Caribbean Building Inspector Training Courses:
A Review

Report submitted by Alwyn Wason, Consultant to the CDMP

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. The PDCPPP/Government of Jamaica/USAID Program
3. The USAID/OAS Caribbean Disaster Mitigation Project Program
4. Implementation
5. Coordination
6. Conclusions and Recommendations

Annex 1: PCDPPP/GOJ/USAID Training Program
Annex 2: USAID/OAS CDMP Training Program
Annex 3: Persons to whom Initations were Sent (September 1999 Training Program)
Annex 4: List of Participants (September 1999 Training Program)
Annex 5 Resource Persons (September 1999 Training Program):

I. Introduction

This report provides information on the design and implementation of short term training courses for building inspectors. There have been 2 programs: one of 2 weeks duration for three terms held in Jamaica from 1986 to 1990, and one of 3 weeks held in Barbados in 1999. The work carried out by the Consultant for the Jamaican program has been to:

1. design the training program
2. negotiate with funding agencies the provision of funds for the implementation of the program
3. choose participants from the OECS
4. discuss the conduct of the program with the College of Arts Science and Technology and
5. gain approval from UNDRO for the implementation of the program and for the use of UNDRO funds for the travel and subsistence of OECS participants.

This program was managed by CAST and was implemented from 1986 to 1990 when the funding ended. For the Barbados program which was funded by the CDMP/OAS, the work carried out by the Consultant has been to:

1. design of the program
2. assist the Barbados Community College (BCC) which was chosen by CDMP to implement the program in the arrangements for the conduct of the program
3. assist the BCC in engaging competent resource persons
4. monitor the work being done by the BCC via telephone and e-mail
5. develop, in concert with the BCC coordinator, evaluation questionnaires to evaluate the work of each session, of each Module and of the total program
6. assist CDMP with contact names for the choice of participants

II. The PCDPPP/Government of Jamaica/USAID Program

In 1984 as a result of a one moth examination of building inspection procedures in Jamaica, the Pan Caribbean Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Project (PCDPPP) prepared a report on the findings of the examination and recommended that there should be a training program for building inspectors from Jamaica and the OECS countries which were member states of the PCDPPP. A 3 year program of training was developed and discussed with UNDRO the executing agency for the PCDPPP, the Office of Disaster Preparedness in Jamaica and the College of Arts, Science and Technology (CAST). Discussions were also held with the USSAID office in Jamaica which agreed that USSAID funds can be used to assist in the financing of the program.

Financing of the program was therefore a cooperative effort between the Government of Jamaica, USAID and PCDPPP/UNDRO. The travel and subsistence costs for the OECS participants were met by the PCDPPP with support from UNDRO. The program, based on the proposal at Annex 1 of this report, was started in 1986.

The program was reduced from 15 days as originally proposed to nine days of intensive instruction. The sessions were held at CAST during the August holiday period so as to take advantage of housing accommodation and availability of classroom space and lecturers from CAST. The program came to an end in 1990.

The participants were chosen from the building inspectorates in the PCDPPP member states with about one building inspector from each state being given the opportunity of participating in the program in any one year. It is estimated that about 20 building inspectors from the OECS were trained.

Subsequent discussions with participants from the OECS and the Turks and Caicos Islands showed the participants considered that Module 2 was of use to them as it focused an the technical issues to be considered during examination of plans and inspection of construction. Modules 1 and 3 were developed particularly for the Jamaican officers (Superintendents of Works) who have to be responsible for construction activities and must therefore be involved in the supervision of labour and related activities.

Unfortunately many of the building inspectors from the OECS who received this training have left the services of the Governments with the result that the inspectorates of states such as Turks and Caicos Islands, Dominica and Antigua have no trained building inspectors on staff..

Because of the demise of PCDPPP and the change from the College of Arts Science and Technology to a University, it has been difficult to find written information on the reasons why the program was not continued, but inasmuch as the program was designed with a three year horizon, the program would naturally come to an end at the end of the three years.

Information from Franklin McDonald who, as Director of the Office of Disaster Preparedness in Jamaica assisted in promoting the program and who became Project Manager of PCDPPP in 1987, is that the program ran out of funds at the end of its term. There appears to have been no formal negotiation for a continuation of the program. Further information is being sought from USAID and from UTECH in Jamaica.

III. The USAID/OAS Caribbean Disaster Mitigation Project Program

The proposal for the training of building inspectors of the OECS states and Belize was developed in July 1999. The proposal stated "inter alia" that "the proposed training program is designed to provide the skills needed by the building inspectors to review the plans and construction of residential buildings and to enforce the building regulations. A preliminary survey of the buildings being constructed in the OECS annually shows that more than 60% of the buildings are residences designed by persons who are not professional architects or engineers. Damage statistics from high winds also show that the houses suffer significantly because of inadequate construction. The emphasis on training building inspectors for the review of plans for residential construction responds to the problems recognised by the Planning and Development Control Authorities and by the private sector in Barbados and in Belize for ensuring "safe" construction.

The existing practice or legislation of most of the countries requires the design of major buildings be carried out by professional engineers and architects. However, the review of the designs and the inspection of construction has been left to the staff off the planning and controlling institutions in the countries. This has not been satisfactory for a number of reasons among which is the lack of qualified staff to carry out this work effectively. The OECS Building Code requires that the review of the designs of important buildings be carried out by professional engineers and architects. It is proposed that this system be enshrined in the building regulations of all of the countries, so as to ensure effective enforcement of the building regulations.

The program as proposed, will provide the building inspectors with reasonably focused information on the problems to be dealt with in the examination of residential building plans and in inspection of construction in the field."

The program as proposed was in 2 phases. Phase 1 focused on classroom training and Phase 2 on site training The program for the classroom training is at Annex 2 of this report. It is considered that Phase 2 of the program should be implemented as soon as funds permit.

IV. Implementation

4.1 Management of the program and resource persons

The training program was carried out by the Barbados Community College (BCC). Mr.Rawle Graham, Senior Tutor in the Division of Technology, was appointed by the BCC as coordinator of the program. This program is at Annex 2.

The Division of Technology offers a three year program leading to an Associate Degree in Technology. Many of the graduates find employment as technicians in engineering and architects offices in Barbados and in the OECS. The BCC has also been involved in the training of foremen and small contractors in Barbados in quantity surveying and cost management, conflict resolution and supervisory skills. It was considered that the BCC would be capable of undertaking the management of the training program with practicing engineers and planners being recruited to assist in technical lectures and discussions.

The list of lecturers and resource persons is given in the report of the BCC but it is provided here (Annex 5) for completeness of this report and ease of reference. There were 15 persons from the Government and from the private sector engaged by the BCC as resource persons.

The resource persons were senior Government officers or consultants in the engineering, planning and health fields. The BCC also used a member of the staff of the Polytechnic to discuss particularly residential plumbing. It was considered that as most of the buildings to be examined by the Building Inspectors will be residential buildings, discussions with a practicing plumber will be more useful than discussions with an engineer. This has turned out to be very useful.

The Table below shows the number of contact hours of the members of the various Government Ministries and consultants who were resource persons for the program.

* This does not include the number of hours the BCC project coordinator spent on the training venue.

The construction industry in Barbados is presently absorbing all of the building professionals, and it was difficult to attract the senior professionals to assist with the training program. Private consultants contacted could not spend more than about 15 hours of contact time with the participants. It is gratifying that the Ministries have been able to release senior officers and in two cases the heads of their Departments to spend about 71% of the total contact time on the program. The Table above does not include preparation time which was at least twice the contact time for each of the resource persons.

4.2 Program costs

The preliminary costs of the program (in US dollars) as developed by the BCC was:

There were some additional costs for transportation for field trips.

4.3 Participants

For this program the participants were drawn from Belize, Barbados, St.Lucia, Grenada and Dominica. These countries were chosen as the OAS/CDMP have had recent contact with the regulatory bodies through the development of building codes, and are in the process of enacting building regulations for the enforcement of the building codes and building guidelines. It was considered that in these circumstances the training of building inspectors is a an urgent necessity.

Invitations were sent to the offices responsible for building control in Barbados and in the OECS countries designated for participation in this program.. This list is at Annex 3. Unfortunately of the ten participants expected from Barbados only three were released for participation in the program. The list of the participants is at Annex 4.

The invitations were sent to the heads of the Government Departments responsible for building inspectorate, and it was expected that the participants chosen would be persons who would benefit from this program It was disappointing therefore to have participants who are senior building inspectors and planners, and in one case a head of the regulatory authority with over twelve years experience in regulating and controlling building developments.

Invitations were also sent to a an insurance company, the Insurance Corporation of Barbados and to financing agency the Barbados Mortgage Finance Company. Both of these agencies are involved in the financing of residential properties and do carry out inspections generally to ensure that advances for construction are in line with the quantity of work done on the building being financed. The Managers of both agencies showed a great deal of interest in the training program especially in view of the legislation mandating the use of the Barbados National Building Code. It is probable that the short time between the receipt of the invitation and the start of the training program prevented the Managers from releasing one of their inspectors for the program.

4.4 Evaluation

Evaluation questionnaires were developed in concert with the BCC coordinator. These questionnaires asked simple questions, as it is our experience that participants will provide honest and truthful answers to questions, the answers to which do not require much study.

The questionnaires were therefore meant to determine:

1. if the accommodation was satisfactory
2. if the lecture facilities were satisfactory
3. if the meals were satisfactory
4. if the transportation to and from the lecture venue was satisfactory
5. if the content of the training program was satisfactory and met their expectations
6. if the presentations were satisfactory in delivery and content
7. if the participant will attend another such program
8. if the participant will recommend such a program to others.
9. whether the program as a whole should be expanded or reduced

These questionnaires were given to the participants for evaluation after the completion of each module. The answers are analyzed in the following Table:

Table 2: Program Evaluation Results

This analysis shows that while the presentations in Model 1, General matters, were fair, 40% of the participants thought that the information presented was inadequate This is because some of the participants have had many years of experience with the operation of planning laws and other related matters.

Modules 2 and 3 dealt with engineering maters and was better received by the participants. In fact 93% of the participants considered that the information presented on structural matters was satisfactory. Discussion with some of the participants at the end of the first day indicated that because the participants were experienced planning and building inspectors most of Module 1 can be dispensed with and more resources put in Modules 2 and 3.

The presentations themselves were generally satisfactory. This is gratifying as most of the presenters have had little or no experience in presenting material to a group of building inspectors. The normal amount of preparation time for such presentations was not available and the resource had to dwell on their practical experiences.

The evaluation for the course as a whole showed that 17% of the participants considered that the program did not meet their expectations, but 100% said that they would recommend the program to others. If the answers are honest, it would confirm the fact that some of the participants were very senior control officers. These officers saw the value of the program for others, although they themselves will not attend a similar course again.

5. Coordination

The BCC appointed a project coordinator who worked with the OAS consultant in the development of the details of the project and supplied the consultant with reports and information on the program by e-mail. The consultant took part in the opening ceremony and spent the day in discussing presentations with some professional engineers and planners who were asked to be resource persons. The consultant was charged with the responsibility of monitoring the project. The consultant therefore:

1. Assisted and guided the BCC coordinator in the preparation of the program details
2. Assisted in the recruitment of a consultant planner and two consulting professional engineers
3. Developed evaluation questionnaires in concert with the BCC coordinator
4. Discussed the first day’s program with some participants, and as a result of the discussion recommended minor adjustments to the First Module.
5. Received information and reports on the progress of the program by the BCC coordinator and provided assistance as required
6. Assisted in the preparation of the draft BCC report

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

Program at CAST

Training programs for building inspectors are considered to be important for proper control of developments. The first of such programs was developed by the Pan Caribbean Disaster Preparedness and Prevention project in 1984 and was held at CAST in Jamaica from 1986 to 1989. The program was developed for as a three year project with support from:

1. the Government of Jamaica, for travel and subsistence for Jamaican participants
2. USAID for support to CAST
3. PCDPPP for travel and subsistence for the OECS participants

No formal evaluation of the program is presently available, but discussions with participants form the Turks and Caicos Islands and Dominica have indicated that they were satisfied with the program and had learnt about the techniques of inspection and some details of the construction methods and materials which are in common use.

Program at Barbados Community College

The CDMP/OAS program was held in Barbados from September 27 to October 15. Unfortunately the college is in session during this period and no classrooms were available for use by the training program. Accommodation was therefore arranged with the Pommarine hotel which is the training hotel for the College. Fifteen participants from Grenada, St Lucia, Dominica, Belize and Barbados attended. The experiences of the participants were varied but some participants were very senior planners and building inspectors. The preliminary budget for the program was about US$ 60,000 including the costs of accommodation and meals for participants and costs of resource persons and air fares for the participants from Dominica, St. Lucia, Grenada, and Belize

There were fifteen resource persons drawn from Government Ministries and Departments, and from the Polytechnic and BCC . The private sector was only able to provide three resource persons. The persons released by the Government Ministries to assist with the training absorbed 71% of the total contact time.

The results of the evaluation questionnaires showed that most of the participants agreed that the program was well run and the presentations acceptable. There was some doubt as to the value of Module 1 in as much as some participants were well schooled in the topics being discussed in that Module. The consensus was that most of Module 1 can be dispensed with, and the program contracted to two weeks instead of three. In fact the first program which was held at CAST in Jamaica was contracted to two weeks generally because of costs.

Recommendations

1. There should be another training program for building inspectors in the other OECS countries which did not participate in the Barbados program.
2. The program should be designed as a two week program of two modules, with each module being of 35 contact hours The funds required for this program should not be more than $60,000 including air fares and payment for preparation time required by the resource persons..
3. Participants (no more than 20) should be chosen from those building inspectors and building inspector trainees who have not had technical training and who can benefit from a short course such as the one proposed.
4. The resource persons should be a mixture of Government professionals and private consultants and building contractors. A mixture of 50% Government professionals and 50% private persons would be suitable.
5. The program itself should include at least 3 days of structured field visits so that the participants can be shown construction techniques and be taught to analyze the problems seen.
6. The OECS building code and building guidelines should be the base of the instruction and resource persons familiar with these documents should be engaged.
7. Emphasis should be placed on the importance of siting buildings to avoid damage and to mitigate the effects of natural hazards such as high seas, hurricane winds, and heavy rainfall. There should be at least 2 illustrated sessions on this topic.
8. If at all possible, more lead time should be given to resource persons so that illustrations can be prepared and all resource persons requested to provide base papers from which the discussions and presentations are based.
9. Private consultants should be remunerated at the standard rate for consulting services. Preparation time at least twice the presentation time should be paid for. This will allow the program managers to engage suitable consultants for this vital program.
10. This program was the first such program managed by the Barbados Community College. I consider that the program ran smoothly and that the College fulfilled its obligations. The College can manage another such program easily.
11. Invitations for participation in future programs should specify the qualification and experience levels of participants required.
12. Phase 2 of the training proposal dealt with on-site training. This phase of the program should be implemented urgently, as it is considered that the building inspectors will learn how to apply the lessons learnt in the classroom, and also learn by example how to deal with the many problems of development control.

Annex 1: PCDPPP/GOJ/USAID Training Program

"The program is divided into three basic modules. The first module discusses the Jamaican Government machinery (organization, budgets and local government) so as to provide a background for the officers understanding of his role in the Organization in which he works.

The basic philosophy of the course format is one of encouraging interaction with the participants. Lectures or presentations will therefore be as brief as possible with emphasis on involvement of the participants in the subject matter being discussed. The presentation of each topic will therefore be no more than forty-five minutes in each session with a further hour and a quarter for discussion of the points developed in the presentation. The presentations must be tailored accordingly and must be interactive. Slides and video material will be necessary training aids.

It is intended that the program of training be intensive over a period of three weeks (15 working days) and for about nine hours of lectures and discussions per day. It would not be possible to release all of the inspectors at one time to attend the course. It is possible however that 15 inspectors or about 1/3 of the total inspectorate can attend at any time. Three - three week sessions would allow all of the inspectors to benefit from the program without affecting the normal work load unduly.

The second module is a technical education module with emphasis on discussing each of the major building materials, concrete, steel, masonry and timber with special reference to the requirements of the Jamaica National Building Code.

Planning and Development Control will be discussed from the planner’s perspective so as to give the Building Inspectors the rationale behind the planning decisions which must be enforced by the inspectors. Planning Legislation will be introduced.

Careful attention will be paid to inspection procedures and problems. Standardized procedures will be introduced and discussed. Each inspector will be given an opportunity to develop a solution for a hypothetical inspection problem

The third module focuses on the general principles or management. This module will be useful for the Superintendent of Roads and Works who is responsible for carrying out road and building storks where the proper supervision of labour is necessary for the success of the project.

The lecturers or presenters should be persons with the necessary academic knowledge of the subject matter being discussed and must be a practicing engineer or planner for those subjects requiring expertise in engineering or planning. It is suggested that the presenters for the first and third modules be drawn from the University and CAST with Senior Government officials being coopted for those subjects requiring current knowledge of the civil service.

Costs

The costs computed are based on a standard rate of US$100 per day with four hours of preparation for one hour of lecture attendance.

• Total classroom time: 15 days
• Lecture preparation time: 60 days
• Total for 1st group of participants 75 days

For succeeding groups time needed for lecture preparation is assumed to be 15 days for each group. Hence for the second and third years of the program the total lecture and preparation time will be 30 days per year:

Total lecture and preparation time for the three year program: 165 days

It is assumed that the costs of participants will be met by the Parish Councils and by the Central Government. These costs should be checked with the CAST Administration for validity. It is recommended that a Consultant be appointed to develop the details of the courses and to coordinate the program. The Consultant’s fee is estimated to be US$5,000. The total estimated cost of the program is US$26,500.

The outline program follows:

Module 1 - Government Organization - 3 Days

One day - 9 hours is reserved for discussions and problem solving.

Module 2 - Technical Education - 5 Days

Module 3 - Supervision and Management - 4 Days

The program was reduced from 3 weeks to 2 weeks due to budget constraints.

Annex 2: USAID/OAS CDMP Training Program

"The training to be in 2 phases:

1. Phase 1 will be classroom training at TECH in Jamaica or at the Community College in Barbados or at the Sir Arthur Lewis College in St.Lucia
   For classroom training about 2 inspectors from each country will be away for training for a period of 3 weeks. In St. Lucia where there are 12 Building Officers, about 3 persons can be away for training at the same time.. It is proposed that the Building Guidelines developed for use in the OECS be used as the source of reference for the technical aspects of the training program.
2. Phase 2 will be on-site training in each of the participating countries

Phase 1. Classroom Training

2.3.1 This training will involve the introduction of the building inspectors to the technical subjects, the knowledge of which is necessary for adequate examination of building plans and inspection of construction. The training will be introductory only and will provide a basic understanding of the technical and other issues involved in the design and construction of residential buildings. It is proposed that the classroom training will be held during the summer months when the regular student body is away and dormitory or similar accommodation for the students will be available.

2.3.2 There will be three modules

a) Module 1 - General matters - 4 days

1. Building and planning laws
2. Role of the building inspector in the control of construction of developments
3. How inspection should be carried out
4. Use of building codes
5. Case study and discussion

This module is designed to be interactive so that the students, who will all have had some experience in inspection, will be encouraged to discuss their experiences and problems found in the inspection of developments.

b) Module 2 - Civil engineering and sanitary drainage - 5 days

1. Site layout and land use
2. Drainage
3. Access roads
4. Water supply
5. Sewerage
6. Plumbing

The emphasis in this Module is effective use of the land, infrastructure design and proper collection and disposal of waste.

c) Model 3 - Structures - 6 days

1. Hurricane and earthquake resistant construction
2. Timber frame, walls, floor and roof construction
3. Masonry wall construction
4. Reinforced concrete frame, floors and roof construction
5. Structural steel frame
6. Prefabricated buildings and proprietary systems
7. Case Study and discussion

2.3.3 The failure of buildings from high winds or earthquakes results in the main from inadequate construction of the structure. This module may be considered to be the most important, and is intended to make the building inspector aware of all of the details of construction which will affect the life and use of a building. In this module the building inspector will be exposed to the design details which must be examined before giving approval for construction, and will be taught through illustrations the details which would be acceptable for "safe" construction.

2.3.4 There are many prefabricated buildings on the market, and the design of these buildings must be examined carefully before being accepted for the housing market in the country. Examples of such construction will be examined.

2.4. Phase 2 - on site training

2.4.1 It is considered that on-site training should follow the classroom training. Experience has shown that too often the pressures of work in the field leads to poor inspection of critical components. It is proposed that an experienced building inspector be engaged to examine the work of the building inspectors in the field, and to provide assistance and problem solving for a period of at least four weeks after the classroom training.

2.4.2 The task will be to train the building inspectors in the carrying out of field inspections and in the proper enforcement procedures in accordance with the relevant legislation. It is considered that the involvement of an experienced inspector with the field work is an important component of the training of the inspector, as many of the problems arise in the review of the plan submitted for a building permit, and in the actual construction in the field. A contact period of one month in each country may not be adequate to review and offer solutions for all of the problems; but within this period many of the problems can be examined and recorded by the consultant for further discussion with the head of the controlling department or authority

2.4.3 The timing of this training will have to be carefully programmed so as to give the maximum benefit to all of the building inspectors in the various countries. There will be a total of 44 on-site contact weeks of training.

3.1 The technical disciplines and contact times required for the resource persons to be engaged for the classroom training in Phase 1 of the program are given in Annex 2. The training staff for Phase 1 will consist of a land use planner, a civil engineer a sanitary engineer a structural engineer, and an experienced building inspector.

3.2 It is considered that experienced professionals staff would be available in the country in which the classroom training is being held from which the resource persons can be chosen.

3.3 For Phase 2, it is proposed that an experienced building inspector be engaged as a building consultant for a period of one year to spend one month in each of the participating countries. The building inspector may have to be recruited from the Bahamas which has had over 20 years of experience in the enforcement of the Bahamas building code.

4.1 It is proposed that a program manager be engaged for the development of the detailed program and management of the process. The times and costs of the resource persons and of the program manager are given in Annex 2.

5.1 The costs of classroom training carried out by the technical colleges should be provided by colleges. However the costs given in Annex 1 assume that the instructors will be remunerated at consultancy rates and not at rates applicable to members of staff of an institution. The total costs given in the appendix should therefore be adequate to over the costs that will be charged by the technical colleges.

5.2 The costs of travel and subsistence for students will be approximately US$ 60,300. It is assumed that the students can be housed in the University or college accommodation during the summer months and that the students will require subsistence for 23 days for the three week training program.

5.3 The cost of engaging an experienced building inspector (building consultant) for on-site training for a total of 52 weeks (including, preparation, travel and reporting time) including salary costs, DSA and airfares will be approximately $128,000 as shown in Annex 3.

5.4 These costs are approximate at this time and will have to be developed more precisely.

Annex 3: Persons to whom Invitations were Sent (September 1999 Training Program)

• Ms Graces Les Fouris, Director of Planning, Grand Turk, Turks ad Caicos Islands, tel 649 946 2220: for one person
• Mr Cadet Henderson, Chief Engineer, Ministry of Works, Belmopan, Belize:tel 501 822 690; for three persons
• Mr Blaize Nickson, Chief Physical Planner, Development Control Authority, P.O. Box 709, Castries, St. Lucia; tel: 758 452 2506; for three persons
• Chief Technical Officer, Ministry of Public Works and Transport, the Pine, St. Michael Barbados: for four persons
• Mr.C. Headley Senior Environmental Engineer, Ministry of Health, Jemmotts Lane, Bridgetown, Barbados; te 246 436 4826; for two persons
• Mr Alan Jones, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Lands, Sir Frank Walcott Building, Culloden Road, St. Michael, Barbados, Tel 246 431 7601: for two persons from the National Housing Corporation
• Dr. Joseph Bannis, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Planning, Government Headquarters, Roseau Dominica , tel 767 448 2401; for two persons
• Mrs Waveney Nicholls, Manager Barbados Mortgage Finance Company, 6^th Avenue and Pine Road, Belleville, St. Michael, Barbados. Tel 246 427 5780; for one person
• Mr. Wismar Greaves, Manager Insurance Corporation of Barbados, ICB Building, Roebuck St, Bridgetown, Barbados: for one person
• Mr. Mark Cummings, Chief Town Planner, Block B, the Garrison, St. Michael, Barbados, Tel 246 426 1284, for two persons

Annex 4: List of Participants (September 1999 Training Program)

Annex 5: Resource Persons (September 1999 Training Program)

Site visits were organised by the project coordinator Rawle Graham and Ivan Sealy of the Ministry of Housing.