CLEANING GRADE A CLEANING
Danny Peat, General Manager at LITA Group looks at the possibilities for adopting new strategies of cleaning in schools to protect both students and staff alike.
COVID specialist school cleaning is, in many ways, a brand-new discipline. With the growth of the virus early last year, there have been huge shifts in the methods, realities, and demands for the new service—demands that add pressure to both staff time and on the quality of the end service.
For schools in particular, remote activities have proven to be a challenging nut to crack. There is clear motivation from the highest levels of government to keep children in school where possible, with the onus on headteachers and those with responsibility to commission these new cleaning strategies to ensure the safety of school staff and pupils in doing so.
The COVID school cleaning process, while not quite starting from scratch, certainly didn’t begin in an optimal state. In 2019, teaching unions in Scotland collectively claimed that 80% of their schools had “suffered a drop in the frequency or quality of cleaning due to budget cuts in the past three years”. Around a sixth of the respondents labelled the conditions “dirty”.
It’s no surprise that there’s a struggle. Last year, research from the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) found that primary schools’ spending on cleaning could increase to an average of £280,000 per school per year, and secondary schools could spend as much as £720,000 per school. This is 20% of an average Local Authority primary budget, and 12% of an average secondary budget.
As seems to be a constant narrative, schools are being asked to do more with less. In this case, lives are quite literally on the line. The question, then, is how do you integrate an ‘all-hands-on-deck’ approach when it’s those very hands, noses and mouths that are the issue?
New technology for new challenges The technology supporting this dramatic change in cleaning strategy is incredibly useful. Fogging machines - not widely used in schools ahead of COVID – have now become standard equipment. Moreover, this is equipment teachers are actively being trained on so they can continue to keep classrooms safe even without a cleaning specialist available. One newcomer to the market is aerosolised electrolysed water – an electrically altered solution of salt, water and vinegar - that claims to be as effective as bleach with none of the drawbacks.
Cleaning specialists using new systems have dramatically risen in importance in your average school, and it’s enabled far more effective work.
Previously, school cleaning schedules would follow a simple pattern: top-up cleans through term-time, clearing away rubbish, cleaning bathrooms, and removing any trip
40 | TOMORROW’S FM
twitter.com/TomorrowsFM
hazards. Traditionally the school deep cleans would take place during holiday time such as half terms or where the spaces would be clear of children.
“Primary schools’ spending on cleaning could increase to an
average of £280,000 per school per year, and secondary schools
could spend as much as £720,000 per school.”
Today, we don’t have that luxury. Every day is a deep clean scenario, and it’s necessitated a huge relationship shift between education and cleaning specialists.
Changing relationships and
greater prioritisation Cleaners used to follow the playbook of Victorian children: out of sight, out of mind.
Prior to COVID, cleaning in schools was something that happened before the pupils arrived, and after they had gone home. Today, it’s a case of when cleaning needs to be done regardless of class interruptions. There’s a real sense of calm and security in being able to visually notice a member of the cleaning team doing their jobs. It’s a visual aid for something that’s a distinctly non-visual problem.
Currently we see two types of strategy emerge in meeting the challenge COVID poses in schools – at least from a cleaning perspective. The first is to increase budget. This equates to more school cleaning contractor hours, a greater
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70
