Memorandum submitted by the Department
for Education and Skills (DfES)
INTRODUCTION
This paper sets out the Government's broad capital
strategy for schools incorporating Building Schools for the Future
and Academies and to a lesser extent FE. It sets these programmes
within the broader context of our drive to refurbish school buildings,
including primary schools, and how this supports the wider agenda
to improve educational provision for all our children and young
people. It sets out how we are supporting good design and the
processes in place for ensuring that educational transformation
is at the heart of the renewal process. The paper addresses the
issues of sustainability in its environmental, social and economic
aspects. We cover a lot of ground but—perhaps inevitably—touch
on some areas in more detail than others and therefore further
information is available in the supporting documentation. However,
if the Committee wishes to have any more detail on anything contained
in this paper or indeed anything that is not covered we are ready
to provide further information as requested.
The Government's aim is to rebuild or refurbish
all secondary schools and significantly improve half of all primary
schools over the next 15 years. The school building programme,
including the far reaching Building Schools for the Future Programme,
supports the Government's wider drive to raise education standards,
personalise learning and place schools at the heart of their communities.
The investment in our school buildings provides
a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to transform our schools estate
so that we have buildings that inspire learning and benefit every
pupil and member of staff and are a source of pride as well as
a practical resource for the community. Sustainability will be
at the heart of the programme. This means schools constructed
and delivered in ways that are environmentally friendly; sufficiently
flexible to adapt to changing methods of teaching and learning
and contributing to local regeneration schemes.
The challenge is to combine excellent buildings
that are good value for money with support for the highest standards
of teaching and learning for years to come. The investment will
enable the construction of high quality classrooms, kitchens,
dining halls, sports and ICT facilities and staff and community
rooms. We aim to have school buildings that are both inspirational
and get the basics right; school environments that are by turns
practical, sustainable, delightful, pleasant, accessible and secure:
buildings that support the principle that every child matters
and serve the local community.
The school renewal programme is ambitious. And
with the scale of investment comes responsibility. It is incumbent
on everyone involved to play their part effectively and to work
in partnership to make the most of this opportunity. They include
the Department for Education and Skills (DfES), local authorities,
non-departmental public bodies (such as Partnership for Schools
(PfS), diocesan bodies and faith groups, architects, designers,
contractors and builders, the school workforce, governors and
pupils. But above all success will depend on how well we work
together. For instance, designers and architects are key to the
programme but they may have a limited knowledge of education imperatives
and practicalities. Those in education may be experts in their
field but unaware of the prospects open to them through innovative
design approaches. That is why effective partnership and engagement
bringing different areas of expertise together early on is so
important. And in terms of environmental sustainability it is
most readily affordable if built in from the start and not as
something bolted on later.
Good design is essential to our programme and
can make a significant difference in simple ways: imaginatively
designed dining halls can promote healthy eating; wider corridors
can improve the flow of pupil traffic and cut down on bullying;
classrooms with good acoustics and ventilation can improve concentration
and behaviour. The DfES is supporting good design in a range of
ways. We are producing design guidance; disseminating best practice;
fostering demonstration projects, both real and conceptual; providing
tools to support technical guidance or help users better understand
their needs and communicate them to designers; providing professional
advice on individual projects; and innovative projects that encourage
greater user participation. And we have funded the joinedupdesignforschools
exhibition which explored how good design can improve the quality
of life in schools by listening to the pupils.
In recent years the backlog of need has been
substantially addressed, and the hundreds of newly built and refurbished
schools and programmes such as Classrooms of the Future have shown
us what can be achieved. But there are also instances where things
have not gone as well as everyone would have liked and it is important
to learn from these mistakes. Later PFI programmes, for instance,
have learnt the lessons of some of those earlier ones where the
experience was less than satisfactory. Everyone involved needs
to learn from these mistakes as well as from the wide range of
successfully completed projects that point the way to an exciting
future.
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
THE SCHOOLS
ESTATE
There are approximately 23,000 maintained schools,
(excluding early years and further education), in England. 20%
of school buildings were constructed before the second world war.
50% were built between 1945 and 1976, a period that included much
system-building, and 30% since then. System building was typified
by school designs of the 1960s and 1970s which facilitated rapid
construction at a time of growing need but have left a legacy
of high running costs in terms of maintenance and energy use.
The post-1976 percentage, which includes new
school buildings, has doubled in the last four or five years—ie
there has been as much new school building since 2001 as there
was in the preceding 25 years. 3% of accommodation is in temporary
buildings. The maintained school building stock has a replacement
value of, very roughly, £130 billion.
THE CAPITAL
STRATEGY
The Government's main capital strategy was introduced
in 1999 following extensive consultation and provides for a balanced
programme of investment. The underlying principles represented
a move away from centrally directed bureaucratic bidding processes
in favour of a balanced programme of investment as follows: significant
levels of funding directed locally to be prioritised locally and
a move to three year budgets to provide greater support for effective
planning.
The investment is divided into three parts.
— Firstly, money for every school to
spend how it likes on buildings and ICT.
— Secondly, funding for every local
authority, diocese and their schools to spend on modernising facilities,
improving disabled access and providing places for pupils.
— And thirdly funding for a more strategic
approach to renewal across the entire school estate, through BSF
and the new primary programme.The funding is divided as follows:
— Devolved: about 43% of the investment
is devolved to local level allowing every school to spend on its
own needs and every local authority (LA) and its partners to tackle
its highest priorities.
— Targeted: around 13% of the investment
is through targeted capital programmes which allow high priority
building projects to be progressed which cannot be tackled through
formulaic allocations, or await BSF. As part of this strategy
there is also a government ambition that by 2011 all LAs should
have funding to rebuild at least one secondary school through
BSF, the Academies programme, or the TCF funded BSF one-school
pathfinder scheme.
— Strategic: about 43% of the money
will be delivered through the BSF and the primary programme. Building
Schools for the Future, in conjunction with the academies programme,
aims to renew all secondary schools in 15 waves starting from
2005-06. In March 2006 the DfES published its proposals to refurbish
half of all primary schools over a 15-year period. £150 million
will be invested in 2008-09 rising to £500 million from 2009-10.
The consultation ended on 14 June 2006 and we will report in autumn
2006.
INVESTMENT
The level of investment is now six times higher
than it was in 1996-97.
Investment in schools in recent years has been
as follows.
1996-97: £700 million
1997-98: £800 million
1998-99: £1.1 billion
1999-00: £1.4 billion
2000-01: £2.1 billion
2001-02: £2.4 billion
2002-03: £3.3 billion
2003-04: £4.2 billion
2004-05: £4.9 billion
2005-06: £5.5 billion
2006-07: £5.8 billion
2007-08: £6.3 billion
These figures include PFI credits and capital
funding for ICT.
Since 1998 the overwhelming majority of schools
will have benefited from significant improvements including the
replacement of thousands of temporary classrooms; new roofs; the
installation of major and efficient boilers and improved toilet
facilities ( in part through the "bogs and boilers"
programme); better lighting systems have been installed and CCTVs
and security fencing has made schools safer. The specialist schools
programme has seen expenditure of £150,000 (£50,000
raised by the school) for each school and has supported the development
of facilities in line with the school's specialism such as drama
spaces, sprung floors for dance and so on. We have seen the reduction
in class sizes and the removal of external toilets.
There has also been a PFI programme—largely
new build schools with some refurbishment. The 100th schools PFI
project was signed in May this year. There are now 817 schools
in England covered by contracts and the total allocated PFI credits
have now reached £3.658 billion. Of the 817 schools 444 are
operational and 373 either building or about to start building.
BUILDING SCHOOLS FOR THE FUTURE
OVERVIEW AND
RESPECTIVE ROLES
Building Schools for the Future (BSF) investment
is designed to secure a step-change in achievement and attainment
in our schools, and is therefore prioritised according to educational
and social need (as measured by GCSE results and eligibility levels
for Free School Meals).
BSF projects are managed by local authorities
with the assistance of Partnerships for Schools (PfS—the
non-departmental public body charged with delivering the national
programme), dedicated DfES officials and the Local Government
Association's Public Private Partnerships Programme (the 4ps).
Partnerships for Schools provide authorities with advice, guidance
and challenge on project planning and management, procurement
and their education vision on a day to day basis. DfES BSF officials
provide local authorities with advice on policy related matters,
and ensure that they have rapid access to the relevant policy
teams where necessary. The 4ps are the Local Government Association's
project management and procurement specialists, and are available
to provide training to members, senior officers, head teachers
and governors through their "Expert Client" programme—helping
authorities to deal with private sector bidders in a robust, confident
and effective manner. They also help authorities to identify any
gaps in their internal capacity which may need to be met by using
external advisers.
Once projects have received funding approval,
local authorities go to market to seek private sector partners
with which to form a Local Education Partnership (LEP). LEPs are
a new model of procurement designed to deliver more reliable supply
chains and genuine on-going commitment from the private sector
partner to the successful delivery of the project. LEPs can also
be used to deliver a wider range of services above and beyond
BSF projects—enabling local authorities to obtain greater
value for money and to develop deeper and more effective partnerships.
BSF FUNDING FOR
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS
BSF funding is provided on a formulaic basis—reflecting
the authorities' pupil place planning projections over 10 years—to
provide sufficient capital to entirely rebuild 50% of the existing
estate and to remodel or refurbish the other 50%. This formula
was developed on the basis of local assessments of the condition
of school buildings and to ensure equitable funding across and
throughout the length of the programme. Capital funding has also
been identified to support the implementation of ICT through BSF.
BSF PROCESSES
Currently, there are three key approval stages
for a local authority to pass through before it can commence procurement:
— Education Vision—the
authority must set out its strategic plans for the future of education
locally. The Education Vision must encapsulate the authority's
approach to raising standards and a range of other Departmental
policy priorities (eg extended schools and community use, Special
Educational Needs, 14-19, PE and sport etc) as set out in the
relevant guidance.
— Strategic Business Case (SBC)
—the authority sets out how it plans to utilise BSF investment
to secure the aims and objectives set out in its Education Vision,
and what this means for the school estate. The Strategic Business
Case will include details of local consultations, funding arrangements
(eg conventional or PFI, use of any other funding streams), affordability,
procurement planning, project management, phasing and prioritisation
of works, arrangements for lifecycle maintenance etc.
— Outline Business Case (OBC)
—the authority sets out more detailed plans for the delivery
of its first phase of BSF investment (usually covering a smaller
number of schools than that in the Strategic Business Case), that
are sufficiently developed to go to market. Once the Outline Business
Case has been approved by the Treasury-chaired Project Review
Group the authority can issue the relevant OJEU (Official Journal
of the European Union) notices inviting expressions of interest
from potential private sector partners. It is at this stage that
bidders submit detailed design proposals and drawings on a sample
set of schools within the project.
From wave 4 onwards however, (January 2007),
in order to reduce the length of the pre-procurement stages—and
to better ensure a closer integration of education strategies
and school building proposals—we will be replacing the requirement
for authorities to submit both Education Visions and Strategic
Business Cases with the requirement to submit a single document
entitled a "Strategy for Change".
In their "Strategy for Change" proposals
authorities will be expected to set out their plans for delivering
greater diversity of provision, choice and access as set out in
the Government's recent White Paper Higher Standards, Better
Schools for All and the current Education and Inspections
Bill.
SUPPORTING EDUCATIONAL
CHANGE
All BSF guidance and documentation—from
both PfS and DfES—makes it clear that BSF is not merely
a buildings programme. Educational transformation is at its heart.
The first formal requirement for authorities selected for BSF
investment is, therefore, that they must submit an Education Vision
(or Strategy for Change from 2007), setting out their strategic
plans for the future of local education.
Local authorities are required to demonstrate
that they have consulted on their Education Vision with the full
range of local stakeholders, including: school communities, (staff,
governors and pupils); Learning and Skills Council; local Further
Education colleges; local businesses and employers; local faith
and diocesan organisations; and Sport England and other relevant
sport governing bodies (eg FA, LTA etc).
In order for a local authority's Education Vision
to be approved by both PfS and the Department, it must demonstrate
that it has robust proposals relating to the following areas:
School improvement (including consideration of Academies where
appropriate and relevant); school organisation—including
diversity of provision to ensure choice for parents and pupils;
Every Child Matters and Children's Trusts; extended schools and
community use; Special Educational Needs provision; behaviour
and attendance; healthy schools; PE and sport; personalised learning;
14-19 provision; specialist schools; ICT; and school workforce
reform.
SCHOOLS AT
THE HEART
OF THE
COMMUNITY
The provision of extended services and activities
by schools, or the offer of access to services, is a major, essential
element of the Building Schools for the Future programme. A local
authority, proposal, therefore, needs to demonstrate how the capital
funding allocation will support the delivery of extended services
and activities—accessible to pupils, families and the wider
community—by schools.
We see schools as a national resource which
should be fully utilised. They should be at the heart of their
communities, opening up their facilities and providing a wide
range of opportunities to all in an open, safe and welcoming environment.
Schools have much to offer in terms of offering facilities and
hosting local services, and because of this have a strong influence
on local affairs. BSF proposals need to demonstrate that schools
will provide access to, as well as joint use of, facilities by
the wider local community. They need to identify whether physical
changes are needed to buildings to provide more flexible learning
spaces or additional space to accommodate community services and
activities, and demonstrate flexibility of space that will be
required over time with changes in community use.
Through their strong connections with local
people and through the extended services that many are already
offering, schools have an important role to play in realising
the goal of sustainable communities. Links with the community
help schools in raising pupils' motivation, expectations and achievement.
This leads to higher standards and improved behaviour. Support
from parents and local community organisations can be a crucial
factor in improving pupils' attainment and combating social exclusion.
Our objective is to see all schools provide access to a core offer
of extended services by 2010, and to use their teaching and wider
influence to address the needs of the local environment and community.
In developing BSF proposals, local authorities must demonstrate
that developments will lead to better, coherent, joined up and
locally provided support for children, families and communities.
We also look at how well BSF and extended schools
are aligned with other funding strands. Proposals should support
the development of a coherent programme that enables various capital
resources held by the local authority, schools and others to be
better joined up for greatest impact and best use of schools as
community assets.
In addition Academies are contractually bound
by virtue of their funding agreement (a contract between the Secretary
of State and an Academy Trust) to be at the heart of their communities,
sharing facilities with other schools and the wider community.
This is particularly powerful when considering that Academies
are situated in areas of significant disadvantage and deprivation.
Access to high quality resources, a community focal point and
a source of pride in an area of deprivation will undoubtedly contribute
to the regeneration of that area. The extended schools agenda
is an important component in the strategy to realise this aim.
The majority of Academies offer some form of extended schools
provision, while others are already seeking extended schools status.
BSF AND ICT
The BSF approach to ICT is founded on the following
principles:
— ICT provision should be seen as the
"fourth utility" by teaching staff, staff and pupils.
From their perspective it should be simple to use, and integral
to the school environment—from the building design stage
onwards.
— ICT provision should be a viewed
as a service that establishes the basis for the long term use
of ICT.
— ICT provision should be seen as an
agent for change, enabling teaching staff and pupils to transform
the way they work.
The funding allowance for ICT within BSF is
at unprecedented levels. At the heart of these principles is a
philosophy that new schools will be designed and built around
the use of cutting edge ICT, including teaching and learning,
school management and buildings management systems and solutions.
The aim is to optimise the educational impact of ICT, in a way
that "retrofitting" ICT to existing school buildings
cannot hope to emulate.
PROGRESS ON
BSF—THE CURRENT
POSITION
BSF projects are prioritised according to educational
and social need. The first consultation on BSF and invitations
for expressions of interest were announced in July 2003. However,
we had already begun working with four "Pathfinder"
projects (including one joint project involving three local authorities)
in March 2003. Following the consultation a further 12 projects
(including one joint project) were named in wave 1 of BSF in February
2004. In November 2004, we announced 20 new projects for the second
and third waves of BSF. We began working with the authorities
in wave 2 in January 2005 and with those in wave 3 in September
the same year.
In total, 39 local authorities are now actively
engaged in the programme with projects covering around 360 schools.
Progress to date is described in more detail below.
Wave 1: Business cases have been
approved for 13 of the 16 projects in wave 1. These authorities
are now in the process of procuring partners to deliver BSF. Two
further authorities are also making good progress but are following
a slightly different process due to existing contractual arrangements
(Manchester have an existing framework arrangement and Stoke have
an authority-wide PFI contract to provide energy, energy management,
and repair and maintenance work).
The leading wave 1 project (Bristol, one of
the "Pathfinders") appointed a preferred bidder in December
and is expected to sign a contract in June 2006. This will enable
building work to begin on the first BSF schools (other than a
number of "quick win" projects which were funded in
wave 1 local authorities ahead of their main BSF projects). These
new school buildings are due to be ready for occupation in September
2007. Three other wave 1 projects have also appointed preferred
partners and a number more are expected to do so over the next
few months.
Wave 2: Authorities in wave 2 are
currently preparing their strategic plans and business cases.
One wave 2 project has already begun procurement (in May 2006)
and others are expected to follow shortly. Work on the first wave
2 schools should be completed in 2009.
Wave 3: Most authorities have now
completed the first stage of developing their BSF projects, with
visions for transforming secondary education in their areas approved
by the Department. The first wave 3 authorities are now submitting
their strategic plans to the Department for approval.
PROGRESS ON
BSF—SLIPPAGE AND
ACTION
There has been significant slippage in BSF projects
in waves 1-3, with the majority of projects behind the ideal project
timelines. Key common factors behind such slippage include: lack
of capacity or experience in delivering large projects in local
authorities; insufficient corporate support and leadership; insufficient
involvement of school improvement teams (as opposed to solely
property) at local levels; inaccurate pupil place planning (omission
of SEN numbers has for example been a common flaw); planning obstacles,
including unavailability of sites in London in particular; difficulties
in agreeing Education Visions at a local level; and poor stakeholder
engagement or consultation. Most slippage occurs at the pre-procurement
and planning stage, and we have tried to address this in 2 key
ways:
(i) Authorities within waves 4-6 will be
prioritised on their capacity to deliver; and
(ii) We have reduced the pre-procurement
approval stages from 3 to 2 by combining the former Education
Vision and Strategic Business Case stages into one "Strategy
for Change" stage. This will ensure that authorities can
have confidence in their key strategic ambitions as early on in
the process as possible, as opposed to spending a year drafting
an Education Vision which fails to meet the required standards.
LESSONS LEARNED
FROM WAVE
1
It is important that we learn the lessons from
the early stages of BSF and continuously improve our processes
as we progress. That is why we are introducing a new formal stage
of approval within the BSF process to replace 2 existing ones.
As indicated above, instead of authorities being required to submit
both an Education Vision and a Strategic Business Case, from wave
4 onwards they will only be required to submit a Strategy for
Change. This Strategy for Change will set out both the authority's
plans and ambitions for improving education provision, and the
implications of those plans for the school estate. We need to
ensure that an authority's school estate plans really do underpin
a strategy for change and improvement—and indeed are determined
by it. By integrating educational and building plans authorities
should be able to achieve a single coherent strategy, with educational
priorities continuing to be at the forefront throughout the process,
rather than simply being viewed as an initial hurdle.
Other lessons learnt have included:
— BSF projects need the highest level
of corporate support/ownership within a local authority to ensure
rapid delivery.
— It is never too early for LAs to
begin planning and consulting with stakeholders on their strategies
to maximise the potential benefits of this unique opportunity
for transformational investment—particularly around school
organisation/pupil place planning issues, and of course to secure
local consensus and support.
— Early planning is also crucial to
securing as much joined-up funding as possible.
— Rationalising of the school estate,
where possible (eg. Knowsley—replacing 11 schools with 8
new learning centres), maximises the potential of funding (allowing
greater levels of new build).
— Importance of having a local "design
champion" from the beginning of the process—hence introduction
of CABE Enablers for future waves.
INCLUSION OF
ACADEMIES IN
BSF PLANS
Tackling underachievement and underperformance
is a central plank of all local authorities' BSF proposals. Where
appropriate, (ie where schools are falling beneath floor targets)
we expect local authorities to objectively consider the potential
for Academies in improving school standards and providing parents
with access to good schools. Projects that contain innovative
Academy proposals within their plans are likely to progress more
rapidly to approval.
DELIVERING ACADEMIES
THROUGH BSF
On 23 March 2006 the Department announced that
the Academies building programme will in future be delivered by
Partnership for Schools (PfS). From this date there will be two
delivery routes:
New Academies that are in local authorities (LAs)
that are included in the BSF programme will be delivered by Local
Education Partnerships (LEPs) or any other approved alternative
procurement route. The delivery of these Academies will be integrated
with BSF waves and will be included in BSF proposals in the same
way as any other secondary school. Academy Building Projects delivered
by LEPs will broadly follow established BSF arrangements.
New Academies in LAs that have yet to be prioritised
for inclusion in BSF will be delivered using a National Framework
that will be managed by PfS. The framework is expected to be in
place by September 2006, with providers who will have demonstrated
levels of efficiency and cost that are comparable to those in
BSF. To build an Academy, LAs will hold a mini competition to
select a provider from the framework.
Delivering Academies through BSF is a significant
move by the Department to realise greater savings and efficiencies.
However, in order to maintain progress, the individual Academy
projects which were underway prior to the integration of the delivery
of Academies with the BSF programme (ie underway prior to March
this year) will continue along the traditional procurement route
to completion (estimated at around 30 projects).
PROGRESS ON
ACADEMIES
27 Academies are already open. 18 more are set
to open in September 2006. A further 60 plus are in development.
We are in discussion with potential sponsors about over 100 more
projects. Our aim is to have at least 200 Academies open or in
the pipeline by 2010, including 60 in London.
It is early days but we have good evidence that
the Academies are working:
— In 2003, their first year, the average
5+ A*-C GCSE results in the three open Academies was 24%, compared
to an average of 16% in their predecessor schools in 2002.
— In 2004 the Academy schools achieved
close to 30% 5+ A*-Cs. This included improvements at Capital City
Academy, Brent, from 14%-29% and of 26%-33% at the City Academy,
Bristol.
— In 2005, Academies improved results
by nearly 8 percentage points compared to last year. This is three
times the national average increase of 2.4 percentage points.
— The average 5+ good GCSE results
of the 14 Academies with pupils sitting GCSEs was 36.4% in 2005,
compared to an average 21% in their predecessor schools in 2002.
This represents a 73% improvement in GCSE performance in three
years. 12 of the 14 Academies with pupils taking GCSE saw rises
on what their predecessor schools had achieved in 2002.
— The Academy model builds on the tried
and tested successes of the 15 City Technology Colleges. In 2004,
11 of the 15 CTCs recorded more than 75% five or more good GCSE
passes, with two achieving 100%. The national average is 53%.
Their value added performance is similarly outstanding.
— Parents are voting with their feet—almost
all of the Academies have been oversubscribed on opening and for
each year afterwards. For example, in September 2005, each of
Lambeth, City of London and Mossbourne Academies received over
1,200 applications for 180 places in each.
— There is ongoing evaluation of the
programme to make sure that it is working. An early evaluation
concluded—"Academies do seem to have made a strong
impact on the educational aspirations of large numbers of children
from disadvantaged areas and their families".
COSTINGS
Academies are built to the same area and cost
guidelines (Building Bulletin 98) as all other departmentally
funded schools. The average cost of a new secondary school with
1,300 pupils and a sixth form in a high-cost inner-city area is
£25-30 million and this is the same as the average cost of
an Academy of this size and location. The average cost per pupil
of new build voluntary aided schools which the Department is currently
funding is £23,886; the average cost of an Academy is £23,370.
Academy cost overruns are now falling. Academy
costs overall have been slightly higher to date than some other
school building schemes and those currently projected for BSF
projects due to the following factors:
— Academy projects usually involve
complicated and restricted inner city sites with a higher than
normal proportion of "abnormal" costs;
— Academy projects had, until recently,
been procured on a "one-off" basis which meant they
had not been able to access the economies of scale achieved through
large, multi-school PFI or BSF procurements. This is changing
now that Academies can be procured as part of the BSF programme.
Academies can also learn lessons on design by being incorporated
into BSF and equally BSF can learn from Academies;
— As Academies are independent of local
authorities, we have not assumed that they can recycle fixed furniture
and equipment to the same degree as other school building projects,
and allowed for additional funding accordingly.
MANAGING COSTS
AND VALUE
FOR MONEY
Inevitably, at the inception of the Academies
programme we focused—successfully—on making the rapid
progress needed to get a major programme moving over reasonable
time scales. But that does not mean that lessons have not been
learnt and the need for careful management of capital costs and
value for money has been ignored. On the contrary:
— lessons from the earliest projects
and induction in Government guidance and standards is provided
to all architectural firms;
— a framework contract has been drawn
up laying out common conditions and obligations for firms involved
in Academy projects;
— processes for analysing project designs
in more detail at an earlier stage of an Academy project have
been implemented; and
— Construction Project Managers are
appointed to offer advice and guidance on design and building
issues to each Academy project.
EVERY CHILD
MATTERS AND
EARLY YEARS
Building Schools for the Future and Academies,
our long-term, strategic programmes transforming secondary schools
are underway. For the early years Sure Start is also providing
new modern infrastructure for the expansion of childcare and the
development of children's centres and Sure Start programmes for
children in the most challenging circumstances.
Every Child Matters: Change for Children is
a new approach to the well-being of children and young people
from birth to age 19. The Government's aim is for every child,
whatever their background or their circumstances, to have the
support they need to: be healthy; stay safe; enjoy and achieve;
make a positive contribution; and achieve economic well-being.
This means that organisations providing services to children—from
hospitals and schools, to police and voluntary groups—will
be teaming up in new ways, sharing information and working together,
to protect children and young people from harm and help them achieve
what they want in life.
The Government has made free part-time, early
education available for all our 3 and 4-year-olds, and substantially
expanded childcare provision with a wide variety of providers—nurseries,
childminders, before and after school clubs and holiday play schemes
increasingly delivered alongside early education and other family
services—to meet parents' different needs and provide real
choice.
Sure Start Children's Centres enable children
under 5 years old and their families to receive seamless, integrated
services and information, including help from multi-disciplinary
teams of professionals. Children's Centres build on the successes
of the pioneering Sure Start Local Programmes, Early Excellence
Centres and Neighbourhood Nurseries, and are about mainstreaming
the lessons learned, so the benefits can be extended to all young
children and families. Sure Start Children's Centres are one of
the key features of the Government's Ten Year Childcare Strategy
which aims to ensure all families with children have access to
an affordable, flexible, high quality childcare. The Government
is committed to delivering 3,500 Children's Centres—one
for every community—by 2010.
The Strategy also includes the commitment that
families with children from 3 to 14, who need it, will have access
to affordable, flexible and high quality childcare from 8-6 and
throughout the year. We are building that offer around schools
as part of a range of enriching, out of hours, extended services
for pupils and the local community that schools will host. We
want all schools to become extended schools by 2010, providing
a core offer of activities, with at least half of primary schools
and a third of secondary schools doing so by 2008.
Our investment in schools also impacts on areas
that are of vital importance in encouraging a choice of healthy
life styles. We are therefore developing a "Healthy Schools"
programme to improve health and well-being for children. The important
strands for capital investment are healthy eating and sport. This
means good food where possible freshly prepared on the premises
from local ingredients and served and eaten in good surroundings.
And sports facilities that offer a wide range of activity and
encourage children to participate for more than the statutory
minimum and to continue out of school.
PRIMARY CAPITAL
PROGRAMME
We have already been improving primary school
buildings, for example by tackling the backlog or repairs and
reducing infant class sizes. We are now turning our attention
to the long term needs of primary school buildings. Now is the
time to encourage and enable all local authorities and communities
to start the long-term transformation of primary schools across
the country.
We published our proposals in March to rebuild,
remodel or refurbish half of all primary schools over 15 years.
It will help achieve a number of strategies already underway such
as Every Child Matters; Better Standards for all and Primary Strategy.
It also brings together the 10-year childcare strategy, workforce
strategy, and ICT and extended schools programmes.
Some £150 million extra is available in
2008-09, rising to £500 million in 2009-10. It is expected
that investment will remain at that level for around 15 years,
subject to future public spending decisions—some £7
billion in total. This could be added to other DfES capital for
primary schools to create a much larger sum for investment. On
top of this could be added: other eligible investment from central
government departments and agencies; local government investment,
receipts and prudential borrowing; as well as contributions from
the private sector and others. Only by joining up this funding
and targeting it precisely will we achieve the ambitions of this
programme. All local authorities will benefit from capital allocated
by a simple, open formula reflecting pupil numbers and deprivation.
Devolved formula capital will, of course, be available for primary
schools not directly benefiting from this programme.
It should be possible, using DfES investment,
to improve at least half of all primary schools and primary-age
special schools. Within that, we would hope to rebuild or take
out of use, as a minimum, at least the 5% of school buildings
in the worst physical condition nationally, and to improve or
take out of use the 20% of the worst condition buildings in our
most-deprived communities. With strategic and joined-up planning
and funding, we would hope to exceed these targets. Other schools
benefiting from the programme will have substantial improvements.
The programme should also contribute to other national aims such
as to raise standards, improve school food or promote sport and
languages.
FE CAPITAL
In addition to capital investment in schools,
the Government is committed to transforming the Further Education
estate, recognising the legacy of underinvestment which left the
sector characterised by unfit for purpose facilities. Over the
past four years, capital investment has begun to have an impact
on improving the quality of the estate enabling more flexible
and efficient delivery. The Learning and Skills Council (LSC)
has approved grants of just under £1 billion to support 524
building projects in the sector, worth a total of nearly £3.2
billion. Evaluation of the impact of that investment by PWC (March
2004) reported that:
— Quantitative evidence suggests a
positive relationship between capital investment and learner outcomes,
in particular success rates.
— Qualitative evidence provides strong
evidence of a positive relationship between capital investment
and a wide range of outcomes including:
— Providing a catalyst for wider strategic
and/or curriculum change.
— Improved facilities, which can raise
student recruitment and retention as well as enhance the quality
of teaching and learning.
— Improvement to college reputation
resulting in better staff and student morale.
Earlier this year, we published the FE White
Paper, Further Education: Raising Skills, Improving Life Chances.
It sets out reforms to the FE sector to ensure learners are equipped
with high quality skills for productive, sustainable employment
and personal fulfilment; and employers have the right skills for
their business to succeed in a competitive global economy. The
Government recognises significant further capital investment is
required to support this vision. Including the new joint schools
and FE 16-19 capital fund, designed to improve choice and diversity
in 16-19 provision, investment through the LSC is set to rise
to £748 million in 2009-10 from £291 million in 2004-05.
This means Government investment will more than double in real
terms by 2009-10 compared to 2004-05.
To help ensure this investment supports the
needs of learners, employers and communities now and in the future,
the White Paper detailed a number of reforms to the FE capital
programme including regional capital strategies, which will guide
investment ensuring that there is sufficient capacity, an effective
pattern of specialisation and increasing choice and responsiveness
for learners and employers. Importantly, to ensure a coherent
approach to 14-19 reform through the BSF programme, the scope
of local authorities' Strategies for Change have been extended
to cover all the settings in which young people aged 14-19 will
be learning in future. As funding flows through the Local Education
Partnership to implement BSF, the LSC will direct its capital
resources to support the FE component of the vision. This will
mean that for the first time, there is effectively a fully integrated
strategy to deliver for 14-19-year-olds across schools and the
FE system.
The importance of environmental sustainability
through capital investment is gaining recognition and priority
in the sector and a number of reforms are underway. The LSC's
Sustainable Development strategy From Here to Sustainability
sets out an action plan for developing a sustainable approach
in relation to Environmental Management Systems (EMS), Building
and Design, Procurement, Biodiversity and Travel. The Learning
and Skills Council's written evidence to the Committee will set
out in full how the FE capital programme aims to support investment
in an FE sector which meets the needs of learners, employers and
communities now and in the future.
PRIVATE FINANCE
INITIATIVE (PFI)
PFI was introduced into the schools sector in
1997 with the first project a single school in Dorset. The programme
has progressed rapidly, and in May 2006, the 100th schools PFI
contract was signed. This means that in total 817 schools are
receiving investment through this route, with a total capital
value of £3.66 billion in PFI credits. In future all PFI
will be delivered via the BSF programme.
Schools PFI contracts are between individual
local authorities and private sector partners for the provision
of buildings and services, for the life of the contract, which
is usually 25 years. The private sector partner funds and procures
the investment in the school buildings (usually new build, with
some grouped contracts including remodelling and refurbishment
of existing buildings) and is responsible for their maintenance
over the life of the contract. It is therefore in the interests
of the private sector to consider full life costs and sustainability
in construction.
DfES supports PFI procurement with guidance
and assistance to local authorities, directly and through Partnerships
UK (PUK). This includes standard contracts, which are developed
with advice from PUK and HM Treasury. All PFI contacts must demonstrate
value for money to be endorsed by the Project Review Group, which
is chaired by HM Treasury.
PUK REPORT INTO
SIGNED PFI CONTRACTS
We know that PFI has a mixed reputation which
is why we decided to do a survey to sort out the myths from the
reality. The survey by Partnerships UK was published last year
and is available in the House Libraries and through www.teachernet.gov.uk/schoolsprivatefinanceinitiative.
Positive feedback included: teachers report
that they are delighted with the buildings, which are well designed
and work well; schools delivered on time and sometimes to a higher
level of finish than the specification; facilities already well
respected by pupils and the community; a positive impact on children,
behaviour and attendance; higher proportions of children are staying
in school for lunch; improved security; buildings maintenance
better than before, and applications to the school have risen.
The clear lesson is that contracts work best
where there is co-operative partnership working between the public
and private sectors. There are, however, also areas where some
schools have been disappointed and the report makes several recommendations
for improvement, all of which we are happy to accept and to work
on implementing. The main areas of dissatisfaction are the working
of helpdesks and agreeing variations to the contract in response
to developing needs. The report was based on early contracts and
many of the recommendations have already been incorporated in
later contracts. The Department and its partners including PUK,
4ps and now PfS have learned from experience and worked to standardise
and improve contracts. The clear lesson is that PFI is not yet
perfect and we will continue to work hard in partnership with
schools and industry, to implement the recommendations, to learn
from experience and continuously to improve.
IMPROVING PFI—WHAT
NEEDS TO
BE DONE
— All PFI contracts must in practice
as well as in theory deliver the services specified and serve
everyone's best interest. In the interests of the children, we
must not have schools hampered in their efforts to give children
the best education by contractual difficulties.
— Working together with partners, we
are acting to help some of the single schools that were the first
to sign contracts and where the projects are not working as well
as they should. We will continue to do this. The lessons learnt
from these early contracts have been incorporated into later contracts.
— We will work with schools, with authorities,
with Treasury, with PfS, PUK, with 4ps and with the market, to
secure further improvement. And if required, we will work directly
with contractors. We are not prepared to see teachers' efforts
and pupils' potential wasted because of avoidable problems.
PFI AND SUSTAINABILITY
PFI is about a process of continuous improvement,
and that includes the area of sustainability. In some early contracts,
for example, energy costs were passed directly to the schools.
There was no advantage to the private sector in designing buildings
to reduce energy consumption. Now contracts pass the risk of energy
costs to the private sector partner, ensuring they are motivated
to design and build energy conservation measures from the start.
In future, all PFI credits will be allocated
to BSF projects. BSF projects are required to achieve at least
a "very good" BREEAM rating for environmental sustainability
(see section on environmental sustainability for further details).
Because of the targeted and managed nature of the programme, BSF
is the first major investment programme for some time where a
complex evaluation is possible. We are appointing PricewaterhouseCoopers
to evaluate BSF for us. Whilst the core of this evaluation is
the impact of BSF investment on educational standards, this will
include evaluating the factors which act as levers to improving
achievement. These will include the design and construction quality
of the buildings which BSF is funding and value for money. Lessons
learned will be disseminated to inform the rest of the BSF programme.
SUPPORTING GOOD DESIGN
If schools are to provide excellent educational
facilities for the next 20-30 years, designs must take account
not only of current needs but also of likely future change. We
need to be aware of likely educational, technological and social
developments. Key drivers now include:
— a more diverse and flexible curriculum;
— new ways of learning (including beyond
the school boundary and traditional school hours);
— the impact of ICT and more personalised
learning;
— a range of extended services on school
sites (including childcare, after school clubs, adult learning
and family support); and
— the inclusion of pupils with special
educational needs and disabilities onto mainstream school sites.
New school buildings should serve their communities
for many years to come and it is important that they facilitate
good teaching and learning, provide attractive and comfortable
environments for all users—staff, pupils and the wider community—and
that they are robust enough to need minimal maintenance over time.
Excellent design will inspire teachers and learners, optimise
inclusion and help to improve behaviour and attendance. Design
quality encompasses a number of issues but should include sustainability,
flexibility, adaptability and value for money.
The Department is addressing design quality
on a number of fronts, recognising that the best school designs
come from a successful partnership between designers, users and
providers. The work we are doing to ensure good school design
divides broadly into five areas:
— inspiring demonstration projects,
both real and conceptual;
— tools to support technical guidance
or help users to better understand their needs and communicate
them to designers;
— professional advice to individual
projects; and
— innovative projects that encourage
greater user participation.
There are many organisations with an interest
in school building design with which the Department works closely:
Commissioners for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE),
the Sorrell Foundation, Open House (in London), the Design Council,
the Royal Institute of British Architects, and School Works. We
held a highly successful design conference last December (05)
with significant representation from the public and private sector
where we gained a greater understanding of the barriers to good
design and—hopefully—inspired everyone to aim as high
as possible. As a result of this we set up the School Design Advisory
Council (SDAC) as a forum that brings together these and other
stakeholders including local authorities and schools. In addition
we are working closely with PfS to ensure BSF deliver excellent
design.
DESIGN GUIDANCE
All guidance is developed in consultation with
local authorities, schools and educationalists to ensure it is
relevant to users' current and future needs. Recent publications
include:
— Building Bulletin 101 Ventilation
of School Buildings;
— Building Bulletin 93, Acoustic
Design for Schools;
— Building Bulletin 98, Briefing
Framework for Secondary Schools specifying space standards for
school buildings and grounds;
— Designing Schools for Extended
Services;
— Inspirational design for PE and
Sports Spaces; and
— Primary Ideas: a toolkit of
design principles, ideas and projects for primary school environments
aimed at inspiring staff, pupils and parents.
Forthcoming publications include:
— Building Bulletin 77: Designing
for Pupils with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities:
applicable to specialist provision in mainstream schools, co-located
or independently sited special schools;
— Designing School Grounds; and
— Building Bulletin 99, Briefing
Framework for Primary Schools specifying space standards for
school buildings and grounds.
DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS
DEMONSTRATION SUSTAINABLE
SCHOOLS
Thirteen new schools will be constructed within
the "One-School Pathfinder" programme. Three of these
schools will be demonstration projects to reflect the principles
of sustainable development.
These demonstration projects will:
— achieve a BREEAM school rating of
"excellent" for their design and construction;
— incorporate a number of sustainable
features that have widespread scope for replication in future
school buildings, eg wind turbines, microgeneration, etc; and
— Make use of sustainable technologies
to develop the curriculum.
Case studies, whether built or desk-based are
a valuable means of demonstrating good design. The Department
has organised a number of such projects recently including:
— Classrooms of the Future: 12
LAs were funded to build 26 pilot projects that create innovative
learning environments, with the aim of inspiring children to achieve
more. Round 2, Teaching Environments for the Future, involved
18 LAs developing 25 further projects, with the emphasis on how
building design can help resolve school workforce issues. Most
of these are now finished.
— Exemplar Designs: concepts and
Ideas: 11 leading architects were chosen by competition
to develop design solutions for schools for the future (5 primary,
5 secondary and one all-age). The resulting designs were inspiring
and we understand that two are already being built.
— Open House: The Department
sponsored a publication to showcase London's newly designed schools,
to be linked to the annual "Open House" event in 2005.
It will be extended this year to the whole of England.
— Standard specifications, layouts
and dimensions for schools (SSLD): In support of the
huge school building programmes over the next 10-15 years, we
are working with designers, manufacturers, suppliers and research
groups to develop more standardised approaches to school building
design and to encourage more off-site fabrication were appropriate.
The aim is to provide consistent high quality design and supply-side
efficiencies through developing clear output specifications and
reducing waste and unnecessary effort in both manufacture and
specification of components. Areas currently being developed include:
classroom dimensions, doorsets, floor coverings, modular WC design,
partitions, staircases and lighting systems.
TOOLS
— Design Quality Indicators:
The DfES has worked with the Construction Industry Council
(CIC) to develop a Design Quality Indicator (DQI) for schools.
Through facilitated workshops, it helps raise aspirations and
manage expectations of all stakeholders involved in the project.
It can be used at four stages:
— At briefing stage—to capture
and prioritise all the stakeholders' aspirations.
— At mid-design stage—to check
how the design is progressing and to measure against the original
aspirations.
— At "ready for occupation"
stage—to check how well the building has met the stakeholders
aspirations before occupation.
— When the building has been completed
for a year or more—as a post-occupancy evaluation tool.
— The Building Research Establishment
Assessment method for schools (BREEAM): assesses the
environmental performance of buildings in terms of management,
energy use, health and wellbeing, pollution, transport, land use,
ecology, materials and water.
— ClassVent and ClassCool tools
to enable the design of classroom ventilation strategies and strategies
to avoid summertime overheating to be used with BB101.
PROFESSIONAL ADVICE
The Department funds 10 days support from a
CABE enabler for every BSF project and four days support for every
One School Pathfinder project.
PARTICIPATION
The Department has supported a number of projects
that aim to improve school design by encouraging stronger links
between school designers and their "real" clients—school
staff and pupils. Projects include:
Joinedupdesignforschools: The Sorrell
Foundation arranged for designers to work with pupils in over
sixty schools, identifying what concerns them and finding solutions.
Many of the projects ranging from improving a dining space to
redesigning a school uniform have been realised.
School Works: have developed a toolkit
to facilitate the consultation process at briefing stage and carried
out a series of post-occupancy evaluations with schools and their
authorities.
Designmyschool.com: developed by the
Design Council, a website providing practical tools, ideas and
resources to enable staff, pupils and parents to participate in
the design of their school.
The range of design advice, demonstration projects
and design tools that is available is huge. But these are not
enough in themselves. Exciting new classrooms and inspiring projects
with small groups of pupils can lead the way but the real challenge
for BSF is to ensure that these innovative designs and ways of
working (especially consultation) are mainstreamed into the whole
BSF programme. We aim to do this through our key delivery partners—PfS
for liaison with the private sector, CABE and others in the design
community, the LGA and 4ps for local government contacts and our
own education networks. Our aim is not just to demonstrate what
can be done, but also to impress upon the market what high expectations
we have for contractors to deliver good design and to help schools
and local authorities really understand what best practice looks
like and support them in demanding it from their contractor.
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
OVERVIEW
Historic approaches to construction are unsustainable.
Some progress has recently been made in improving sustainability
of buildings as a result of government initiatives. Building Regulations
require that today's buildings are 40% more energy efficient than
those built five years ago. The DfES has its own set of policies
to reflect government policy on sustainable development. The Department's
Sustainable Development Action Plan was launched in March 2006
and will be followed up with a variety of tools including a sustainable
development schools website and means of self [en rule]evaluation.
KEY PRINCIPLES
The UK's Sustainable Development Strategy, set
out in Securing the Future[1],
aims "to enable all people throughout the world to satisfy
their basic needs and enjoy a better quality of life, without
compromising the quality of life of future generations. "
It sets out five principles that provide a basis for sustainable
development policy in the UK:
— living within environmental limits—ensuring
the natural resources needed for life are unimpaired and remain
so in the future;
— ensuring a strong, healthy and just
society—meeting diverse needs and creating opportunity for
all;
— achieving a sustainable economy—with
efficient resource use incentivised;
— using sound science responsibly—strong
scientific evidence, taking into account scientific uncertainty
and public attitudes and values; and
— promoting good governance—effective,
participative systems of governance in all levels of society.
The design and construction of school buildings
can support these principles through a wide range of features
which:
— conserve energy and water
— avoid pollutants and potential pollutants
— protect or enhance biodiversity
— respect people and their environment
The DfES Sustainable Development Action Plan
(SDAP) describes a number of actions we are committed to undertake
in order to deliver sustainable school buildings. We expect all
new schools to reach these standards, and encourage existing schools
to adopt sustainable targets as quickly as possible.
BUILDING RESEARCH
ESTABLISHMENT EVALUATION
METHOD FOR
SCHOOLS (BREEAM)
BREEAM schools is a tool to allow us to set
robust achievable and cost effective environmental targets for
new buildings and refurbishment projects. It was commissioned
from the Building Research Establishment (BRE) by the Department
to enable standards to be set without prescribing specific design
solutions to client and design teams. It was guided by a sector
advisory group comprising designers, local authority representatives,
Non Government Organisations and DfES experts and officials.
HOW BREEAM WORKS
The basis of the scheme is a certificate awarded
on the basis of credits for a set of performance criteria. The
certificate provides recognition for the building environmental
performance and allows claims to be verified.
The method considers a wide range of sustainability
issues within a single assessment. These cover the impact of buildings
on the environment at global regional, local and indoor levels.
For example, there are up to 10 credits available depending on
the level of emissions of carbon dioxide relating to operational
energy consumption. Overall more than 100 credits are available.
BREEAM provides a means of balancing these against each other
as decisions are made. The number of credits attained are translated
into a single score using a consensus[en rule]based weighting
system. This score is them interpreted in the form of an overall
rating of Excellent, Very Good, Good and Pass.
THE STANDARD
BREEAM credits are only available when proposed
design and construction solutions exceed minimum standards. The
Department has set standards for school buildings that are more
onerous than those that apply to many other building types (eg
offices). This means that in order to achieve the standard of
"very good", a school will have to meet higher standards
than those required for an equivalent rating for other types of
building. In April 2006 all versions of BREEAM were comprehensively
revised following major revisions to building regulations, and
now represent a higher standard than ever.
The Department considers that a BREEAM for Schools
rating of "very good" is a challenging but achievable
target. We recognise that there is more to do, particularly in
the light of suggestions that BREEAM "very good" is
too low a target. We commissioned a study to investigate the potential
cost implications of raising the target to "excellent".
This study confirms that a rating of "very good" is
achievable for new buildings within existing levels of funding.
Additional funding, of between £40-£160/m2 (approximately
3-12% of current funding levels) depending on the location and
the scale of the development, may be required to achieve "excellent".
Further research is required before the findings can be published.
Other than cost, there are some significant
barriers to raising the BREEAM hurdle. The location of a school
building can have a major effect on its BREEAM rating, and on
the cost of improving its rating. For school refurbishments where
many facets of the design are already established, it may not
be technically possible to achieve a rating of "excellent".
Schools need to be sited to some specific catchment areas, and
it may not be possible to place them close to major public transport
hubs. Similarly, for rural schools on green field sites it may
more difficult to achieve a target rating. It has not been established
with certainty that a BREEAM rating of "excellent" is
technically possible for all school buildings, but research into
other building types[2]
has shown that it may not be possible to adapt the design of a
building to achieve "excellent" where the building's
location is constrained.
In order to gain a better understanding of the
challenges presented by raising the target to "excellent",
we are funding a number of demonstration projects within BSF.
A selection of school's within the One School Offer pathfinder
programme will be demonstrations of sustainability. These will
be funded to achieve a BREEAM rating of "excellent",
and the buildings will contain renewable energy systems which
contribute towards more than 20% of each schools energy needs.
We will work in partnership with the LAs and their design teams
on these projects so that the practical and financial issues surrounding
environmental sustainability are addressed and understood.
More than 250 schools are currently registered
for BREEAM assessments. Construction timescales are such that
only a few completed schools (Academies) have received a certified
BREEAM rating. Of these, the most recently certified have met
the current target of "very good".
ENVIRONMENTAL KEY
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
(KPIS)
We have developed a range of key performance
indicators (KPIs) to assess the performance of Local Education
Partnerships' (LEPs) delivery of new school buildings within BSF
and other capital funding programmes. These include the following
indicators of environmental performance:
— Percentage of designs achieving the
BREEAM "very good" target.
— Tonnes of construction waste relative
to project value.
— Energy efficiency of school buildings
in operation.
The KPIs that have been developed are consistent
with the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)
plans to develop a Code for Sustainable Building (CSB). A consultation
draft for a CSB has been developed using a subset of the BREEAM
categories which could be applied to housing (eg carbon emissions,
water use, etc). A review of responses to this consultation is
currently underway. The code would result in a more narrowly focussed
and less flexible target-setting code than BREEAM for Schools.
However, DCLG do not intend to apply the CSB to other sectors
before it has been tried in the housing sector..
The Sustainable Buildings Task Group (which
was tasked with identifying short and long term improvements in
the environmental performance of buildings) has identified that
significant improvements are required, within the construction
industry as a whole, for energy, water, construction waste, timber
and other construction materials. The Sustainable Buildings Task
Group is due to publish their recommendations in June 2006, and
DfES will incorporate these recommendations within their requirements
for school buildings. DfES officials are also liaising with DTI
and other government departments on establishing a vision and
setting long term targets for more sustainable construction.
ENERGY USE
AND RENEWABLE
ENERGY
Energy targets for school projects within BSF
are set within Part L Building Regulations[3]
which require that buildings that are constructed to today's standards
are 40% more energy efficient (ie emit 40% less carbon through
energy use) than those built five years ago.
Part L Building Regulations also require that
renewable energy sources and other low carbon technologies are
considered, and implemented where technically, practically and
economically feasible. The regulations set an overall target for
carbon emissions which implies that 10% of a building's energy
demand is met using renewable energy technologies—where
renewable energy technologies are not adopted then the overall
carbon reduction target must be met in other ways (eg through
improved energy efficiency). Many planning authorities have also
introduced a specific requirement for renewable energy which is
typically set at 10% of predicted energy demand, and new schools
must satisfy these local planning requirements.
We have recently appointed a specialist adviser
on renewable energy and is currently developing policy guidance
on the installation of renewable energy technologies. The guidance
will draw on other material, including Departmental and inter-departmental
initiatives such as the Biomass Task Force and the DTI's Micro-generation
Strategy.
A scoping study has been completed into the
carbon footprint of schools. This has established that schools
account for approximately 15% of public sector carbon emissions.
Almost half of these emissions are produced as a result of energy
use, approximately one third are released through transport, and
the remainder represents energy that is used in the manufacture
and supply of equipment and consumables.
We are currently in the process of gathering
detailed data on energy (and water) consumption in schools to
gain an understanding of the links between energy use and factors
such as ICT provision and building age. This exercise will enable
us to set realistic benchmarks and will inform future targets
for energy and water in BSF. It will also help to determine the
scale of renewable energy systems that will be required to reduce
carbon emissions by 10%.
GUIDANCE ON
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Several aspects of environmental sustainability
have been addressed in previous DfES guidance, eg the Teachernet
web-site contains advice on school design together with guidance
on operational issues such as energy management. Building bulletins
describe requirements for acoustic performance and ventilation,
and other publications contain exemplar designs and examples of
good practice.
We are now working closely with a range of authors
and organisations to develop advice on all practical measures
which can be taken to encourage and enhance sustainable development
within a co-ordinated set of documents. Published guidance on
the sustainable design of schools will be available in June 2006.
This will take the form of two printed publications: a volume
of case studies supported by a companion guide which describes
the wide ranging features of a sustainable school.
SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS—THE
NEXT GENERATION
It is the children and young people in our schools
and colleges who have the most to lose if we as adults do not
tackle climate change. The clock is ticking and we need to act
now. That includes making sure that care for the environment is
second nature to all of the pupils in our schools.
Sustainable features that are established during
the design and construction of school buildings and grounds can
contribute to learning about the environment and prepare young
people for a lifetime of sustainable living. For example, small
scale renewable energy installations have proven to be a valuable
teaching resource in some schools and are also useful in raising
the awareness of the local community. Some schools have been constructed
so that elements such as walls are fitted with vision panels allowing
pupils to see thermal insulation and structural features. Grounds
play a vital role in every child's learning and development and
BB85, the outdoor classroom, describes the educational uses of
school grounds and how this resource can be created or adapted
and managed, and these principles are being continually developed
by learning through landscapes (http://www.ltl.org.uk/).
The DfES launched its Sustainable Schools Strategy
in May 2006. This leads schools to consider how they can commit
to sustainable development through eight key areas—or "doorways".
Each of these doorways present an opportunity for learning, and
many of this can be enhanced through the design of the schools
building and grounds.
Food & Drink—through the availability
of healthy food and drink prepared (or grown) on school premises.
Energy & Water—provision of metering
to allow pupils to monitor use, small scale renewable energy systems
provide further opportunities.
Travel & Traffic—encouraging pupils
to participate in surveying transport arrangements, developing
travel plans, and walking and cycling.
Purchasing & Waste—adopting measures
to encourage pupils to sort and recycle waste and minimise packaging.
Buildings & Grounds—through the use
of school grounds as outdoor classrooms, and the use of a schools
building/construction as a teaching resource.
Inclusion & Participation—providing
school facilities which enable and involve all students.
Local Wellbeing—measures that allow schools
to develop links with local communities.
Global Dimension—eg by comparing the environmental
impacts of a UK school with those in other parts of the world
through twinning and joint projects.
THINGS TO
SEE IN
A SUSTAINABLE
SCHOOL
— Good control systems which are easy
to understand to enable the school to manage energy and water
appropriately and hence reduce the amount of these resources used.
— Renewable energy sources, for example
solar panels, wind turbines, biomass heating, and ground source
heat pumps (but only if the school has tried, where possible,
to reduce their energy use by good controls, rather than the view
"well if we produce our own we can use as much as we like").
— The provision for pupils and staff
to use alternative forms of transport safely. For example cycle
racks and pedestrians and cyclists protected from traffic whilst
entering the school grounds.
— Low water using WCs, urinals and
taps within the school building to reduce the amount of water
needlessly wasted. Rainwater harvesting systems (but only if the
school has tried, where possible, to reduce their water use by
good controls and low water using appliances, rather than the
view "well if we produce our own we can use as much as we
like"). Also, a good provision of drinking water and good
design of toilet facilities can often improve the ambiance of
the school.
— The use of recycled materials for
the building or those that have a low environmental impact, for
example timber from sustainable sources.
— Recycling facilities in schools,
including storage for materials collected. This could include
a number of materials, not just paper, including batteries, plastics
aluminium, and possibly glass. The school could become the point
for community recycling. There is a lot of information available
from other northern European countries.
It is important to remember that you may be
unable to see all the aspects that make a new school sustainable.
For example:
— Good ventilation and indoor air quality,
acoustics, natural lighting, and reducing the use of volatile
organic compounds all effect the general ambiance of the building
and make working conditions better (the social point of sustainability)
but it would be hard to physically see anything.
— Commissioning and making the building
easy to maintain means that the building can be managed more efficiently
and hence reduce the amount of resources used (and frustration).
— Community and pupil consultation
makes the community feel that it "owns" the building
which can often reduce vandalism as pupils and the community feel
as though the building belongs to them, this will increase the
life span of the building.
June 2006
1 Securing the Future, UK government sustainable development
strategy, March 2005, http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/publications/ Back
2
FB10, Putting a Price on Sustainability, BRE & Cyril Sweett,
BRE Trust, 2005. Back
3
Conservation of Fuel and Power, Approved Documents Part 2A and
2B, effective from April 2006. Back
| 
