RECYCLING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
Invoicing processes, weight data and reporting methods (including estimations) were interrogated for accuracy and compliance, and end of life solutions checked and verified.
Following the review, the company were able to draw up a virtual map of tonnages leaving the campus, including costs and end of life solutions. Strategies, recommendations and a vision for the future were included in the output report on all processes and protocols across the facility associated with recycling and waste. Examples of recommendations that were implemented included obtaining rebates for cardboard, and ensuring the coffee cups were recycled via dry mixed recycling.
Immediate improvements were made to recycling and waste processes and expenditure. Collections were reduced in line with the facilities requirements via a strictly applied calculation and criteria. This contributed to a 26% cost reduction for commercial and household waste solutions.
One future strategy that was identified was a ‘clear bag policy’ which has the potential to increase recycling by a further 20%. Training has been carried out and this should be introduced following the next review across all estates solutions.
Paul Taylor, Recycling and Waste Manager for Sitemark, said: “Since that initial benchmarking review, we have carried out a further two annual reviews to ensure that all processes remain at the best-practice standard. This is vital as best-practice can change over time. We also work with a number of other universities so are able to draw from experiences elsewhere to inform our work with UoB.”
Tender processes Having delivered that initial review in 2015, UoB realised that a recycling and waste tender process would be the best way to start embedding the strategies, recommendations and findings of the report.
The University engaged Sitemark to work with the Environmental Services Team, Procurement and other key stakeholders to produce tender documents including a pre-qualification questionnaire to support an open Official Journal of the European Union process to select a recycling and waste partner.
“The University’s key stakeholders were able to utilise to the fullest extent the advantage of having
market specialists involved in the evaluation process.”
The company reviewed the UoB’s historical tender documents to draw up a new document that allowed potential suppliers to be innovative in their solutions. It included writing into the tender the improved data
www.tomorrowsfm.com
analysis and strategies from the benchmarking process that would build on existing environmental policies and further engage UoB in the circular economy.
The University’s key stakeholders were able to utilise to the fullest extent the advantage of having market specialists involved in the evaluation process. In the early stages this included access to extensive market analysis and supplier research. This provided valuable information into economic indicators, emerging industry trends and the competitive environment, allowing UoB to balance its requirements against the market capabilities.
Working together, all parties were able to navigate the evaluation process to a time frame that worked for the university, resulting in the appointment of a provider who could deliver the required service with minimal disruption to university life during the mobilisation process.
This process was very well received by the University. Karen Manyika, Purchasing Manager for Estates and Facilities, said: “Working with Sitemark opened my eyes to areas within a service requirement where the University could have been left very vulnerable without the input of a market expert. Sitemark were able to work to our time scales and provided a very positive contribution to the whole process from market analysis, developing the specification, developing tender documents, supplier shortlisting and technical tender analysis.”
Ongoing partnership The success of these projects has led to an ongoing partnership between the University and Sitemark to address a wide scope of recycling and waste management processes.
Taylor explained: “In 2017 we developed and delivered a training package for senior supervisors, and in the same year we conducted a hazardous waste review.
“We’re currently halfway through a project to reduce the use of single use plastic across the University. The project covers the new build, large refurbishment and in-house services across the estates and facilities departments. So far, a detailed list has been complied of materials that have been tested for plastic type. Once solutions are identified for the reduction of single use plastic where possible, this will become part of all future contracts that UoB engages contractors in.
“This long-standing relationship has led to other opportunities to collaborate. At the start of the year we introduced a student internship programme. One student has joined the programme as a ‘test run’ with scope to increase the number of placements. We’re keen to offer more than just experience and so retrospective job offers may follow if appropriate.”
He concluded: “Our work with the University of Birmingham is a prime example of the benefits of a long- term partnership. We’ve become an extension of the UoB team and that has allowed us to continually improve the recycling and waste management situation.”
www.sitemark.co.uk/ TOMORROW’S FM | 31
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
