|
Thus far, Better Schools - A Better Tomorrow has been developed with the Deputy Director of Education acting as Project Sponsor, backed up by expertise in the LEA’s sites and buildings section and supplemented with the services of an employed external consultant. Internal Services have been briefed and prepared, including:
All first and second tier Council managers have been briefed and are prepared. Service plans now factor in the cross-cutting intentions of BSBT This plan also underpins one of the key council priorities identified in the Corporate Business plan: ‘The Council will reduce the gap between the educational achievement of our children and those in the best areas of the country.’ The Council has already demonstrated capacity to deliver, for example:
In - house expertise will be used to deliver the proposals in BSBT. However, the scale of this project is recognised as beyond local capacity. The Council has set aside £350,000 p.a. over the three-year implementation period to buy in outside consultancy in order to deliver the project on time. This will be used variously as ‘back-fill’ or ‘lead’ depending on available expertise in each service. The project management structure is planned and ready to put into place. Through the engagement with partners additional funding streams through Health, SRB, New Opportunities Fund (specifically for community recreational facilities) are lined up and ready to add more value to this project. The preferred pattern of provision, now known as
the Blueprint, was assessed as an option appraisal, against nine options
by applying the following criteria: The authority recognises that not all the funding
through Building Schools for the Future will be PFI Credits. Through
work completed for a previous PFI bid the authority is aware of the
positives / negatives and time-scale involved in PFI proposals. Procurement
options were appraised in accordance with the Treasury Green Book guidance.
Appraisal of PFI procurement and a public sector comparitor assuming
traditional procurement shows that the PFI option incurs a lower net
present value over a period of 25 years, transfers risk from the authority
and demonstrates better value for money. The authority is concerned
that it does not want to have a two-tier funding and maintenance system
for its secondary schools. The schools that receive their investment
through traditional means may need including in a facilities maintenance
contract to ensure similar standards to any PFI proposals. This also
ensures that the capital investment by traditional means is maximised
and its value maintained into the future. |
|
|||||
|
|
|
This page was created by Nicola Worrell
Rupert Collins tel. 01472 323273
rupert.collins@nelincs.gov.uk