Case Jyväskylä Life cycle procurement: Sharing the risks and savings SCI Network meeting, Malmö Sanna Ahvenharju, Gaia Consulting Oy Based on presentation by Mikko Lepo, City of Jyväskylä

Gaia team – at Your Service 35 highly-educated experts – multidisciplinary and cross- sectorial Sustainability consultancy and business development since 1993 Strategy and implementation partner Over 400 clients in 5 continents Offices in Finland, Switzerland, China, Ethiopia and Argentina 2

Construction of a campus of childrens’ facilities School for grades 1-9 Day care centre Special school for children requiring specific support Altogether 1000 children, 180 personnel Investment of m2, 35 M€ years lifecycle, ~55 M€

4

Timeline 5 Preselection of providers (5-6/2010) Presentation of solutions (9-10/2010) Tenders (1/2011) Final decisions (5-6/2011) Signing of contracts (8/2011) Procurement announcement 4/2010 Tendering of procurement consultants 1-2/2010 Procurement decision 1/2010 Project plan 2009 Construction 3/2012 – 7/2015 Service until 2033 Competitive negotiation

Aims of the procurement project 1. Efficiency and multifunctional use of space 2. Monitoring and reporting the set goals for functionality and condition of different spaces/facilities 3. Application of new technical solutions 4. Sustainable development and energy efficiency 5. Competitive financing for life cycle procurement and the legislative requirements of the process 6

Life cycle approach Feasibility study Project planning Procurement preparation ConstructionUseMaintenance 7 Lifecycle procurement Procurement of - usability, - functionality and - predefined conditions of a facility

Risk assessment identified over 100 risks 8

Target values defined for different spaces 9

Contractual requirements, examples The condition of buildings have to fulfill certain level of quality throughout their lifetime Assignment of required response times -Decrease service contract payments 1 €/m2/day, if response is delayed Predefined maximum energy consumption -Costs for exceeding the limit are carried by the provider -The potentially achieved savings are divided 50% / 50% between procurer and provider 10

Lessons learned 11 Innovation limited by the fact that many equipment requirements had to be specific in order to allow for quantitative comparison between tenders -Life-cycle contract allows for further development during later phases of the project Energy and water contracting mechanism worked well – encouraged savings and new innovations The reporting mechanisms and usability and functionality assessment mechanisms carry a potential for further service providers and innovations The target levels for energy consumption could have been even more tight

Notes for the guide 2.a - good project team 2. g - funding from national programme 3.f – performance targets 5.a – procurement model 6.a – use of incentives 12