INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

YS T T

INCREASING

THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

Hannah Boyle, David Butler, Steven Chang, Conor Frow & Viktoriia Udaltsova

Acknowledgements We are particularly grateful for the assistance given by Callum Gearing for his valuable support on this project and for his comments that greatly improved this paper. We thank Pablo Garfias Torrent for helping us to start this project and his support through the writing process.

We thank Julius Yam for providing us with a policy paper design. We thank Dom Roebuck, Patrick O'Donnell and Carly Precious for answering our questions which served as an important starting point for our work. We thank Jake Keay and the York Student Think Tank Editing Team for their patience and contributions.

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

Executive Summary

Executive Summary The majority of students are dissatisfied with the quality of laundry services provided by the University. Since there is no alternative on campus, this problem remains one the biggest reported by students. The current provider is responsible for 95% of the laundrette services provided by UK universities which means that this issue is relevant to the majority of universities in the country.

In light of Covid-19, the need for transparency and value for money is vital, as well as the need for continued laundry and campus services which have been procured with the student experience in mind.

Analysis of the procurement process will be of long-term benefit in the production and amendment of future laundry management service contracts of the university.

Recommendations: •

The University should move from indirect (conducted through the Student Union) to direct student participation. Surveys need to be conducted by the university that consider both the quality of the current service and what students value most in a laundry provider. This will help the university provide students with a better awareness of their role in the process of selecting the contractor, as well as get a better understanding of students’ needs.

•

The University should improve its complaints procedure. QR codes that allow students to contact customer service or provide feedback with a simple scan should be placed in all laundry rooms.

•

A set of awards criteria should be expanded and not based only on quality and cost but other important factors such as ease of access and use or environmental impact to ensure that different students’ priorities are included and considered.

•

Implementation of a clear service level agreement which can be based on the aforementioned student feedback system and collection of complaints.

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

Content

Content 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................2 2 Methodology ...................................................................................................................................3 3 Past, Present and Future: Policy and Development ..................................................................4 4 The Solution: More Transparent Procurement Process and Better Use of Student Feedback .............................................................................................................................................6 4.1 Improving the Feedback System – Direct Student Participation ...............................................6 4.2 Proactive Complaint Handling ....................................................................................................6 4.3 Appropriate and Relevant Changes to the Contract .................................................................7 5 Conclusion: Looking Ahead .........................................................................................................8

1

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

1 Introduction

Introduction: An Overview Over the past twelve years, the laundrette services at University of York have been solely provided

by Circuit Laundry, a fully incorporated division of the JLA group. Together, the company is currently responsible for 95% of the services provided to UK universities and private student accommodation.

However, there has been widespread concern regarding its quality; problems range from machine malfunctions, to the cost of service, to the lack of customer support from the company itself.

This frustration is commonly shared by students in York: a recent survey conducted by the York University Student Union (YUSU) showed 89.3% of the 1327 respondents rated Circuit laundry as 5/10 or less on ‘quality of service’.

The COVID-19 crisis has highlighted the pressures on students residing on and off campus. In particular, students on courses that require them to work in close proximity with infected patients, or those who undertake health care or social care courses, are more dependent than ever on the consistent performance of the laundrette machines to ensure their clothes are properly cleaned.

This increased usage of services also means some students may face financial problems in the long term, further adding to the financial and emotional strain on students.

While many students have called for a replacement to Circuit Laundry, this is not possible at this time. The procurement process is already underway and a new contract of five years in duration, with the possibility for extension if needed, is set to begin in September 2021. The financial difficulties imposed upon laundrette providers by the pandemic also means companies of a smaller scale are less likely to be able to compete against Circuit laundry. Prior to this contract renewal, however, all contracts had been for a seven-year period; a shorter length in the current contract could therefore indicate a change in university tactics on laundrette providers.

In this context, this paper will start by looking at the current service provider (Circuit Laundry), and will then examine the procurement process as well as any relevant documents available. Finally, the paper will turn its attention to ways in which future procurement procedures can be improved, particularly regarding transparency, a key factor that allows for more student input on what is expected in terms of costs and quality. To this end, this paper recommends that the University take the following actions: 1. The implementation of an effective complaints and feedback system 2. The implementation of a clear and effective awards criterion The reasoning for these recommendations will be covered in this paper.

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

2

2 Methodology

Methodology In this paper York Student Think Tank (YSTT) aims to outline the current issues with the procurement of laundry provision for the accommodation provided by the University of York across its two campuses, and unpack possible fixes for the flaws noted within this paper. After studying the procurement process of the University of York and other similar institutions, this report will set out recommendations of explicit improvements which could be implemented by the University of York in association with students and faculty.

Information has been collected for this work using direct interviews with those who are involved and responsible for the procurement process and student satisfaction, including President of YUSU Patrick O’ Donnell and Procurement manager Dom Roebuck, both of whom provided valuable information regarding their position in the procurement process.

It should be noted that there have been notable legal barriers in the process of obtaining information regarding legal tender and contractual obligations; however, the available information has been used to the best of its ability in order to ensure that there is a coherent response to the problems assessed within this report. Following accurate assessments of the procurement procedure, this report made the executive choice to shift focus onto the procedure rather than immediate alternative laundry management solutions, as outlined below.

This report will be broken into clear sections indicating the outcomes of research. Following an introduction and overview of the aims of this paper, a policy content section will provide details on the previous and current policy and its implications. A recommendation section will outline the next possible steps to improve the procurement process and the implementation of these suggestions, before concluding our findings.

3

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

3 Past Present and Future

Past, Present and Future: Policy and Development The laundry management services company Circuit Laundry has been the provider for the University of York since at least 2012. The previous contract from 2012 had an initial contract term of 5 years with 3 x 1-year extension options. This contract ran until 2020 when a prior information notice and a later contract notice were submitted on the Tender electronics daily site (TED).

The website, used to show business opportunities across the EU, is a public procurement journal which allowed the university to accord to its statutory requirements as a public contracting authority.

Additional information and documents were published on the University’s procurement portal although the documents were only available to companies bidding for the contract.

The prior information notice published on the site in March 2020 outlined a preliminary market consultation happening in April. It gave companies a deadline of around a month to submit requests for participation in the market consultation event1. The event saw numerous representatives from different departments of the university including YUSU and the Graduate Students Association (GSA) involved. This helped the university and its multiple relevant departments gain knowledge of the market, on potential new companies for the contract, and was to help shape the tender contract when it was to be released later in the year.

The contract notice was published on the TED site in October. This outlined more specific details of the contract the university was looking to award, in relation to the procedure of the bidding process for the new contract. The bidding process was an open procedure with the deadline of requests to participate for consideration of the contract around a month later in December2.

The proposed contract was for laundry management services which involved the supply, installation, and maintenance of laundry equipment and facilities around campus, and also sought the operation of payment facilities and social engagement events. The new contract was valued at £2.3 million, as shown in the contract notice. The tender was also not to be divided into lots, which according to Dom Roebuck is because the university aims to deal with a single laundry provider. This is in contrast with other universities such as Warwick, who run different contracts in different accommodation3.

While the contract notice did not provide detailed award criteria itself, one can look at the criteria from a University of Leeds contract notice dividing between ‘Quality’ and ‘Price’. According to relevant staff, the York contract has similar weighting in its award criteria. Nonetheless, the exact details of the award criteria remain undisclosed. However, according to the university, student satisfaction has become a considerable priority in making decisions. In relation to this, plans for

1 Services - 112541-2020 - TED Tenders Electronic Daily. Ted.europa.eu. (2021). Retrieved 25 January 2021, from

https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:112541-2020:TEXT:EN:HTML. 2

Services - 483825-2020 - TED Tenders Electronic Daily. Ted.europa.eu. (2021). Retrieved 25 January 2021, from https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:483825-2020:TEXT:EN:HTML. 3 Suen, E. (2019). Warwick SU replaces Circuit Laundry at most halls and campus laundrettes. Theboar.org. Retrieved 25 January

2021, from https://theboar.org/2019/10/warwick-su-replaces-circuit-laundry-at-most-student-halls-and-laundrettes/.

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

4

3 Past Present and Future

‘student engagement activities’ and student surveys have been on the table; whether these will be acted on, and how, is currently unknown.

The deliberation of which company was to be awarded the contract was through an evaluation panel consisting representatives from YUSU, Estates and Campus Services, Commercial Services and Procurement. The process involved the companies making presentations and being interviewed by the panel in November 2020. The prospective companies were then scored against the award criteria and the winner was then to be appointed as the new tender of the contract. As of January 2021, the new tender is unknown. However, the actual implementation of the contract is now known to start from March 2021 rather than as suggested previously, September 2021.

With this further context, one can analyse the current policy and procedure of the University of York relating to laundry management services selection. Circuit Laundry has been unpopular with students, as demonstrated by the 2019 YUSU survey of students, 9 in 10 respondents giving the quality of the service 5/10 or less4.While this paper is not directly concerned with the actual company who will be responsible for the laundry management solutions for the University, highlighting areas where the procedure for selection can be improved along with after-the-fact recommendations the awarded company must act on, provides a good basis for an improved quality of service down the line.

The feedback system including a means for lodging complaints effectively is the first point of concern. The contract provides unclear and undetailed award criteria, this is another problem where improvement ought to be considered. What is also of concern is the student representation in the selection process itself. These concerns will be further considered in the next section where recommendations will be made. While the contracted provider has already been selected, modifications to the current procedure of selection and added after-the-fact obligations can provide suitable and plausible ways for progression of the laundry management services at the University.

4

Hewat, E., 2020. YUSU Circuit Laundry Survey Reinforces Student Frustrations. [online] Nouse.co.uk. Available at: <https://nouse.co.uk/2020/01/22/yusu-circuit-laundry-survey-reinforcesstudent-frustrations> [Accessed 14 November 2020].

5

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

4 The Solution

The Solution: More Transparent Procurement Process and Better Use of Student Feedback 1.1 Improving the Feedback System - Direct Student Participation One of the biggest causes of criticism towards the current University laundry is the absence of an effective feedback system. Despite the fact that the University bodies engage with the Student Union, taking into consideration their opinion and consequently (so the thinking goes) that of the students they represent, the University is failing to make students consciously aware that they are being consulted. Students are unaware of the existence of the panel event and their representation in questions connected to launderette services. To achieve a more effective feedback system, we propose using direct student participation through yearly surveys offered in multiple channels such as social media, email campaigns, and in-person surveys. We propose that surveys are conducted directly by the University or the laundry contractor as part of their student engagement events. We recommend conducting surveys with the minimum participation of 500 students at the end of every autumn term.

The survey should include questions that will help to measure current student satisfaction (such as satisfaction with price, quality of services, accessibility, etc.), identify the existing issues, and get opinions on the possible solutions presented by students. We also recommend using Customer Effort Score metrics by including questions on how easy it is for students to interact with the contractor and fix problems through customer support, measuring them on a scale of ‘very easy’ to ‘very difficult’.

Direct student participation will help the university to get a better understanding of student needs and preferences. At the same time, students will have a better awareness of their role in the process of selecting the laundry provider. Providing a more effective feedback system through direct participation will build a bridge between students and the University, which in turn will result in decreasing criticism and an increasing sense of cooperation.

1.2. Proactive complaint handling It is crucial for the University to have an effective complaints procedure. Complaints are a great source of valuable information and should be seen as an opportunity, not a threat. The failure of the University to create such a procedure has resulted in even more scepticism from the student body.

We thus propose the creation of a more efficient complaint platform. QR codes that allow students to contact customer service or provide feedback with a simple scan can be a solution to the problem.

We recommend it be implemented as follows:

•

Displayed/available where students can see it - (for example, laundry rooms),

•

Easy for students to understand and follow,

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

6

4 The Solution •

Explanatory remarks of the possible outcomes, stressing the importance of their opinion in the next selection process,

•

Respecting students' confidentiality.

The University should have direct access (or shared with the laundry provider) to all complaints with the ability to provide constructive responses. We also recommend the development of more efficient companies.

The creation of a more effective complaints system will allow students to express their concerns.

For the University, on the other hand, the opportunity to address concerns directly will increase its standing and trustworthiness amongst the student body - they will feel more represented and considered.

1.3. Appropriate and relevant changes to the contract When renewing their laundry provider in 2018, Leeds included in their tender that they would be considering both the quality and the cost of the service (with a respective weighting of 80/20). The current procurement process already uses a similar idea, where a panel of representatives from different departments in the university (including YUSU) give a rating in varying categories for each prospective company. Although this has been especially beneficial with the recent procurement process, in which a greater focus was placed on student satisfaction, more input from the student body is needed to allow them to properly voice what they value more in the trade-off between quality and cost. We recommend this is done as follows:

7

•

A reassurance that the tender itself contains a set of awards criteria that allows direct input from YUSU and the student body, considering not only quality and cost but other important factors such as ease of access and use or environmental impact to ensure that different students priorities are included and considered.

•

Surveying each set of first-year students towards the end of their year in campus accommodation, by which point most would know the system in place well, as well as what they would like to see changed about it. If done over the eight-year course of the contract, the university would obtain a much clearer picture of what exactly students want, which will result in a better-informed awards criterion and a provider better suited for their needs.

•

Implementation of a clear service level agreement which can be based on the aforementioned student feedback system and collection of complaints, making sure that minimum levels of service quality are achieved, and that if not, the company is held accountable. This could be done by gauging how many complaints/issues were raised in a limited time frame; if too many are left unresolved, then steps may need to be taken by the university to ensure the contractual duties are fulfilled. Whilst Circuit Laundry did appear to tick all the boxes over the course of their contract, they were often not doing much beyond that (as an example, they would attend the required ‘student engagement sessions’ that were simply short meetings with the YUSU president). By having a clear and well defined ‘failsafe’ that is centred around student feedback, not only will the service be of better quality, but it will be more responsive to any issues that may arise.

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

4 The Solution

Ideally, we would like to aim to have the procurement process be as open and transparent as possible, with students able to see who applied for the contract and with what offer, so that they may input their thoughts on each one. However, this simply is not possible, so we believe that our propositions provide a fair middle ground, allowing the student voice to be both heard and implemented in future procurements without infringing on any companies’ privacy.

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES

8

5 Conclusion

Conclusion: Looking Ahead Following the events of 2020 and the continuing developments of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic, student satisfaction and services have been on the front line of development. However, this comes with a notable change that are also required to ensure sanitation, hygiene and student experiences do not become compromised.

After detailed analysis of past and present policy procedures, the University of York could be inclined to consider the viable options presented above as improvements to campus services which are in the mutual interest of both student, faculty and facilities, as well as to the benefit of affiliated parties such as York University Student Union and potentially to influence private sector accommodations.

Cost, quality of service and transparency have been noted within this report as being challenged and potentially undermined by the procurement process, and therefore the recommendations of active student collaboration for feedback, effective and unbiased complaints procedures, and altered and fair award criteria would ensure that student satisfaction is regulated, York University Student Union and the University of York have a direct role and responsibility for student requirements and concerns, as well as ensuring a cost effective solution for essential campus services.

While this paper reflects on the University of York services for laundry procurement, however the report would recommend a similar review of campus services which have a direct and influential impact on those who reside in campus accommodation, particularly with the development of two new college accommodations within the University of York campus community. Furthermore, the report would encourage increased transparency with the tender and legal process to the extent which is permitted in law in order to allow student scrutiny prior to the contract renewal of September 2021.

9

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY OF UNIVERSITY LAUNDRETTES