback from people, rather than it being a formal presentation.
But I’ll kick in and explain the context. There’s a lot of people on here that may not be directly engaged in a fire safety side of things, but it’s now a legal requirement for you to report that you’ve got the information that’s been handed over. (shares screen). I think we’re clear that we’re now a regulated industry. We’ve got a hell of a lot of things that we’ve now got to be covering. And to some extent, a lot of the things are is my project in scope? Do I need to do something for the Building Safety Act? I think there’s a lot of misunderstanding about the Fire Safety Act. The Fire Safety Act, most people in this group will understand that it’s relevant to all projects, all buildings.
And to some extent, what we’ve got within this BIM In Asset Management community is probably the top 10, top 5 percent of the industry in terms of understanding what needs to be done. So, the big job that we’ve got is to address the 90%. The Defective Premises Act is another one that is going to bite people, particularly contractors that have delivered buildings in the past, because it’s retrospective. And also new builds. And ESG also requires us to have much better digital records. So, I think the point is that digital records are becoming increasingly critical. And I don’t know if everybody has got on their radar, this is the one that comes in, in October, Awaab’s Law.
This is the one that’s kicked off from the little kiddie dying of exposure to mould. So, this is really about air quality, it’s about damp, however that’s created. In some cases it’s created because of the way that people are perhaps drying clothes on radiators and the like, without having adequate ventilation leaving windows open. But it’s now something that’s really quite serious and it kicks in in October this year. So, that’s another one that we need to be able to track the asset information. So, that’s what’s got to happen in October. This is largely for social landlords, but obviously mould can be anywhere, so I think that it’s something that the whole of our asset management community needs to be aware of.
If we then go back to the way fire safety is being managed, again, there’s an update to the regulations that took place 2 years ago. And a lot of the landlords I speak to aren’t really aware of their duties in this particular area. But as we know, not knowing isn’t a defence in the eye of the law. And what now is a legal requirement is for a responsible person, typically the landlord, to sign a declaration that they’ve had all of the information that they need to run and operate the building safely. And then know everything they need to know about the fire safety systems. Now, in my experience, we’ve been doing a fair bit of analysis of this with people, I don’t think anybody can sign that at the moment.
Because the quality of handover information is so incomplete that I can’t see that they can do it. But it’s a legal requirement, and it’s an individual that has to sign it, it’s not corporate. The corporate is responsible as well, but somebody has to sign it. So, I’d like to understand from the group within your organisation. Because it’s not just the landlord that’s got to sign it, it’s also the principal contractor and probably the principal designer, that has also got to sign a declaration to say that they’ve provided all of the information that’s needed for fire safety. Is everybody aware of this? Again, I’m sorry if I’m saying this in this sort of way, but I’m finding that a lot of people aren’t aware of this new law.
STEWART PARKER I wouldn’t say that it’s a new law, it’s been around for a while. And Regulation 38 has been there for what seems to be forever. And the problem is knowing the responsibility because I agree with you it’s not fair for a responsible person or an approved person to be given it. All of that information on the separate fire elements of a building and not understand it. Where we seem to fail in my sector is, is people aren’t educated in signing off fire dampers, for instance. They’ll sign off the mechanism, they won’t understand the fire strategy, they won’t understand the fabric of the building. So, the overall what we’re trying to give over for Regulation 38 is something that supports it, educates them and brings it inline with everything else in the building.
You don’t get this problem with fire extinguishers, for instance, in a building. You can go onto a fire extinguisher, you can look at the extinguisher and you know who’s tested it, when it was last serviced and by what company. You can’t do that with fire dampers in buildings because they just don’t do it. Like you said, it’s really, really poor. But it’s been there forever, most buildings would probably be classed as inadequate with that information on Regulation 38. And there’s a lot of Tier 1s that will accept any signature, not a signature by a competent compliant person, but any signature.
EDWARD COSTER Just to chip in there, it came in as Regulation 16B way back in about 2006, to support the introduction of the Fire Safety Order. So, that’s where it came from and it’s evolved since then and became 38. I think the big change really is who signed off saying that they provide the information. Before it was the applicant, and now it’s actually the responsible person. So, that’s the big change. There’s also some other interesting quirks, that change applies to existing projects underway, it seems, because of some of the wording in the further regulations laid down last year.
Which means that even live projects, where you normally say oh, the regulation isn’t retrospective. Well, in this case it is, if you’ve got a live project. So, that’s something worth bearing in mind. I’ll drop a link in from NHBC that I think covers that.
GEORGE STEVENSON That’s really helpful, Ed, because what I’m finding is that within the organisations, it’s not a matter of assigning blame to anybody, quite the opposite. What we want to do is make it more simple for the responsible person to actually be able to sign it. But, as you say, it’s a responsibility as well of the supply chain to provide the information in a structured way. And we’re finding that that isn’t the case.
JONATHAN HALLAM I’m just saying on from the last comment about it particularly being applicable to current active projects. Which are still ongoing and may have been ongoing for years, depending on the size of the projects. I work at DIO for in defence which has probably the most projects there is for one landowner and clients. Probably a number of you are working on projects for us. Is that would be a mammoth task to go back into every single active one. And also I would suspect most of those projects and the people who are working on them, the different parties would probably be raising things around potentially conversation events because they’re then going to have to do more work to provide it, whether it’s in law or not. I expect I would be having conversations around this update.
If they’re new ones, I don’t see that much of an issue because it’s when you come onto a new contract, we just make sure it’s integrated into new wordings for those new project contracts. We even change RIBA stages.
GEORGE STEVENSON My understanding is that this, as Ed was saying earlier, not the bit about the people actually signing, but the responsibility for providing the information has been around for 20 years.
EDWARD COSTER Absolutely, you’re right. The only change is who signs to say that it’s been done, that’s the big change.
STEWART PARKER What we have to also bear in mind is what I see a lot of is manufacturer’s guidance and policies and procedures. So, when a product is tested, with regards to my industry with fire dampers, it comes under the EN 3066, now that the 476 has gone. Now, that’s a manufacturing test for the integrity of whatever is being tested on a furnace, for instance. And all too often, I see that used as an installation standard, when it’s nothing to do with installation, it’s only to do with testing. So, manufacturers then start stepping into they need manufacturing and then they start getting involved in installation. Well, that’s not correct because they’re not qualified to do that. Then we see the same with the ISOs, with the 9001, we’re looking at policies and procedures.
Now, as soon as you step out of the office onto a construction site, you’ve left the policies and procedures back there. Now, I’ve had in depth conversations with people from Bree, with people from other third parties. They don’t actually sign anything off. So, we’ve got all of these people who are brought in and they’re all signed up to a third party, we don’t know if any of those dampers are adequately installed correctly. So, we’ve seeing this as well. It’s that information coming from manufacturers of third party, what is their job? Is their job for the office? Is their job for manufacturing? And they’re all getting involved now in the installation.
And the problem is if somebody ticks a box on a third party, or somebody ticks a box from a manufacturer, they feel that it’s being done correctly. The procurement might have selected the correct components to go in the building, but it’s a whole different world when you’ve got to go out there and look at it and it’s not installed correctly. And that’s a huge issue for me, what I see day in and day out.
PENCHO STUDENKOV I echo that, obviously part of the information that we need to receive is a design installation. But we need to make sure that the installs are done correctly and we have measures in place to survey the building, pretty much during construction and pre-handover, to make sure that workmanship is also in line. I just want to echo that, and also to add to Ed’s comment about the change in the building regulation is not just who is signing what, but also they put in place now information that’s been already in ADB for the past 20-ish years. Which is the fire safety information that the responsible person, and all of this now is in the building regulations, rather than just sitting somewhere in ADB.
And I think it’s now more clear that the guidance given in the ADB is just as a starting point to draft your Regulation 38 checklist. What we have done is taking that as a starting point and we have now 7 different versions of the Regulation 38 checklist. We expanded that to cover pretty much all the active and passive fire safety measures, management and what not. But we’re not starting to gather, what we call an HBC pro forma, the signing of declaration, which is essentially what we started discussing this. But we’re still in the process of obtaining this information from a principal contractor, but it seems like industry is not really prepared for this change.
But we have done is we’ve put that in place in our ERs in the contracts to provide Regulation 38 at different stages during design and construction. So, we don’t have to obtain all of this information suddenly, 2 weeks or a week before handover. And we have that itemised time schedule for each and every item for the Regulation 38.
PAUL WOMACK It’s one following on from Stuart. Don’t you follow up regarding the RAMs of what the equipment is installed? And regarding the dampers, does it match what was put in the RAMs and what it says in the documentation on the equipment?
STEWART PARKER Not always, what you seem to find more often that not is you might have, for instance, a tested wall that’s been tested with a particular damper. What will happen is you’ll see designers often they’re looking at documentation and they’ll have a 2-hour wall and a 2-hour damper and they take for granted that that’s going to work. It’s not always the case. So we always have to resort back to the manufacturer’s tested procedures. I’ll give you one example, this is how far we are behind.
So, you go into the HGM O3 and it stipulates in there where and when you can’t use manual fire dampers. I found a hospital built in December last year, it had just finished completion and they’d fitted fusible link dampers throughput the building. That’s a brand spanking new hospital, no motorised dampers at all, nothing was actuated. How do we get to that stage with top Tier 1s? I just can’t believe that it’s still happening.
GEORGE STEVENSON If I could just move on to digital handover. (shares screen). What we’ve been doing on digital handover is trying to address some of these things. We’ve got quite big group and if anybody else is interested in getting involved in the digital handover group, please let us know. One of the challenges that we’ve got is that we’re picking information up from various different sources, either on a new build, or from existing buildings. And we’ve got models, we’ve got CAD, we’ve got hopefully some COBie data, we’ve got O&Ms. And really a lot of the information now, even though we’ve been asking for digital records, is in the O&Ms. And increasingly we’re getting 360 photos.
But the challenge is that none of them are connected up. So, it means that you’ve maybe got some good information, but there’s no relationship between them. And therefore we end up with a lot of manual checking to work things out. Now, we’ve been doing quite a lot of this over the last year or so and the analogy that I’m using is that it’s like being given a pile of jigsaw pieces, but there is no picture on the top of the box to tell you how it fits together. And therefore, asset managers, that’s one of the reasons asset managers complain about the O&Ms. Because the O&MS have been provided according to work package typically, because that’s easier for the main contractors to provide the information, but you manage by system.
And therefore the relationship between both the asset type, the individual asset and the system itself needs to be connected in some sort of way. Even if it’s not in a model, the documents need to have some sort of reference between them. And they really don’t, and it’s a matter of trying to piece things together. So, what we’re trying to do is to make it so that we can integrate and federate and audit and connect all of these things up. And one way of doing that is to take information, if it’s available in a COBie format, then that’s great because COBie is a really good structured way of tracking information. And one of the important things about that is that everything then will have the same space reference.
Now, just think about that for the minute. In an O&M you might have 10, 15, 20 different work packages. If the information about the things that have been installed isn’t referenced to the same spatial reference, the same room number for example, then how on earth can you do anything with it? So, that’s one of the core things that we believe needs to be done. That means that if information is coming in through technical submittals and schedules, it can still be used. It doesn’t need to be modelled, as long as it’s been referenced properly. Now, the example I would use on that is door schedules. Door schedules are normally pretty good.
Door manufacturers now, and door installers, seem to be quite good at providing their information. Possibly because the architects are normally quite good at creating them. But many of the other asset types that we’re dealing with don’t have that level of coordination. And that’s something that we should be focusing on. And the obviously, we’re going to go on shortly to digital asset capture, to be able to capture information that hasn’t been in a model, hasn’t been in a schedule, but it’s still there. Some of you will have seen this before, but I won’t apologise for it because I think it’s a really good example.
Sodexo are an FM company and often they take over buildings where they don’t have any asset records in there. And they’re using 360 photography to actually capture that information. And to do so by sending somebody to site to do it, but the expertise is actually back in the office. So that they can actually go through and find the assets, they can tag them in the 360 photograph. It’s written to a database and then you’ve got a proper record of what’s in the room. And you’re not reliant on whether its been modelled, or what the CAD data is. You’ve got a list there of all of the assets that the team of people, perhaps of experts, have found in that space. So, in that plant room, all of those things that you can see have been tagged.
Now this is a really progressive way, I say progressive because you can add to it over a period, a way of adding intelligence to 360 photos. And then it can be connected back to things like SFG20 and standards and things like that. So, this is the sort of methodology that we’re encouraging people to follow, and it’s becoming increasingly popular. And it provides also a platform to train the next generation of experts. So, what we’ve got there is the experts actually reviewing things. And what we’ve then got, that can be used to train people and also to train AI. So, in this particular case, what it’s being used to do is to train the AI to be able to recognise that valve.
Now, we’re not going to rely on that, but Sodexo have now done 10,000 spaces, 100,000 assets, so we’re building up quite a big data set. So, we’ve got already a fairly strong group of people joining that, so I’ll skip on to that. This is what we’ve been doing in the social housing sector. This is showing how the 360s can be used to capture the information about what’s actually in the building. And an existing building, or obviously a building that’s been built. And then, that can then be used to verify the information. Paul, would you like to talk through your experience of this and why you think it’s useful.
PAUL WOMACK 360 camera, asset management, perfect. It is a game changer. As the building safety manager, I’m also finding it exceptionally useful in helping writing the safety cases and in assisting the fire risk assessors. Because, especially externally, you’re taking a photo of the building, but because it’s 360 it’s everything. So, it’s behind you, to the side, up and down. So, it tells you when you’re getting back to the office and you’re writing reports oh, what was that building? How’s that petrol station, how’s that train station going to have any impact on the building safety case?
When you’re into a building and you’re using the 360 for fire risk assessments, you’re taking the photos and you’re almost, because the photos are so good and accurate, you’re getting a little bit blasé. And it’s only when you get back into the office that you look at the photos, open it up and going ah, that’s not quite right, or that’s not quite right. And previously form experience I’ve gone done I take a photo of that? Did I take a photo of this? And you know the answer is yes, by default you’ve taken a photo. So, it’s just a case of reviewing the photograph, looking at it and going ah, there is an issue, no it’s not an issue.
Ooh, there is a piece of equipment there, where is the maintenance, where is the checks for it etc? It really is a game changer and I think we’re just touching the tip of the iceberg with this. This is a photograph that was taken from one of our properties. And we’ve got the Gerda plans and as you can see the plan on the right clearly shows the staircase. And there’s a red wall to the right of it. But if you actually look at the photo you can actually see well, that’s a doorway because the plan shows that you can’t get to that staircase. But by reviewing the Gerda plans, reviewing the photo you can say well, yeah, that doesn’t actually exist.
And then you’ve got the other issue of oh, this is the evidence that we have got a load of rubbish under the staircase. This has to be removed and you’ve got, as you would normally, photographic evidence, but it’s all in one photograph. This photo that was taken from a day that we had in Canada Water, it clearly shows that I have definitely got a face for radio. it picks everything up within the room. The picture was to show who was at the meeting, but it does show the lighting system, detection, doors etc.
GEORGE STEVENSON I just wanted to show this as well. This is where the results of the 360s can be used to add the asset data. So, what we’ve got here is a housing association library of asset types. And it’s just a matter of tagging the 360 photo with the assets. The important thing about this is the that 360 photos are not proprietary, they can be taken by anybody using any type of camera. And the only thing that is a bit different about this is what we’re doing is tagging them, we’re turning it into addressable asset data. So that you can search a building, you can search all of the 360 photos to find where all of the AOVs are, for example, or where all of the fire dampers are.
ANDREW COULDRIDGE Can I ask whether you believe that this should be a deliverable of a developer, for example, on a new scheme? Or is this retrospectively an activity that we would have to pick up as an agent thereafter? Because I want to challenge the developers to say that actually you’re rather than asking me whether the information that you’re sending me is correct, because they’re putting the onus on me to check. I’m going to say that I don’t know until I look at it. But ultimately, having a visual representation of the asset or the assets that they’ve built, for me I think is a positive thing, but it would be definitely their deliverable and not something that I would have to spend service charge money on thereafter.
PAUL WOMACK One I’ve done personally, I’ve done my 460 photos, you’ll notice there’s a false ceiling. And we don’t necessarily know and confirm what’s above that false ceiling. So yeah, during construction this is also key when you want these photos, what is in the ceiling line? And again, then that will assist in doing your asset tagging.
ANDREW COULDRIDGE OK, that’s helpful to know. But I suppose my question is, is there any pressure on developers to do this and provide it as a deliverable? Because it doesn’t seem at this moment in time that that is the case.
PAUL WOMACK I think as a client you could potentially request it.
ANDREW COULDRIDGE Yeah, that’s the problem, I’m not the client, I’m the service provider that they employ. So, maybe that’s where the challenge is.
GEORGE STEVENSON I think that one of the challenges is that a lot of construction companies are actually doing this type of recording, they’re using 360s to manage progress. And we can use the 360 photos that have been taken in OpenSpace or HoloBuilder or any of these other systems. The issue is that they don’t want to share all of the information, for probably good commercial reasons with the client, because they don’t want to be penalised by somebody identifying something that’s there. So, I think that’s a matter of collaborative working where the developer and the contractor is able to give a selection of 360 photos that represent what was actually installed, so that we can manage that through.
And what I’m trying to do with this group is identify why that is a useful thing to do to protect everybody. Because everybody now is legally responsible for providing adequate information. Now, the challenge is what does adequate mean? And we’ve got an opportunity with this group to actually start defining what that is.
JONATHAN HALLAM The main thing that I would also ask in terms of surely you’ve got two deliverables. You’ve got the 360 which is capturing the digital assets, but those actually really should be delivered in a 3D model, whether IFC or 2D drawings as the final product. The 3D pictures is just a side piece to ensure that that’s being corrected, because that’s the everything of something being coming over. So, it would be interesting to know how big a file size is, because Lidar has always been notoriously too heavy on file sizes, coming over as a raw data set. I would also pick up on the last point which was raised around not sharing. I wouldn’t say for security issues, the sharing of things like those valuable pictures should only be very securely archived once projects have been completed.
And to only be accessed when raised any queries, because it’s client side information and property. I think the biggest thing which is an issue is taking over from what is from the projects, you’re taking on the information which is already there. I see lots of projects where the information is not brought over from GIS plans, CAD plans, loads of plans and models. And when we’ve got the models there is the first place is maybe a different question, I do see that some of these things that have been shown can really help with that. But taking on those, taking on what’s actually recorded on the actual estate and integrating those into how that is being utilised during the design and construction, to me that is the biggest issue of taking on what is currently on the estate.
And I've not seen that in terms of how to pick up what's in the asset information model, what is already there, what is in that model and what is already recorded against that asset.
GEORGE STEVENSON In answer to your point about Lidar and 3D models and scanning and the like, I think there’s some very good use cases for having a 3D model. But I certainly wouldn’t say that from an asset management point of view it’s critical. Because in many cases, as long as they’ve got a spatial reference for where everything is, they don’t need it in 3D, they’ve got the building. I’m not saying it wouldn’t be desirable, but the size of your estate, to actually turn all of the estate into a 3D model. And it won’t be a BIM model, but the way, because by scanning you don’t know what the walls are made of.
JONATHAN HALLAM Yeah, and I think that’s the point in terms of the size of our estate is how you go from new projects on, maybe, refurbs and things. Or even new buildings where you’ve got the land, you’re potentially building on a car park or something, is taking into account what the current estate information is. And I think that’s the key. It would be great to go and do a 360 capture across the whole estate that would be one of the biggest projects there ever would be, with the amount of assets that we’ve got.
GEORGE STEVENSON I appreciate that, but what we’re actually finding is that it’s relatively low cost to do. The cameras are only about £300. And you don’t need a subject matter expert to go to the sites and you can do it progressively over a period.
JONATHAN HALLAM Yeah, and I’d like to pick this up with more people like Paul and find out more detail.
MARK GRIFFITHS Firstly, it’s the first time that I’ve been to one of these and I found it really informative and thank you. I’ve got a very small consultancy business of my own, we specialise in FM and work place, but a lot of what you’re talking about is very relevant to us. What I was going to highlight was on I also sit on a BSI committee for facilities management standards and we’re doing a lot of work at the moment reviewing things like soft landings, digital handover and the like. Some of that, I’l get some data from the committee secretary, but there are some items coming out that will be available for public comment and consultation soon.
And if there is anyone here that might be interested in sitting on any of those groups, if they’d find it interesting in terms of contributing. It sounds to me as if a lot of what’s being discussed is around standards and requirements. It might be a useful segue way to what’s being discussed, so I’m happy is someone pings me an email and let us know and that will help keep on with the good quality of stuff you have going on here, then I’m happy to help move that along.
DAN O’GORMAN As far as the 3D video cameras, yes there is a security issue, but they can also be Aliler/ALA? 43mins 41secs time-lined using AI. So, it’s not a problem form a security perspective. And you can do the same as what the police do, you can actually rub out information that is critical to the client, and you can smooth it out so that it isn’t seen. So, all of this is possible, so 3D cameras are the way to go. And finally, given, my construction background, yes, they are used extensively by contractors across the globe. And it’s only, a matter of putting a particular clause in the contract covering security and the provision of those at hand over.
MANDEEP SINGH I know this is obviously for asset management, but then there was a question asked about is there a requirement to capture this information. Just specifically relating to high-risk buildings, if you’re doing any kind of refurbishment works, Category A or B, as part of the application you have to submit a construction control plan. And in that construction control plan you have to specify how you’re going to be recording the evidence that you’ve complied with building regulations.
So, I think you could say that there is a requirement, if you’re working on HRB, to capture this information. And that’s the kind of requirement that it is basically, under the HRB procedure regs and the construction control plan where you have to justify and demonstrate how you’re going to record and evidence that compliance and put it as part of the Golden Thread.
PIERRE VENTER One this is, every single one of these issues that we’ve raised requires a central PDE database folder system. And the reason is that there’s two streams. One stream is that the data is being captured during the design, engineering, tendering, construction, handover and onwards. That’s one stream. And the second stream is the one that you’re putting forward which also covers the existing buildings being captured…photogrammetry. But where we lose is all of the data that’s going in which is part of that Golden Thread, right the way through until such time as it becomes a product that somebody is actually going to have installed and continue using it.
So, it’s really important for us to discuss that process of where these things can be implemented, what’s actually the form, not maybe all of the details about it, but what’s essential there to connect people to those dots? Because at the moment, we’ve got a bunch of headless chickens running around.
GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, it’s like the jigsaw that I was saying earlier. What we’re finding is that it’s like being given a load of jigsaw pieces, without having the box itself.
KEVIN BAYLISS Just going on what Mandeep said. Absolutely, the construction management plan, we’ve been doing a template for it for Wolverhampton Homes at the moment. And setting up for a project and talking to them about how they record things onsite. I did put in the comments about when it comes to regulatory elements, the client is ultimately responsible for making sure that they can say, to their best knowledge, it’s been installed in compliance with the building regulations when somebody is doing some work. So, that whole management of what’s been installed and to the right level and that photographic evidence of that is really, really important.
And what I was also going to mention as part of that, there’s a requirement on HRBs that the client should have put in place methods of managing. Not just managing, to make sure that there is a method of policies for holding that Golden Thread and managing that Golden Thread through that process. So to me, there is an ultimate responsibility legally for people to do that, especially where HRBs are concerned. And one of the things I was going to talk on what Pierre said, we absolutely need to manage that Golden Thread and that could be a collection of platforms. But understanding people when it actually hits the Golden Thread is really important.
So, I produced a bit of a diagram for Wolverhampton to explain how I understood it, which I can share it you like. I literally just did a bit of a sketch to really understand, because what was happening was people working on individual platforms and think that’s in work in progress, and people were working on it, is that a Golden Thread? But as soon as it hits into the point of view of essentially, because information management comes in and how the ISO works in and out. You’re then going to have an area of Golden Thread which is really owned bu the client. But that might not necessarily be one platform. For example, we’re talking to Wolverhampton Homes and all of the design stuff is going on there.
But when they’re talking about change control and that procedure of doing that which feeds into HRBs and the requirements, they’re setting up a separate database where it goes to various people within their organisation to go to their approvals of those change before they could submit it to those. So, it could be a collection of platforms, but to clarify because, for example, Jacobs have a number of disciplines when they’re producing information, working together. And what we were doing is actually we were working on our own system, when in reality until it got to a point that as a company we shared. And I was like that’s wrong.
Each discipline, contractors, whoever it might be, as soon as it goes out work in progress they should be putting it onto one system which is the client system. And that should be held together so that you can always track it.
GEORGE STEVENSON Most definitely, and I think what you said there is exactly our premise as well, and that is that there’s going to be maybe dozens of Golden Threads. What’s critical is that we get the information structured in the right sort of way, and that’s what I’m going to come on to. The digital handover group has been looking at how can we standardise the way health & safety files and O&Ms are structured. And one of the ways that we can do that is nobody is actually going to do it in a legislative way. So, what we’ve been doing is discussing this with the HSE and we’ve come up with a structured way of holding the health & safety file and also the information from the consultants, which obviously is part of the heath & safety file. But then the information for each work package and system.
So, what we’re trying to do here is make it so that there’s at least a standardised folder structure that can be used. Now, we’re not suggesting that people should try and find documents based on a folder structure because they won’t be able to. You may have something that says, for example, the emergency procedures. That may be in a document, or it may be part of several contractors different submissions, and also information from the designers. So, this (referring to the document displayed on screen) is a standard structure. As I say, we’ve been discussing and agreeing with the HSE which we’re now sharing, but what we’d like is for people to go through this.
We’ve got half a dozen or so people already that have volunteered to go through this but the more people that can get involved in it the better. Because some of this information would be delivered as a document, and some of it would be delivered as data. So, if you’d be interested in getting involved in this review of the standardised health & safety file and O&Ms, put your name in the chat and we’ll include you in those discussions, The point is, if we can standardise things it makes it a lot easier to work with. I’m then going to skip over to the other thing that we’ve been doing.
So, what we’ve been doing, this is over the last week or so, Kevin and Pierre have been involved in this. And what we’ve identified is that the information that’s being provided as part of Regulation 38 is incomplete and it’s actually quite difficult to join together. So, what we’ve decided to do is to create an expert group and if you’re interested we’d like you to join, because the more people that can buy into this, the better. So. we’re starting with just something very basic and that’s saying what’s an asset? So the asset type name and there’s also the element of sub-assets as well that actually go to make up the main asset. So, in this case, the door leaf, the frame, etc.
So, what we actually want to do is to use this as a mechanism to provide to supply chain members and say this is the information that we expect you to provide. We expect you to say what the asset is, what its name is. Also, a unique reference for the individual asset, the location of the asset. What system or circuit that it’s part of, the manufacturer’s product reference. Who’s installed it, who commissioned it, who’s inspected it and ultimately then, who is maintaining it. Now, we think that’s a pretty low bar to use to review an O&M handover set. But you probably wouldn’t be surprised that that often isn’t being provided. So, what my question is, we’ve done this and actually broken it down for things like fire alarm detection systems, CCTV, emergency lighting.
Because it’s at this level, from a maintenance point of view, not necessarily a planned maintenance point of view, you need to be able to know what type of batteries you need to replace things with. So, we’ve now got the ASFP which is the passive fire people, they bought into it. And I was with the Fire Industry Association yesterday and they bought into it as well. I’ve also spoken to, in Birmingham at the Fire Safety Conference, quite a few manufacturers and they’re up for it as well. So, I think that’s something that we’d like to see. If you’re interested in joining the Golden Thread Taskforce, as we’ve called it, put your name in the chat please.
STEWART PARKER When you were looking at the asset, like you just mentioned the doors, the door leaves etc, this is where the third party audit should cover all of that information. And again, what we don’t see, we see desktop digital audits where nobody attends construction sites or the finished product. So again, I think that digital audits don’t really serve a purpose other than it just shows the asset, it doesn’t really go into if it’s installed correctly, is it the right asset for the right application.
GEORGE STEVENSON I agree and definitely we want to try and get to there, Stuart. But the fundamental thing that we’re finding is we don’t even know where the assets are installed, never mind…
STEWART PARKER But again, it’s poor auditing. If somebody is not up to the task and not qualified to go and do it as a safety audit on a component in a building, why is that audit even taking place? This is where we keep seeing it. For instance, we mentioned the recent fire at the fire station in Central London at the restaurant there. Again, that was audited from a desktop perspective and the audit showed the riser shaft had never been cleaned, so it was like a matchstick waiting to happen. And it’s where does that information go? Without going down the MOR route, is that the only route that we can take? Someone has got to start listening to the complaints.
EDWARD COSTER Just one point, quite important in terms of the Golden Thread in respect to high-risk buildings is it includes structure as well, and we mustn’t forget that. So, Regulation 38 is fantastic, it covers fire safety, but we don’t have the equivalent for structural safety yet. but we need to include it if we’re talking about Golden Thread. And that’s obviously your substructure, infrastructure, and the structural aspects things like cladding systems. It's not just fire safety, is your cladding system attached to the building properly? Because there’s been a few instances where it hasn’t been.
So, that’s something that needs to be added in there and maybe it’s bringing in some structural people into this conversation because we’re probably a bit top-heavy on fire safety. Not that that’s any criticism, but it’s the way things have developed, it’s a quirk of history. And we just need to ensure that we’re covering structural as well.
GEORGE STEVENSON I absolutely agree, but what I’m trying to do, we’ve done a lot of work over the last 3 or 4 years in terms of guidance and getting people onboard and things. And we’re finding that it’s still not working. The handover information still is incomplete. We’ve got situations where the location of fire dampers is being given as internal.
EDWARD COSTER Yeah, if you think that fire safety information is bad, have a look at the structural. I had a blank look when I said can we have the bar schedules for your reinforced concrete. People not understanding how their buildings are built, so without even getting to the point of how do we stop fire spreading around them.
ANDREW COULDRIDGE Just on the point that was raised there, it was an interesting point in regards to the structural. Obviously residential buildings, they’ll be a mandatory occurrence reporting process as part of the resident engagement strategy. For me, I’m slightly concerned by that because it leans heavily into the resident and for the resident to be able to report something. The question there is are they the right people to be reporting something that is structural? I know there’s obviously the visual signs and if it is cladding that’s fallen off I guess that’s relatively straightforward.
But I think the ownership and responsibility of a lot of this, particularly the way I see it being designed, puts a lot of responsibility onto those who are residents when it comes to resident engagement and mandatory occurrence reporting, which I don’t feel is necessarily appropriate. Yes, raise the flag, but what are we opening ourselves up for? I suppose is the question.
GEORGE STEVENSON I don’t understand what you’re saying there, Andrew. Are you saying this is resident information?
ANDREW COULDRIDGE No, the mandatory occurrence reporting documents that we’re working with that have been put together by a consultant detail, and I’ve seen it on local authorities as well, give the responsibility to a resident to be able to report something. Be that building safety related or structurally related. Be that a crack that’s appeared, and I think that’s actually in the narrative, it says a visible crack, or something that is loose on the building. Or a contractor that might be working unsafely. So, my concern there is we seem to be putting a lot of onus and responsibility on residents to be self-managing and self-reporting.
EDWARD COSTER That is not, the resident engagement strategy which is required under the Building Safety Act and the mandatory occurrence reporting requirements are separate things. And the mandatory occurrence reporting system is the responsibility of the principal accountable person. Now of course, if a resident sees something they should be aware of the ability to report that to their principal accountable person. So, it’s not pinning the responsibility for them to be the only people spotting any hazards. But if they become aware of something then by all means please report it and tell it through the complaints system, which is another requirement under the Act.
And that would then trigger someone at the principal accountable person end going hang on a minute, this looks like a mandatory occurrence and then it would drop into that process. But mandatory occurrence can come from many sources. It could be some event that a caretaker spots, a surveyor going to site, or it could be a works instance that gets reported as a RIDDOR as well. So, it’s not putting everything on the resident, but the resident has the opportunity to report, as does anyone else.
ANDREW COULDRIDGE I appreciate and agree with you there, it’s just in the residential world we kind of make available to residents a method of reporting. I think perhaps they’re learning on sites is that actually others can report it, but the question is how do they report it? If they haven’t got access to the systems that we engage with under that community engagement piece.
STEWART PARKER Well, remember that we have got the VOR which is probably more suited for those guys.
EDWARD COSTER I’m from the residential sector as well, a housing association. We’ve spent time looking at how our resident engagement strategy dovetails into our other policies. So essentially we already have, any housing association has systems in place for when queries come in from residents and concerns. What we’re ensuring is that that system now, when someone phones up our call centre and makes a report or talk to someone onsite, that feeds back into the system as it would anyway. And comes to us in the building safety team where we can look at it and make a decision around is this a mandatory occurrence incident, is it a building safety matter, all of these kind of things. So, it’s about building it into our existing systems, because we do have systems already.
GEORGE STEVENSON Could I just circle back on where we started with this in terms of the declarations that are now a legal requirement for both landlords and construction firms to deliver. Could you maybe put in the chat if you have either signed one of those, or if your organisation has completed one. Because I’m just trying to understand the maturity of the industry. My impression is that we’re still very much on the early steps of that, even though it’s been in place for some time. If you could put into the chat whether your organisation has actually signed one of those declarations, that would be really helpful. Because it would give us a little bit of an understanding as to what the level of maturity is.
NEIL BAILEY I emailed you earlier, the declaration regarding Regulation 38 handing over, like a sample. It’s quite straightforward really, it could just be rebranded to suit but I think it covers everything really.
GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, I’ve got an example here for one of the Building Control people. (shares screen). Because it seems if it’s a mandatory thing, there for example, they’re using exactly the same terminology. So, you’ve got a declaration by the principal contractor and a declaration by the client. So, I’m thinking that if this is a general thing, it is something that we need to make it easier for people to be able to sign it. If it’s not being signed, what’s happening? Is it holding up…are any landlords aware, any responsible persons, are you aware of any delays that have taken place in terms of getting your certificate of completion or whatever? Is this being managed?
ANDREW COULDRIDGE It was only last week that working with a developer through the mobilisation of a site where, as is typically the case, trying to rush in everybody at the last minute. I was asked to take receipt of the Regulation 38 information that came over via a digital link. And in doing so in the email attachment was Andy, can you let us know if you’ve got everything that you need? And I went back and said have you provided everything that I need? And it was kind of a bit of dialogue and ultimately what came on the back of that was Andy, we need you to sign this today because if you don’t sing it today it’s going to hold up the NHBC, CMLs was the week before.
So, I think, you talked about the level of maturity and I’m going to honest, putting myself out on a bit of a limb, I’m certainly feeling my way around building safety and the requirements. I’m leaning heavily on to what is being put into the management agreement and I’m talking to the developer about what they have to provide. Pointing them to the government website around what is Golden Thread, what is Regulation 38, what is resident engagement. And I genuinely believe that there is a huge learning curve that we’re all on, but I think that the developers that I’m working with are well behind the curve and in some instances aren’t sure on their deliverable.
It placed me in a bit of a difficult situation because I did have a pro forma acceptance letter that came with it. And I had to caveat it when signing it to say that we’ll review it and I’ll come back to them if there is information that actually they haven’t provided. And it was very, very clear at that point that there was information that wasn’t provided and some of it was quite basic, some of it was the WS1. So, I think the level of maturity, the upper or lower level of that, I’m probably going to sound below half mark. But what I’ve found is that it’s been very much a suck it and see scenario. This group has been really helpful and has highlighted a number of anomalies for me.
But what I’d like to say is what are we doing as a group? What is the industry doing to make sure that the developer has a deliverable which meets the expectation? And it’s not something that we’re passing the buck on, or they are passing the buck on.
GEORGE STEVENSON I’m really encouraged by what you’re saying there, Andrew, and that’s exactly what we’re trying to do. Just to explain, we’ve been on this Golden Thread process for probably 4 years. We led the Golden Thread Initiative asset and survey information group that L&Q put together with the government, to inform the Golden Thread. Because the government and the regulator, they don’t have the competence to be able to say what information is needed. They’re just basically saying that we need you to confirm, just as you’re doing, with the providers of the information or the designers and the contractors, that adequate information has been handed over.
The problem is the only time that actually that will crystallise is potentially when somebody dies. So what we’re trying to do, this was the exercise that we started several years ago, is put together what the subject matter experts in sprinkler systems, smoke control systems, fire doors etc consider to be important. And then we’re using that as the baseline to basically say this is what’s required. Because the contractors themselves, developers certainly, but the contractors are in the middle. Because the majority of this information is coming from specialist subcontractors and if they aren’t aware of what they’re supposed to be producing, that’s a problem.
ANDREW COULDRIDGE I’ll just extend what I was saying, When they are delivering it I get a Wetransfer link and the file says Regulation 38. But everything within that file, and there’s hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of files, are in alphanumeric, not something that says fire doors, smoke, sprinkler systems, fire alarms. So, I have to go and find it, I have to open everything to find it. So, it’s not great, but again, I kind of question the deliverable.
GEORGE STEVENSON Well, that’s exactly what we’re trying to overcome. So, if you’re willing to be a member of that group, we’ve got 80-90 people involved in it now, so the work is spread and shared, I think it’s worth doing. (shares screen). The key thing with the Golden Thread is that the asset information, not just for individual assets or indeed fire doors for example. Just making sure that the fire doors are good isn’t adequate because if you’ve got a fire in a kitchen, you’ve got smoke that you’ve got to control. And you need to make sure that not just the fire doors, but also the penetration seals and everything is going to work. And also the smoke control system works together, so it’s systems of systems.
And what we need therefore to do is if, for example, you’ve got an asset which is the fire doors, you need to make sure that the door itself is in the context of what spaces it’s supporting. And also what other assets are in that compartment. So, to be able to make sure for example, when somebody is using a range of different software applications can go and do inspections that they’re all joined up. And this is an example of the incomplete information. This is perhaps what you’re coming across, Andrew. This fire stopping drawing, for example, was in the folder as the fire stopping information and actually when we went and looked at it, that’s useless. You can’t use it because all of the tabs are overlapping each other.
And when we raised that with the contractor they said oh, the employer’s agent signed it off. So we spoke to the employer’s agent and they said well yeah, we recorded that the fire stopping drawing had been provided as part of that work package, but we didn’t open it up and look at it. Which I think, they didn’t consider that to be part of their scope to actually…
ANDREW COULDRIDGE Again, it’s the question what is the deliverable? What does it need to look like? And that for me is the big stumbling block.
GEORGE STEVENSON I agree and that’s really what we’re trying to do with this group. So if, for example, we can have a mechanism where we say right, this is the information that we would expect to get through from Building Control, or that’s been passed through Building Control. This is the sort of information that’s needed for commissioning. This is the information that’s needed for handover and also Regulation 38, so you can identify what’s missing. And I think if we can get to this situation where we can properly audit stuff. This is one I was referring to the other day, you see that we’ve got fire and smoke dampers there.
The location of the fire dampers is that they’re in the building which I think is completely unacceptable. And the same with the fire stopping, this is from the fire & emergency file, it says that it’s at all levels. That’s something that we ought to be more rigorous about, so that we can train the industry to provide things. So, if you’re up for getting involved in that, it doesn’t have to take time, it’s really a matter of being involved in the process and being able to do the policing. In particular, I’m focusing on the fire safety side of things because that’s very much a legal requirement now.
ANDREW COULDRIDGE Completely, I get that, by all means I’m happy to be part of that. If you actually want to be part of, throw it back at you, you want to come to one of the sites that I’m recently mobilised and we’re currently occupying. The developer’s having housing associations move in and we’ve got residents moving in. If you want to come to see what has just recently been handed over, by all means drop me a line and I can get you in onsite. And we can look at it, if you want a new case study I can give you one.
GEORGE STEVENSON That would be fantastic, thank you. So, does anybody else want to participate? Or os there anybody that doesn’t want to participate? That’s probably a better way. As far as the Golden Thread Taskforce is concerned, do you want to be kept informed? If you don’t want, I appreciate that not everybody is going to be up for that, but are you interested in getting involved? Maybe put Golden Thread Taskforce into the chat if you’d like to be kept involved in what we’re doing.
CHUN QING LI I had a question. Our background is architects and specialising in DFMA, design for manufacturing assembly, and we started software development in partnership with Dassault Systèmes and softwares for the aviation, defence sector…submarines and jet fighters. In that sector, aviation automotive industry, they build engineering templates, each component in our sector, fire stop, they template everything, which complies with all of the QA, QC and the building regulation compliances. So, if that case you don’t need a specialist to do that. Imagine that you’re assembling an aircraft or a car, you have the OEMs, original equipment to manufacture things, they all come with a compliance.
I’m just wondering, is there a way to simplify it? This is what we’re trying to push as well. We started a software company and people said have you built anything with the technology yourself? We said no and then we started a construction company because nobody wants to be a guinea pig. Now we’re kind of in the process of challenging this with developing our own software in partnership with Siemens now. And we’re building there’s a template, so you can automate the entire process and validate digitally. Because ultimately the fire stop is designed, tested, engineered by a supplier. And whoever installed that, they just do a physical validation really, and certify it.
GEORGE STEVENSON One of the challenges with that is that we’ve been involved in this with the building research establishment for 7 or 8 years to try and put together standardised manufacturer’s product data, which is a building block of what you’re just saying. And the industry has been particularly reluctant to follow any type of standardisation of product data. I think possibly because they don’t want to get into a situation where there products can be easily compared.
CHUN QING LI Yeah, we have a live project and I’m more than happy to test with you guys. Because they’re just a bunch of bureaucrats spending 8 years doing nothing really. I’m in the politics myself, I understand this. You just need to do it and lead by example, really. That’s why we started a construction company because we can’t change people, we can’t even say we’re changing the way we’re working with people because it’s just a waste of time, people won’t change.
ANDREW COULDRIDGE I think just on the back of that, George, you talked about the change piece. And think the issue with developers is that the developer has a passion to sell, move people in as quickly as possible, and anything in the way is considered an unnecessary obstruction. And I think the way that they’re approaching, I’m not talking about all developers but some developers, the way that they’re approaching building safety is that it’s becoming a necessary evil, but we’ll just serve it as liberally as we can. Their passion is to get people in, it’s to sell units, and that is the problem, we’re swimming against the tide in that respect.
GEORGE STEVENSON And that’s why we’re trying to simplify it back to a level that gets things structured. I've got one last point to make, I’ve realised that something I wads supposed to mention is the whole issue of PFI and things like room data sheets. Now, there’s a PFI workstream that we’re starting. We’ve got about 25 people involved in it, so PFI hand-back and things like that. So, if there’s anybody on the call that is involved at all with PFI, could you put PFI into the chat. I hope that you found it useful and we’ll see you again. We’ve got workstream meetings that will be taking place over the next 3 or 4 weeks, but we’ll have another forum meeting, they take place each month.
CHAT
Phull, Pav Singh (External) 03:39 pm
CDM H&S file benefits from digital information but may not have a penalty. The benefit is preconstruction information.
Pierre Venter (External) 03:46 pm
Stewart, George, Richard. The discussion needs to be a illustrated checklist to Prompt the checks, its not a full-checklist.
And require the defn of the Roles. Thats a submitted document. part of a Guide
Edward Coster (External) 03:46 pm
Building Control update - Regulation 38 and automatic lapse of Initial Notices
Pierre Venter (External) 03:57 pm
George we said this has to be oin a CDE. The Project CDE, Owned by the Appointing Party/Resp Party
Pierre Venter (External) 03:58 pm
The connected data needs to be managed, and owned, and that cost is the owners to provide
Pierre Venter (External) 03:59 pm
The meta Data is crucial, the containers all need to be Uniquely ID's and that needs a manager (the guy to do it)
Pierre Venter (External) 04:00 pm
The link to the Space/the Room, is accessible in Models, Data and schedules. The reference can be generated in bulk at the design/engineering phase.
Ian Upton (External) 04:02 pm
I've seen this using LIDAR drone surveys
Chun Qing Li (External) 04:03 pm
Does anyone use a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) workflow?
It’s a fantastic approach for design, engineering, manufacturing, assembly, and operation & maintenance.
Here’s the link to my article:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/unlocking-future-construction-kreodx-model-based-systems-chun-qing-li-kgzle
Ian Upton (External) 04:08 pm
Should be defined in a SAMP working backwards in design of your CMMS so that asset references go back to the BIM integration.
Pierre Venter (External) 04:11 pm
There are two options.
- Throught Design/Engr to Constr/Handover iunto Assets
- Photogrametry. Its captures all the data, the photo and Location ID, Coordinates.
Whats lost, the design teams benefits, the Contractor placing of Pr, Products, Cost enginerring etc. The Costs of each would be good to see if anyone has bothered to do that for future projects. The image shows the RDS/Space Data
Paul, the info behind the ceiling/close-up
Dubai, BIM Mandate is the example to look at Further.
Pierre Venter (External) 04:13 pm
Jonathan, Load the Media and data into the Cloud. Its processed out there. What is the cost. Thats a study to motivate it.
Bayliss, Kevin (Unverified) 04:14 pm Edited
The record evidence requirements should be included in the EIR, AIR, and contract BEP, and golden Thread Procedures /policies which they are signed up for during and at the end of construction work. Especially when you consider it is a requirement of the Client to state what has been built is compliant to the best to there knowledge under BSA for HRB's.
Pierre Venter (External) 04:15 pm
The Scope of Service, will define the requirements for each of those control documents
Julian Buhagiar (External) 04:15 pm
IN the absence of any model, Apple iPhone/iPad Pro has the potential to capture on the fly models to a reasonable degree. The 360s can go hand in hand with that form of capture. Pointclouds are big, but highly optimised can be much smaller.
Bayliss, Kevin (Unverified) 04:17 pm
Yes that would also been shown in PIR.
Shervin Yousefzadeh (External) 04:19 pm
I've been using 360 photos for over 10 years and would highly recommend them. However, storing, managing, and geo-tagging 360 photos can be challenging on major projects. Fortunately, there are excellent off-the-shelf platforms that can help you with this: https://sitepics.io/
Hallam, Jonathan C1 (DIO DEx-Snr AIM Mgr) (Unverified) 04:19 pm
retention more for security
no issues see for capture
Mark Griffiths (External) 04:20 pm
re BSI committees and input to upcoming standards focussing upon digital handover and the like
Hallam, Jonathan C1 (DIO DEx-Snr AIM Mgr) (Unverified) 04:22 pm
well said Pierre. its jigsaw across systems, client AIM CDE, PIM CDE's on appointed parties doing works
Terence Horsman (External) 04:24 pm
Kevin, would you be able to share this PDF?
Chris Craggs (External) 04:24 pm
great graphic - are you happy to share?
Pierre Venter (External) 04:26 pm
George, the Pharma industry is the example of how it must be done! The golden thread is measured to 5 Levels , FCC etc all have roles, Regulated
Niki Okala (External) 04:27 pm
Hi George - where can we find this structure?
Bayliss, Kevin (Unverified) 04:32 pm
This is the graphic, of my thoughts for information when doing project and construction work, where I feel the Golden Thread sits.
Julian Buhagiar (External) 04:33 pm
I've got something to offer on Unique Referencing....going beyond Locally Unique, Globally and Universally - I sit on the standard committee that covers these matters.
Dan O'Gorman (External) 04:34 pm
I am particularly interested in Fire Door Assemblies please see this link
https://gs1ie.app/riba/riba.html
Shervin Yousefzadeh (External) 04:35 pm
Global Individual Asset Identifier (GIAI)?
Bayliss, Kevin (Unverified) 04:37 pm
Totally agree, some comments on safety case has come back from BSR with regards on structural.
Victoria Finn (External) 04:38 pm
I dont see the MOR giving residents responsibility but rather giving them another way to report issues but it is also on the contractor working there. I see it the same way Edward
Julian Buhagiar (External) 04:40 pm
We need identifiers for everything at every level of information capture. Different methods serve different purposes, The method I have has characteristics that can complement other forms of ID implemented and assist with interoperability. Its fundamentally based on RFC9562 & ISO 9834 forms of ID generation so can be accommodated by existing databases and technologies but with a bit more usefullness than what is typically implemented in software.
Andrew Couldridge (Unverified) 04:41 pm
Yes
Stewart Parker (External) 04:43 pm
https://paddeco.com/our-qualifications/gt1f-04/
https://paddeco-certification.com
Nicola Barrow (Unverified) 04:44 pm
Neil Bailey (External) Would you be happy to share your example ?
Stewart Parker (External) 04:47 pm
https://paddeco-certification.com
Ian Upton (External) 04:53 pm
Defined R&R in a SAMP which should begin at design stage. Defined TOR
Julian Buhagiar (External) 04:59 pm Edited
Digital Product Passports at CEN level driven by the EcoDesign directive are moving forward very fast. Whether that covers all the matters/aspects this group is wanting to address remains to be seen. (my view is that more specific data dictionaries need to be defined / compiled together by groups like this one)
Karen Ostler (External) 04:59 pm
Swimming against the tide is exactly how it is. Frustrating for sure!
Afam Unaka (External) 05:00 pm
Even if, we can’t change people, but we can influence the next generation 🤷🏾♂️
Sarah Craigie (External) 05:02 pm
George, could we have a copy of todays slides please?