Key findings relating to the operational phase: 

•  no statistically significant differences between PFI and other schools in the costs of building maintenance, grounds maintenance, water and sewerage or fuel were identified;

•  the average costs of cleaning and caretaking are higher in PFI schools, but this was probably because of higher levels of service required by the contract;

•  there was a poor understanding of the furniture, fittings and equipment needs of the users;

•  there had been little service innovation;

•  bidders had underestimated the vandalism risks;

•  many contracts did not anticipate the need for many small variations rather than large ones;

•  contract clauses do not allow for streamlined, cost efficient and rapid processing of high-volume, small-value transactions;

•  there was a mixed picture on the number of payment mechanism deductions and the payment mechanism was not always rigorously enforced;

•  there was a mixed response to the helpdesk - some users saw this as a loss of control by the school head;

•  some saw facilities management services as more responsive due to a good specification; and

•  private finance initiatives should improve with time as lessons are learned.