Building management has become a key challenge for the education sector across the UK in recent years. This issue often appears through the lens of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC), but it represents only one example of a wider problem.
Many buildings in schools, colleges and universities are operating beyond their intended longevity, and maintenance requirements continue to grow. The 2026 Education Estates Strategy has brought further attention to the long-term condition of education buildings. It has also highlighted the need for a more proactive approach to estate management.
The government investment aims to support that transition, with £38 billion committed to education capital projects between 2025-2026 and 2029-20301 educational years. While the government is taking action to address these issues, school management and building managers will need to gain a full appreciation of the condition of the buildings which they manage, as well as an understanding of the associated risks. Accurate information helps authorities direct available funds towards work that reduces the most immediate risk or prevents the most serious disruption.
Incomplete information increases maintenance risks
Maintenance planning often depends on the quality of building records and prior maintenance logs. Maintenance histories, condition data and up-to-date plans help understand how buildings have changed over time, identify emerging issues and prioritise repair and replacement work with greater confidence.
When this information is missing or outdated, teams may spend valuable time filling gaps before they can address routine issues. A contractor might begin work using blueprints that no longer correspond with the building. Alternatively, a refurbishment request may uncover defects that the project budget did not anticipate. Current, methodical records allow institutions to better understand the problems while still having room to adjust the scope, budget or timetable.
Accurate records also support safety planning. Fire strategies, evacuation procedures and maintenance inspections rely on a clear understanding of a building's layout and the operation of its critical systems.
Deferred maintenance increases longer-term costs
The consequences of deferred maintenance rarely remain isolated. Minor issues, such as roof defects, deteriorating heating systems or a leak that could have been addressed through routine maintenance, can result in larger projects that require significant capital expenditure. Contractors may come in for a temporary fix while the structural issue remains, further affecting safety arrangements and budgets.
In specialist environments such as laboratories, workshops and boarding/accommodation areas, disruptions can be even harder to manage because suitable replacement facilities are not always readily available. Contractor availability also affects timing, as custom building work may require particular skills, materials or equipment that may not be easy to source.
Institutions that identify future requirements early can reflect these considerations in their planning. However, those who wait until critical situations arise may have to manage the same challenges under greater operational pressure.
Stronger oversight creates time to make better choices
Undertaking a current condition survey is a starting point for evaluating the estate. A qualified professional can assess the condition of the buildings, identify defects and determine areas requiring upgrades and maintenance. Government guidelines recommend a comprehensive survey at least every five years, including more frequent assessments if problems consistently occur.
Creating an asset register with records of the institution's buildings, key systems and equipment can make building management more efficient. The register can include a methodical process for recording repairs, replacements and alterations. A detailed survey with regular updates will gradually gain value as upgrades are implemented across the estate.
Regular inspections help maintain current information between formal surveys. These inspections can focus on assets showing signs of deterioration that require closer monitoring, while assets in good condition remain on a scheduled routine. A successful maintenance plan separates immediate repairs from planned replacements and longer-term capital projects.
Clear escalation arrangements complete the process. Staff need to identify warning signs that require investigation, determine who has the authority to commission specialist advice and decide when an issue needs to be escalated to senior management or the board. A structured reporting framework can help the institution recognise patterns of repeated incidents and identify the wider problem.
Five estate questions to ask now:
- How current are our records of building condition, completed work and outstanding repairs?
- Which maintenance issues could cause the greatest disruption to classrooms, laboratories, workshops, accommodation or essential services?
- Does our capital plan address developing problems early enough to preserve choice over timing, cost and contractors?
- Do our reinstatement valuations, sums insured and recovery periods reflect current construction costs and the complexity of our buildings?
- Where would critical activities continue if a key building became unavailable, and what would those temporary premises require?
Comprehensive estate knowledge supports realistic insurance decisions
The quality of estate information also affects property insurance and continuity planning. Estate planning not only involves obtaining a credible estimate of the cost to reconstruct buildings but also the time required to restore services after a major insured loss.
One of the most common challenges in this regard is underinsurance.
Property owners frequently confuse market value with rebuilding costs. Market value reflects what a property could sell for, while rebuilding cost reflects what it would cost to reconstruct the building from scratch. Appropriate coverage means that the sum insured reflects the current rebuilding cost, including materials, labour and associated professional remuneration. Rising construction inflation has increased the importance of keeping valuations up to date.
Reinstatement assumptions also deserve attention, as they estimate the cost of rebuilding a property and associated professional expenses. Rebuilding a modern educational facility can take considerably longer than many organisations anticipate. The period required to return to normal operations needs to highlight current construction realities rather than historical assumptions.
Turning knowledge into preparedness
Ageing buildings will always require difficult investment decisions. Better information allows institutions to make these choices earlier. It also enables funds to be directed towards the most critical assets and explains the reasoning to governors, staff, learners and other stakeholders.
The concern regarding RAAC in school buildings has demonstrated how incomplete records can complicate the assessment of urgent building risks. Applying that lesson across roofs, heating, electrical systems and other assets gives institutions more time to act, more control over expenditure and a clearer route to providing uninterrupted educational services.
To learn more about relevant building management practices and understand specific maintenance requirements, speak to a Gallagher representative.
