Burdened with a legacy of RAAC and asbestos, UK schools are struggling with the practical considerations around inspections, risk assessments and remediation. Here RLB Associate, Sean Bernath talks to IOSH magazine about the condition of the country’s education estate.
Schools are meant to be places where children can flourish, yet the existence of both reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) and asbestos in the UK education estate have fuelled fears over pupils’ safety in crumbling classrooms as well as the associated health risks of exposure. Concerns surrounding the structural integrity of RAAC have forced many schools and colleges to move classes into temporary accommodation. Of the 237 educational settings known to contain RAAC in England, 40% have yet to start removing the material. Meanwhile, asbestos is present in an estimated 80% of the school’s estate, according to the Department for Education (DfE, 2019.
The coexistence of RAAC and asbestos in school buildings adds a layer of complication to investigation, renovation or demolition. Evidence of poor asbestos management and out-of-date recordkeeping in some schools has even left surveyors and contractors unaware of the dangers as they commence work.
The post-war construction boom saw increasing use of both asbestos and RAAC, making it likely they will exist in the same buildings. A cheaper, lightweight alternative to standard concrete with a lifespan of about 30 years, RAAC was formed into panels, or planks, used in flat roofs and some floors and walls. The material substitutes coarse aggregates used in regular concrete with a mix of fine aggregates and chemicals that create gas bubbles, boosting volume. A mesh of steel reinforcement is required to increase the porous material’s strength in compression. But years of neglect or ill-thought-out modifications can cause significant damage, resulting in excessive deflections, water ingress and breakdown of the concrete due to rusting reinforcement.
Problems with RAAC came to a head in 2023 when roofs containing the material in three schools collapsed suddenly, prompting the closure of 104 schools. Many more educational sites identified the presence of RAAC and formulated plans to tackle it. Of the 237 institutions affected, RAAC has now been removed from 52 using targeted government grant funding, with a further 71 in the process of rebuilds and refurbishments (DfE, 2025). Regulation 4 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 requires duty holders to produce an asbestos survey identifying ACMs and their location, amount and condition. This forms the basis of an asbestos register, a live document recording the ACMs and actions needed to manage hazard exposure. Information in the register must underpin an asbestos management plan to ensure that no one is exposed. According to Sean Bernath CMIOSH, senior CDM consultant at Rider Levett Bucknall, working out if asbestos will be affected by RAAC removal and determining its location requires a thorough refurbishment and demolition survey completed by a qualified asbestos surveyor.
‘RAAC may often be concealed, so surveyors might have to break holes into walls to identify the presence of RAAC and asbestos,’ says Sean. ‘Prior to any intrusive works, it’s necessary to follow the requirements of the asbestos regulations and make sure the material is either removed or encapsulated and managed. This could also include putting in place enclosures, air monitoring during removal and clearance certification to allow for the RAAC works to be undertaken.’
Due to the absence of any specific legislation on RAAC – there is currently only risk management guidance available – the onus is on duty holders to assemble a competent team of people to advise on appropriate removal or remediation strategies.
Sean says OSH practitioners can assist by, among other things, ensuring they get a clear project scope from the client and inform them of their responsibilities as duty holders under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 (CDM) and Building Regulations, plus any additional associated health and safety legislation. CDM aims to ensure that risks are managed from project inception to completion and requires clients and designers to ensure information within the asbestos register and management plan is available and considered throughout the project lifecycle, with an appointed principal designer coordinating health and safety during the pre-construction phase.
‘Each building, each location, is very different, therefore the level of risk can also be very different,’ says Sean.
Condition surveys by a qualified surveyor or structural engineer will reveal the state of RAAC and point towards the appropriate remedial solution, whether that’s temporary propping, phased removal or a full rebuild. Temporary propping may be required if RAAC planks are bending with limited support on the structural end bearings, or in areas with restricted access where it’s not feasible to remove RAAC. In the case of an unused empty building with badly damaged RAAC, best practice health and safety advice is to remove it entirely.
The full version of this article can be read in the November-December 2025 issue of IOSH magazine.
FURTHER INFORMATION:
