1

CONTENTS PAGE

Strategy for Change Part 2 text 3

Appendix 1a – table of schools (from SfC Part1) 41

Appendix 1b – KPIs for LA and individual schools 47

Appendix 2 – change management plan 69

Appendix 3 – sustainability areas for consideration 72

Appendix 4 – soft market testing list of organisations 75

Appendix 5 – stock profile analysis 76

Appendix 6 – control options: school block plans and On disc drawings

Appendix 7 – estate analysis process 80

Appendix 8 – FAM summary 83

Appendix 9 – LLSC letter of agreement 85

Appendix 10 – communications plan 86

Appendix 11 – project governance organogram 96

Appendix 12 – project team organogram 97

Appendix 13 – project plan 98

Appendix 14 – summary of risk register 99

2

1. Where is the authority now in terms of educational outcomes, diversity of provision, fair access and choice?

Introduction

1.1 Suffolk is a “4 star” Council with ambitious plans to transform the County. Building Schools for the Future will play a very important role in this journey, with far wider benefits from the improvements in educational attainment that it will secure, vital though these are.

1.2 Transforming Suffolk has four key objectives

• A prosperous and vibrant community: to become the most innovative and diverse economy in the East of England. • Learning and skills for the future: to have learning and skills in the top quartile in the country. • The Greenest County: to be the County with the greatest reduction in carbon emissions. • Safe, healthy and inclusive communities: to create a place where everyone is safe, healthy and involved.

1.3 All schools in Suffolk will be central to achieving this vision. The bedrock on which our revolution in skills will be built starts with the children in our schools. We cannot change the profile of our local economy without also changing the skills and learning of our workforce. The creation of sustainable communities with increasing social capital will have schools at their centre, both as social institutions, and also as a community resource. Keeping children safe and healthy begins in school, but schools can make an impact on the lives of everyone in their community. Children are one of the greatest advocates of action on climate change, and schools can be community leaders in this enterprise.

1.4 BSF will provide a vital ingredient in this project, and the huge investment that it represents will have a direct impact on our economy, and workforce. Its building methods and design principles will be consistent with our ambitions for carbon reduction. The schools we build will be designed to be community resources as well as providing the very best education for our children.

1.5 We believe that expenditure in the public sector will inevitably be reduced over the next 3 Public Spending Reviews, and that the resilience and capacity within our communities will be vital in enabling the whole public sector work effectively in this new world. This makes our ambitions in Transforming Suffolk even more pressing and relevant. We believe that there will be great opportunities as the economy recovers to build new, more sustainable jobs, but ones which will require a workforce with a far higher skills and knowledge base that at present. We believe that we need to address community capacity and issues of social capital now, and this inevitably leads us towards areas of deprivation, which are targeted in our BSF programme.

Educational Vision

1.6 The County Council’s Vision for Learning and the Children’s Trust Vision for Children and Young People underpin the BSF programme. They address the three key components of a 21 st century school system as set out in the Government’s 21 st Century Schools: A World-Class Education for Every Child as follows:

• excellent personalised education and development • identifying and helping to address additional needs • a range of activities and opportunities to enrich the lives of children, families and the wider community.

1.7 The County Council has a Cabinet-approved strategy for specialist provision which includes a commitment to local specialist provision for those with special educational needs which cannot be met within mainstream schools, and to the co-location wherever practicable of special with

3

mainstream provision. This is reflected in the prioritisation of BSF investment set out in sections 8 and 12.

1.8 Suffolk’s ambition is to raise the bar by improving standards for all of our students, to close gaps for groups of students who are vulnerable to underachievement, particularly by compensating for social and economic deprivation, and schools in Wave 6 have been identified for this reason. This will be done by encouraging schools to personalise learning so that curriculum provision is appropriate for each learner and a wide range of learning styles are supported. This will require a transformation of teaching approaches which will be supported and driven by the school improvement service in partnership with school leadership teams.

BSF Wave 6

1.9 The current pattern of secondary provision in the BSF Wave 6 geographical area of south and west Ipswich and Felixstowe comprises seven community secondary schools, four community special schools and three pupil referral units (PRUs). The special schools and PRUs serve the whole of south Suffolk. One of the special schools is currently for the primary age range, and one of the PRUs is for Key Stages 2 and 3. Schools are in pyramid based secondary clusters with feeder primary schools. All secondary schools are also members of 14 – 19 partnerships.

1.10 The County Council has recently consulted on, and agreed to, the amalgamation of the primary and secondary SLD special schools into a single all-through school with an implementation date of September 2010. It has also consulted on, and agreed to, the creation of a single secondary school in Felixstowe by closing both the current schools and holding a competition for a new school, the process for which is scheduled for completion in September 2009, before the date for submission of the Outline Business case (OBC). The County Council has also agreed to the establishment of an academy in Ipswich to replace a community school.

Current Performance, and our Priorities for Improvement

1.11 The overall 2008 Annual Performance Assessment (APA) was good and Suffolk is a 4 Star authority which is improving well. Suffolk has a good track record of self evaluation and identifying areas for action. Improving attainment at both Key Stages 2 and 4 is a high priority and local authority plans and approaches to do this have received good feedback from the National Strategies. The most significant action to address low attainment is the Council’s decision to move from 3 tier to 2 tier organisation and close middle schools in more than half of the county. This change of structure linked to BSF will make a significant impact on attainment.

1.12 Although there have been steady improvements in the percentage of students gaining 5 or more A* to C grades GCSE results since the mid 1990’s this has not kept pace with national trends and 2008 results (63%) slipped below average (65%). The percentage of students gaining 5 or more GCSEs including English and maths has been around the national average since 2005 and was 46% in 2008. This places Suffolk towards the bottom of the “statistical neighbours” group of authorities. Key Stage 2 results in Suffolk are low, partly related to the 3 tier system, and in 2008 progress in the secondary phase was better than the national average with a contextual value added (CVA) score of 1003.2. This places Suffolk in the second quartile compared to all local authorities nationally. Science attainment is outstanding and in the top quartile nationally. Performance at A to G grades is well above the national average and indicates that approaches to inclusion are effective.

1.13 There are no confirmed Key Stage 3 results for 2008 but in recent years Suffolk schools have shown better value added progress at Key Stage 3 than across Key Stage 4. The percentage of students making 2 levels progress at Key Stage 3 compares well with similar authorities and secondary headteachers and School Improvement Partners (SIPs) are aware that improving progress at Key Stage 4 is a priority for Suffolk. It is clear that schools need to provide a more relevant and engaging curriculum to meet the needs of all students and improve progress in English and maths. BSF will support this through new curriculum models and pedagogical approaches that will ensure personalisation of learning (section 5).

4

1.14 In 2008 Suffolk has 3 schools below the floor target of 30% gaining 5 or more GCSEs including English and maths and 7 National Challenge schools have been identified (4 are in Wave 6). These schools have comprehensive raising attainment plans in place and the authority has made support to them a high priority. In addition six schools have self nominated for the Gaining Ground programme (two in Wave 6) and will receive additional support. Structural changes including academy status for Holywells and a new school in Felixstowe will lead to improved outcomes for students (section 3).

1.15 Post 16 outcomes have improved faster than the national rate and are now in line with England averages. Average points per candidate for 2008 stood at 739 (top quartile) and points per entry 208 (second quartile). The Suffolk 14 to 19 Strategy will continue to focus on improving performance and, with support from BSF develop a much wider curriculum provision across local partnerships (see section 6). Wave 6 schools are in two partnership groups South West Ipswich and South Suffolk (SWISS) and North Ipswich Central Coast and Estuaries (NICE).

1.16 Participation in structured learning Post 16 has continued to turn upwards and the introduction of the September Guarantee has continued to impact significantly on raising participation rates. This has not however been matched by a corresponding fall in the percentage of the 16-18 cohort who are NEET (not in employment, education or training), where the significant decline in 2007 has not been sustained in 2008 and stands at 7.7%. This means that the PSA target of 5.9% in 2010 will challenging to achieve. It is also worth highlighting at a time of economic downturn that the numbers of 16-18 year olds in work without recognised training has declined since 2007 by over 2%.

1.17 Support to prevent underachievement is central to CYP planning with a significant focus on social deprivation, the performance of Black Caribbean and White working class boys, Looked After Children and pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN).

1.18 At Key Stage 4 girls out perform boys. For or 5 or more GCSE grades at A* to C including English and mathematics the gap is 9% and is similar to the national difference. White working class boys are a significantly large group who are doing less well than they should be. Social deprivation is a significant factor and in 2008 only 18% of pupils taking free school meals (FSM) gained 5 or more A* to C GCSEs including English and maths. 49% of the remaining cohort achieved this measure. 1.19 The gap between SEN and non SEN students at 5 or more GCSE grades at A* to C (both with and without English and mathematics) closed slightly since 2007. Value added progress of pupils recorded as on School Action or Action Plus programmes has generally been higher than expected and progress made by pupils with a Statement has been in line with expectations or just below. 1.20 Focussed local authority support improved the performance of BME students in 2008 and all larger groups narrowed the gap from White British students at 5 or more A* to C grades with significant improvement for Bangladeshi (12%) and Black Caribbean students (20%). At 5 or more A* to C grades including English and maths, Indian and Chinese students exceeded the Suffolk average. 34% of all Black / mixed Black students achieved this measure compared to 47% for White British and improving outcomes for Black Caribbean students continues to be a key priority. 1.21 The effective work of the Looked After Children Education Support Service in monitoring attendance and attainment through the virtual school ensured prompt support to young people at risk and has impacted on the numbers of young people gaining at least one grade at GCSE. Of the fifty two students in the 2008 cohort 19% gained 5 GCSE grades at A* - C and 77% got at least 1 pass - a 10% improvement from 2007. About 1/3 of these students had SEN statements. School Performance 1.22 Behaviour is generally good in Suffolk schools. In 80% of the 24 secondary schools inspected in the last 2 years behaviour was good or outstanding. Attendance has improved significantly. Overall absence, at 6.49% in 2007-8, is lower than the national average of 7.34% and places Suffolk in the top quartile of local authorities nationally. Secondary school persistent absence at 3.9% in 2008 is also significantly better than the national figure of 5.58% and puts Suffolk in 9 th place when compared to all other authorities. Suffolk is in the top quartile for the low number of permanent exclusions (2007) and second quartile for fixed term exclusions. Both measures are below national averages and reflect extensive and effective work with schools to develop more inclusive approaches to learning.

5

1.23 Suffolk schools have good performance reflected through Ofsted inspections. Overall 76% of Upper and High schools are currently judged outstanding or good. This compares well with the HMCI national 2008 figure of 57%. There is 1 secondary school in special measures and 4 middle schools are deemed inadequate. There are no inadequate special schools or PRUs and a higher percentage than the national average are outstanding. There is clearly a good deal of effective practice and the local authority is active in promoting and sharing this with other schools so that all can learn from the best. Our aspiration is that all BSF schools should be judged as good or outstanding at their next inspection.

1.24 In terms of admissions and the expression of parental preferences, the latest figures show that for year 7 applications 93% of applicants obtained their first choice of school while 97% received one of their three preferences. For year 9 applicants (middle to upper school) 98.9% of applicants obtained their first choice of school while 99.8% received one of their three preferences.

1.25 A strength in the system of secondary schooling in Suffolk has been consistent comprehensive provision with diversity of organisation within schools. There is a very low proportion of pupils in special schools and a good range of SEN support within mainstream schools. Travelling distance is a barrier to choice for many parts of the county where population levels are low and public transport limited. This means that schools have had to provide a wide ranging curriculum for all pupils locally.

1.26 Suffolk currently has seven schools with specialist status for science, two for arts, three business and enterprise, four humanities, one language, four maths and computing, five sport and twelve for technology. In addition one special school is recognised for cognition and learning.

1.27 The County Council believes that ICT plays a key role in transforming learning and teaching and improving equality of access and community learning. The ICT Vision articulates this and the ICT Output Specification details how ICT will build on the opportunities now available to our communities.

Conclusion

1.28 BSF is central in our ambition to transform the educational outcomes in Suffolk. We will create first class modern buildings to facilitate personalised learning. We aim to close the gap in learning outcomes between pupils, communities and schools, but in the context of improving attainment across the board. But we also want to have schools which can contribute to all the important outcomes in a child’s life, and BSF will enable us to create schools which are open to partnership and look outward into the communities they serve. Our schools are vital ingredients in the creation of sustainable, self reliant, communities. As such, BSF will be making a real contribution to achieving the wider objectives of “Transforming Suffolk”.

2. What added value will BSF investment provide to local educational outcomes?

2.1 BSF will be a catalyst for change across all aspects of school life, leading to greater ambition on the part of all engaged with learning and teaching. Through our change management programme, as set out in section 9 below, sustainable and far-reaching changes will flow from BSF investment to implement the County Council’s and Children’s Trust’s Vision referred to above. Overall, BSF investment will require the achievement of the 10 year targets for individual schools set out in appendix 1. 2.2 Wave 6 school Strategies for Change reflect partnership with the authority to ensure that BSF will: • significantly improve attainment and progress by personalising learning and reduce NEETs by providing a more engaging curriculum with a wider range of choices and better progression pathways. • stimulate a reappraisal of how learning and teaching can best be organised, with a particular focus on the student as an individual leading to personalised learning for all students; • maximise the benefits of ICT, both for improved learning and teaching opportunities and

6

more effective school management/ administration; • embed ICT that will inspire and challenge learners through differentiated and personalised learning; • be real centres of their local communities, through all schools; offering extended services available for 50 weeks of the year with opening hours aligned to community needs; • promote models of active citizenship and wider engagement between school and community through leadership/volunteering opportunities, community arts, sport and cultural activity; • improve choice and access for students and their parents by: ensuring that performance in all schools improves, achieving a balance and breadth of specialisms; securing access to all 17 specialised diplomas through partnership working; making a broad 14- 19 offer available; promoting a range of school types/governance arrangements; and securing sufficient 11-16 and post-16 places to meet demographic trends and increased staying on rates post-16; • coordinate efforts to make effective use of resources across schools and other providers/agencies, including improving opportunities for sports, arts, and integration of children’s services (see section 7 below); • improve the inclusion of young people with SEN and those who may be vulnerable/underachieving and/or have behaviour difficulties/poor attendance. This will be addressed through improved PRU/special school provision, support for mainstream schools in meeting the needs and improving standards achieved by these youngsters, developing outreach services and promoting the development of alternative curriculum models that offer real engagement for students at risk of failure and disaffection; • embrace change as the natural partner of progress, through the change management programme, and engage young people and their parents in influencing future education provision through meaningful consultation; • contribute to broader regeneration efforts to make Ipswich and Felixstowe more prosperous and economically vibrant areas by improving the skills base within the local community and stimulating active citizenship. 2.3 As a result of engagement with schools on their aspirations for the future of learning and teaching and the impact which large-scale investment can make, the County Council would expect: • An exciting range of differentiated spaces that will support different modes of learning and better outcomes for students, from traditional class-based to less formal student- focused research, all part of an ICT-rich environment. These spaces will incorporate fixed, flexible and adaptable approaches to space design, allowing for changes in room usage over time. This adaptability will be supported by a high-resilience infrastructure and a range of online services. The LA ICT Output Specification will emphasise the need for innovative tools that support collaborative and project-based learning; • schools with a lower environmental impact (Council policy being an aspiration to ‘BREEAM Excellent’ standards) than currently, focusing on reducing the school’s carbon footprint and maximising sustainability; • buildings that speak a different language to students, promoting higher standards of behaviour and improved attendance through better design, particularly of communal and social spaces; dining facilities; small group rooms; staff facilities: spaces for the voluntary and community sector to support children and their families; and a layout that supports the schools’ pastoral arrangements. Our aim is to enhance the sense of partnership in learning so that students can experience a sense of ownership of their school. Technology will be used to include and not alienate; • schools designed and operating as centres of their communities, open in the evenings, weekends and holidays for a range of voluntary and community activities and offering local access to other services, such as health and social care through joined up planning and funding, all managed intelligently, with flexible zoned control; • enhanced facilities in each school’s specialist curriculum area, which will support successful second specialisms and the development of additional training schools, and improved suiting of facilities that support the schools’ organisational structures;

7

• facilities across the schools and colleges that enable a collaborative vocational offer, so every student has the opportunity to pursue relevant courses of study, including all 17 specialised diplomas through the 14 – 19 partnerships; • schools of a size that enable them to meet the demand for places from their local communities, and, where appropriate, are designed to provide options for future development; • an ICT managed service and common Learning Platform to support all school improvement initiatives • improved SEN facilities/DDA access in mainstream schools • a range of facilities that supports active lifestyles by learners, staff and members of the local community. There will be a broad range of activities available across the area in a strategic manner in order to attract ever more people to build exercise and activities into their lifestyle; • areas for staff use that will support their professional development and meet the needs of workforce remodelling, improving retention and recruitment.

3 How does the authority propose to ensure choice, diversity and access for all parents and pupils in its schools?

3.1 In March 2008 the County Council agreed a strategy for the future diversification of school type and consequent enhancement of parental choice. 3.2 In practical terms within the BSF Wave 6 area, the re-organisation of secondary schools in Felixstowe is designed to create a single school of the size necessary to enable it to provide a full curriculum range both pre- and post-16. Site constraints mean that it is not possible to rationalise the secondary estate in south and west Ipswich because there are no sites large enough to accommodate the students from any closed school, but collaboration over the South West Ipswich and South Suffolk (SWISS) Sixth Form Centre will ensure the widest range of curriculum offer post-16 (see below).

3.3 The County Council has been in discussion for some time with the Office of the Schools Commissioner (OSC), and the school governing body, regarding the closure of Holywells High School in Ipswich, which is a National Challenge school, and its replacement by an academy. A process for identifying a potential sponsor was agreed between the County Council. This comprised interviewing potential sponsors by a panel consisting of three representatives each of the County Council and the school, a recommendation to the Director for Children and Young People and Portfolio Holder who, in turn, made a recommendation to the Office of the Schools Commissioner (OSC). The Secretary of State has now issued a Statement of Intent identifying Kunskapsskolan as the sponsor of the academy. The next stage is the completion of the Expression of Interest.

3.4 All the remaining Wave 6 schools are committed to becoming foundation trust schools, the following as part of the SWISS (South West Ipswich and South Suffolk) sixth form centre consortium:

• Stoke High School • Chantry High School (National Challenge) • Westbourne Sports College (National Challenge) • Beacon Hill Special School (MLD) • Belstead/Heathside Special Schools (SLD)

together with two local further education colleges, University campus Suffolk, and local businesses.

The SWISS trust will be established by January 2010 with the following charitable objects:

• to promote inclusive and inspirational learning • to raise aspirations and improve opportunity • to increase participation and raise achievement.

8

3.5 Of the remaining schools in Wave 6:

• Thurleston High School (National Challenge) and Thomas Wolsey Special School are proposing to become foundation trust schools in partnership with other local schools, businesses, the health service and the police. The trust will be established in September 2010 with the following charitable objectives:

to personalise the curriculum through extending the range of the curriculum
to promote fully inclusive learning
to plan learning and development from birth to adulthood
to promote the development of the community in order to overcome disadvantage

• until the establishment of a new school through a competition, Deben and Orwell High Schools are proposing to establish the Felixstowe Learning Trust by September 2009 with a range of local higher education and business partners with the objective of personalising the curriculum through offering an extended menu of courses and qualifications. The first statutory notice was published with a closing date for proposals of 26 May 2009. Four proposals have been received and the County Council will be the decision maker. Cabinet is scheduled to make the decision in September 2009.

4 How will the local authority ensure robust challenge to schools including strategies for early intervention in the case of underperforming or failing schools?

4.1 Suffolk has a regular and rigorous review process based on thorough knowledge of school strengths and weaknesses so schools of concern are rapidly identified. This will ensure that, as BSF is implemented, the Inclusive School Improvement Service (ISIS) can target support and challenge appropriate to each school’s needs. ISIS has been established as an “arms length traded service” so is in a good position to work across more than one authority if this is the outcome of the local government review.

4.2 Students in BSF schools will be expected to make accelerated progress as a result of transformed teaching and learning and significant extra funding. Targets which show a significant uplift have already been agreed with schools for 2010 and the authority is looking to all BSF schools to “turn the curve” still further by 2017. Schools will raise levels of performance and improve the percentage of students making 3 levels progress from Key Stage 2 significantly. Key performance indicators for each mainstream school can be found in appendix 1 and show how BSF will make significant changes to the lives of young people. These include reductions in absence and exclusions. BSF will provide schools in challenging situations with a modern environment for learning and effective ICT which will engage students and their communities and increase participation.

Turning the curve - the impact of BSF

70

60

58 50

40 41

30 32 30 31 20

10 % 5+ A* to C inc English and maths and English inc C to A* 5+ %

0 2006 2007 2008 2010 2017

9

4.3 Because of the significant differences between types of student performance measures, key indicators for PRUs and special schools will be tailored to each set of circumstances. They are expected to reflect the impact of BSF on learning and are set out in appendix 1.

4.4 School Improvement Partners (SIPs) are fully integrated with local authority services and National Strategy advisers rate the support and challenge provided by secondary SIPs as good. SIP deployment has been aligned to BSF and school reorganisation plans so that future support is linked up at a local level. For example, both Felixstowe schools have the same SIP as they will be merging into one school. The judgements of SIPs will continue to be very important in targeting effective intervention. National Challenge Advisers, SIPs, Area Advisers and the Secondary Strategy Manager are coordinated by the Senior Secondary Adviser and feedback will be provided for the BSF change management group to ensure a coherent approach. Together they will provide school leadership teams with information about national and local priorities and ensure coherence in monitoring progress of BSF schools and identifying support. Key practitioners such as ASTs and NLEs complement Council staff and make up the broader school improvement team.

4.5 Children and Young People’s Services have been effective in identifying a wider range of underperformance (11 priorities in CYPP2 monitored by the Children’s Trust) which can have a potential impact on attainment. The focus has widened to pull together aspects of behaviour, exclusions, attendance and social inclusion. The integration of Council services and close working in eighteen community clusters across the county will support this work.

4.6 Area Children’s Services Teams work with ISIS to support these clusters of schools. Locality work will be strengthened still further in coming years to provide challenging leadership and governance. A comprehensive Early Intervention and Prevention strategy has been developed and BSF will enable multi-disciplinary teams and voluntary organisations to work more effectively with schools in order to improve attainment and minimise barriers to learning. As part of the strategy to close gaps in attainment Suffolk has ‘virtual’ schools for the Looked After Children Education Support Service (LACESS) and Minority Ethnic and Traveller Attainment Team (METAT) with a SIP to provide challenge. These teams along with the provision for SEN support will continue to be important in targeting action where underperformance has been identified. For example, improved attendance for LAC led to a 10% increase in students gaining at least one GSCE in 2008 and the all larger BME groups improved significantly and narrowed the gap from White British students. There is an increasing confidence in using a range of information to highlight underperforming individuals and groups in order to plan appropriate interventions where students are “off track”.

4.7 Strategies for improving progress for all underperforming groups will be strengthened for BSF schools in order to narrow gaps in attainment. There will be a particular focus on strategies to reduce gaps between boys and girls performance and to improve progress for Black Caribbean students and those with special needs. Schools will be expected to reduce persistent absence overall and in particular for BME groups. SIPs will monitor progress of these groups and will challenge schools where there is evidence that students are off track. BSF schools will continue to be well supported in the use of data and training will be provided for teachers, school leaders and governors. Use of data was identified as a strength in the 2007 JAR report for Suffolk. The authority will continue to develop this and is committed to linking the BSF managed MIS system to central “One” modules. This will in turn support schools’ own use of data and help to identify underperformance and target Council and Standards Fund resources. ICT will provide an opportunity to extend the analysis and use of performance data to embed Assessment for Learning (AFL) in everyday practice. The BSF ICT Output Specification articulates the access and training implications for school staff. ISIS will focus on underperforming departments in BSF schools as there is often more variability across subjects within a school than between schools.

4.8 The Council has both two and three tier systems of schools in different geographical areas and significant underperformance in 3 tier schools was identified though an extensive research programme. This resulted in decisive action to close middle schools and a phased move to a 2 tier system across Suffolk linked to the BSF programme. Although this does not affect schools in Wave 6 it is an important backdrop to the Suffolk context as in 2008 there was a 5% gap between 2 and 3 tier schools for 5 or more GCSE grades at A* to C with English and mathematics.

10

4.9 The Council acted quickly and decisively to provide support for seven National Challenge schools including Westbourne, Chantry, Holywells and Thurleston in Wave 6. In these schools, underperforming groups are identified and they have set challenging improvement targets. In addition, ISIS worked with headteachers to develop criteria for the self-identification of coasting (“Gaining Ground”) performance so that support will be provided through this national programme. Schools will continue to be encouraged to evaluate themselves and discuss appropriate action with advisers and SIPs. BSF will provide a modern environment for learning and through the effective use of ICT, will engage and empower students, increasing their participation in school life, in challenging situations. Schools will also make best use of enhanced ICT in modelling of teaching and sharing of resources, conferencing facilities, a blended approach to coaching and the possibilities of on-line teaching for specific groups.

4.10 Effective self evaluation is a strength of Suffolk schools and is often highlighted in inspection reports. Linked to regular monitoring and comprehensive SIP reports that focus on a Suffolk set of indicators of effectiveness this means that aspects of concern or underperformance can be identified early and action taken to remedy them quickly. Suffolk schools are involved in piloting the new Ofsted inspection framework and work is in hand to develop and update guidance and procedures for identifying and supporting schools of concern by September 2009.

4.11 Since 2006, two schools in Ipswich and Felixstowe, Thurleston and Orwell, were successfully removed from the Ofsted notice to improve category within 12 months. Holywells, like a number of schools in Wave 6, is a school in challenging circumstances and was in special measures for 3 years up to 2004. Although 2008 saw the school achieve its best ever result of 31% A* to C GCSE grades including English and maths there is a need for a robust and sustainable long term arrangement for this area of East Ipswich, as identified by the school itself and supported by neighbouring schools. The aim is to have academy status for Holywells by September 2010.

4.12 The Authority is active in helping schools to explore new solutions to improving performance and this includes trust status. In Felixstowe the new 11 to 18 school will explore the ‘schools within a school’ model of organisation. It has also created, in partnership with Suffolk Coastal District Council and local businesses and education and training providers, the Felixstowe Learning Alliance which aims to raise aspirations and support student achievement. ISIS is working closely with the leadership teams of Orwell and Deben to implement a coherent 5 year plan to address a trend of local under achievement. This includes significant changes to the curriculum and new pedagogical approaches.

4.13 Suffolk provides effective guidance on the identification of gifted and talented students through training, conferences and in school support. The indicators for identification are drawn from national, local and academic sources. The authority has developed advice for students and parents and has structures in place to identify gifted children in care. An extensive range of resources is available for BSF schools to develop challenge in the classroom and link with classroom quality standards. Advice and resources will be provided through network meetings, courses and school based training. There are strong inks with approaches to personalising learning, particularly in relation to student voice and co-construction of learning. Suffolk will continue to encourage additional enrichment through the Eastern Region Gifted and Talented networks, Suffolk Childrens’ University, summer school programmes ongoing study support and school developed opportunities. The BSF programme will support gifted and talented learners through improved access to outreach offered by higher education, the Learner Academy and other providers. Improved ICT facilities will create more imaginative opportunities for demonstrating learning. Where the new secondary curriculum has been embedded, pupils will experience compelling learning and will have opportunities to negotiate challenging targets.

5 How will the local authority deliver personalised learning to ensure that every pupil is fully stretched and can access a broad curriculum that best suits their needs and talents?

5.1 Suffolk’s Vision for Learning: “Transforming Learning with Communities”, which was endorsed by Cabinet in 2008, has been developed in collaboration with head teachers and encompasses five key themes. It reflects key national documents such as “2020 Vision”, “21 st Century Schools” and the QCA “Big Picture” in a Suffolk context. Supported through appropriate and timely professional

11

development, schools in Suffolk will aim to make learning Successful, Enjoyable, Inclusive, Accessible and Ethically-based.

5.2 Advisers are working with Wave 6 BSF schools to develop approaches to transforming learning in the context of this vision and assist in the development of individual school strategies for change. Schools are also creating an ICT Vision, linked to an output specification, in order to capture priorities for supporting personalised learning and the 14 to19 curriculum. Schools will be encouraged to try things out and feed the evaluation outcomes into the BSF design process. Advisers have provided documentation, organised a number of visits to other schools, and organised workshops to enable Wave 6 schools to focus on personalised learning, share good practice and develop their thoughts. The strategic change management group will steer the work of the BSF Transforming Learning Project Team (TLPT) and key practitioners (for example, ASTs and NLEs) to work closely with the fourteen Wave 6 schools over the next two years. This team will focus on the authority’s broad change management plan (appendix 2) to help schools identify and try out cutting edge pedagogical approaches and will have a strong focus on Assessment for Learning, ICT, effective classroom practice and curriculum design. Experiences that will be collected by the project team will be shared with all BSF schools and with a wider audience across Suffolk through training, networks and the Suffolk Learning VLE Hub. An upcoming seminar that seeks to provide stimulus and challenge in terms of moving the PE & Healthy Lifestyles agenda forward will not only benefit the Wave 6 schools but make strategic links with Partnership Development Managers and local Sports Development Teams.

5.3 If learning is to be truly personalised, it is vital that students, teachers and parents are clear about what each learner can understand or do and what they need to do next. Schools will be supported to enhance Assessment for Learning (AfL) strategies in classrooms, improve feedback to students on their progress and achieve high standards. Suffolk schools use data well and this will be enhanced by an effective managed ICT service provided by BSF. Linked to the School Report Card and online reporting this will also improve communication with families so that parents can understand the progress that their children are making and can support learning. ISIS will continue to develop and share effective strategies for tracking progress to ensure that all students are making good progress. Advisers and SIPs will continue to promote appropriate intervention strategies for individuals or groups of students who are “off track”. The authority will help BSF schools provide one to one tuition through the National Secondary Strategy programme and new buildings will need to provide small spaces for this type of coaching activity alongside larger teaching areas and individual work spaces.

5.4 Lead AfL schools will share practice with other schools and ssupport will be provided to BSF schools for approaches to Assessing Pupil Progress (APP) in English and mathematics. Strategic learning networks for AfL will be established across Suffolk to support whole school and subject development. BSF schools will prioritise this work and act as a catalyst for others.

5.5 Good feedback will ensure that students get more opportunities to plan and take responsibility for their own learning. In the light of this feedback students will be advised and helped to make appropriate choices about the way they learn and the curriculum pathways that they follow. ISIS 14 to 19 advisors will work with Youth and Connexions advisors to help schools enhance and improve advice, guidance and tutoring as well as the overall quality of careers education experienced by young people. BSF will enable schools to organise this in different and more effective ways. For example through vertical tutoring groups, a pattern of stage not age curriculum progression and “schools within schools” will help teachers to know students well and enhance tutoring and pastoral care.

5.6 The Authority will continue to support new ways of organising the curriculum to build on best primary practice and prepare students for a different culture in the secondary phase with new spaces and technology. At Key Stage 3, as well as developing skills and providing a broad enriched curriculum, there will continue to be a strong drive for high attainment in English and mathematics. This will be supported by more flexible approaches to curriculum design with effective and innovative use of ICT and improved functionality of learning spaces. Project based learning will be promoted and will aim to personalise the learning experience for all including Gifted and Talented (G&T) students. Schools are testing and evaluating new approaches to transforming learning in preparation for BSF. For example, Stoke High School is collapsing the curriculum for

12

whole days of cross curricular work, while Chantry is part of a DCSF-funded national pilot to test approaches to the use of spaces for personalised learning, and the Felixstowe schools have a new two year Key Stage 3 curriculum in place. Experience of personal, learning and thinking skills (PLTS) and co-construction, which are essential for effective personalised learning, has already been developed at Westbourne and this, along with other projects, will be shared with other schools through courses, secondary networks and the Learning Hub. Stoke, Westbourne, Deben and Orwell are involved in work to improve attainment of the most able students in science and this will impact on post 16 uptake.

5.7 Active support for collaborative partnership work between departments in secondary schools and sharing of specialisms will be a key part of BSF school improvement work. Chantry and Thurleston have worked together to produce high quality resources and enhance teachers’ understanding of PLTS. ISIS will support schools to strengthen leadership, subject planning and curriculum design to incorporate compelling learning experiences and PLTS across the curriculum. Suffolk special schools have a good track record of sharing expertise too. For example Beacon Hill provides exceptional outreach support to other schools in meeting the needs of their autistic pupils.

5.8 In the 14 to 19 phase, all secondary schools will be supported by ISIS, the 14 to 19 Strategy Team and partner organisations to provide alternative and enriched curriculum options in order to engage all young people and reduce NEETs. The full 14 to 19 curriculum, including provision for those with special needs and talents, will be in place by 2013. Local networks and consortia are already starting to broaden the curriculum on offer, strengthen pedagogy and extend teaching resources. For example, Chantry, Thurleston, Westbourne, Deben and Orwell are developing approaches to Study Plus and Deben and Orwell have established a joint Key Stage 4/5 curriculum offer that will incorporate Y9 from 2009. Functional Skills are a significant element of the curriculum and the authority will support planning implementation. A headteacher conference during 2009 will promote Functional Skills and training will support the new diplomas along with development of pedagogy for all English, mathematics and ICT teachers.

5.9 BSF will enable schools to be more innovative in curriculum planning and use of the school day. The BSF school engagement programme focuses on the implications of personalised learning for new school buildings and technology. It challenges schools to ensure that their individual BSF priorities reflect the changes necessary to meet the needs of learning in the future. Schools are beginning to explore and evaluate new ways of working and BSF will bring the opportunity to develop flexible curriculum plans and move to a “stage not age” system of progression so that leaning can be personalised for each student. The recent move of Thomas Wolsey Special School to the Thurleston site is already providing new ways of organising the curriculum. BSF will enable this to happen with all special needs provision so that learning can be personalised for all young people and outreach support can be provided where needed. PRUs offer good models for individual curriculum design and these will be shared with other schools. Ofsted judged the curriculum at Westbridge to be outstanding as it offers flexible, interesting and relevant learning opportunities for all students. At Alderwood pupils make remarkable progress because the unit is sensitive to individual needs and promotes learning in a non-confrontational way.

5.10 In Suffolk learning to learn is a crucial part of a successful school experience. It prepares young people to be independent, flexible and adaptable so that they can accommodate the changes they will experience over their lifetime. Subject knowledge is important but it will be even more important to be a confident lifelong learner. ISIS will work with teachers in BSF schools to enhance pedagogical approaches and curriculum design. As well as aiming for high standards in literacy and numeracy, cutting edge approaches to self assessment, mentoring and coaching, project based learning, group work and discussion will be encouraged and shared. For example teachers and students from Holywells are working with Kesgrave High School on collaborative drama workshops. They make joint visits to theatres and collaborate on self evaluation. Students are using digital technology to record what they do and this supports self evaluation and AfL.

5.11 The Authority recognises the enabling role of ICT and the importance of developing e-confidence in preparation for an ICT rich learning environment. The ICT Vision recognises that technology is a key plank of personalising learning and Suffolk has made a major investment in providing the Uniservity VLE and, with agreed funding from the Schools Forum, to improve bandwidth of the

13

network. The Uniservity contract is for three years (2007-10) and the experience of using a VLE has been instrumental in schools defining the range of functionality they require in a BSF managed service procurement. Chantry High School was an early adopter where the VLE is now central to the way students work. In particular, students use forums to discuss their learning with fellow pupils and with staff. The integrated learning platform and MIS (MLE) to be commissioned through BSF will provide choice and improved functionality for students. It will cater for different learning styles and abilities and will support more effective communication of progress within schools to students, parents / carers and partner providers. There will be ready access to attainment information and exemplar work to support moderation across schools and providers. An online assessment system will also enhance capacity to track students and an e-portfolio will capture their achievements as they move around the system. There are many other examples of good practice with the Learning Platform, which will be built on and shared through the BSF procured ICT MS provision.

5.12 Schools are developing on-line learning resources and this will be enhanced through the national BECTA “Home Access” pilot which is initially focussed on Ipswich, Lowestoft and Sudbury. Home Access will provide ICT equipment and Internet connectivity to low income families. It will make online learning available to all young people and their families at any time. The programme targets families that do not use technology for their children’s benefit and forms part of Next Generation Learning. PRUs will play a leading role in developing flexible, personalised approaches for using ICT to support learning and Parkside has been recognised nationally for this after winning an ICT Excellence Award 2008 – best Whole School. Outlined in the Becta case study , Parkside PRU has introduced online reporting as part of an ongoing strategy by the PRU to engage parents and improve the quality of dialogue between school, parent and learner. The staff and pupils have had remote access to a Learning Platform for three years and are now extending this to parents, allowing secure online access to student details. The Authority shares best practice through ISIS and CSD as well as the Schools Portal and the newly launched Suffolk HuB , and will be strengthened further through the MLE, provided through the ICT Managed Service, targeted training, user groups and conferences in order to develop new approaches to learning using ICT. The Authority currently provides access for schools to Guardian Online and an annual grant for innovation using ICT. Twenty five schools in 2009 have bid for the funding.

The County Council has a long tradition of innovation in ICT and it continues today with many examples of good practice in the use of ICT, inside and outside the classroom and captured on video, for example, Parkside PRU ’s “Callum Day”. ICT will enable:

• all students to be ICT confident and competent and able to exploit ICT fully to improve their learning • a more innovative personalised flexible curriculum with student centred learning, independent and collaborative approaches with creative and social interaction. Collaboration with other educational establishments, such as UCS, will enable students to enjoy a flexible diverse learning environment with an opportunity for peer-to-peer learning • all learners to have on-demand access to media rich learning resources that stimulate learning and are tailored to individual needs, available anytime, anywhere, any device • students to work at a wider range of levels commensurate with their personal needs and abilities in all subjects as the centralised provision over the ICT network allows the differentiation of learning materials • the creation of individual learning pathways (ILPs) for students • learning and teaching to be varied to support diverse needs using a range of technologies, for example using the VLE to provide choice for by catering for different learning styles and abilities.

5.13 Schools will provide well targeted support for all students so that they make good progress. Personal tutoring and mentoring will ensure that all young people have effective pastoral and academic guidance and are known as individuals so that the school can work with families and a range of agencies to support learning effectively. The Authority will develop its Early Intervention and Prevention Strategy which will aim to remove barriers to learning. Multidisciplinary cluster based teams will support schools to ensure that all pupils can do their best and resources will be focussed on schools in the most challenging circumstances. Schools will link closely with Connexions to ensure that post 16 progression is tracked and the September Guarantee and 17

14

Safety Net expectations are met. This will have a positive impact on our targets to reduce NEET figures.

5.14 Effective personalised learning depends on the school’s relationship with parents and carers . Schools will be encouraged to be welcoming to the community so that parents become more regular visitors and feel more involved in supporting high quality learning. “Anywhere anytime learning” will be encouraged with broad curriculum choice and BSF will help to change the atmosphere and environment to make buildings and resources more accessible for family and community use. BSF schools have linked to the Sorrell Foundation to ensure that students are actively involved in the design process. The Authority will continue to be active in promoting powerful opportunities for student voice – for example through effective school councils and involvement of students in decisions about school life and the curriculum to create a learning environment that meets their needs. Schools will ensure that the voices of vulnerable students are heard and will be expected to use evidence from TellUs surveys. Schools will consult parents and the community to ensure that they also have a voice and can contribute to strong partnership working. One such example would be that by taking account of the views and aspirations for PE, sport and the wider leisure needs of all partners within and around the schools we will provide modern, attractive and welcoming PE, sport and recreation facilities that all adults, children and young people will wish to use whether as novice learners or elite performers.

6 How will the local authority ensure the effective delivery of the 14-19 entitlement in partnership with local LSC’s and local FE providers?

6.1 The Phase 2 14-19 Strategic Plan for Suffolk approved by the 14 to 19 Executive Partnership including the Local Authority and Learning and Skills Council, developed seven strategic aims and objectives for Transforming Learning and Performance in Suffolk (2008 – 2013) as follows:

• raising participation and engaging young people • delivering the 14-19 Curriculum and providing for those with special needs and special talents • providing high quality IAG (Information, Advice and Guidance) • raising achievement and skills and working towards world class standards. • engaging with employers in developing education and training • building workforce facilities and infrastructure for the new curriculum to match new styles of learning and assessment • building Partnerships, planning, commissioning and funding arrangements to deliver and develop the 14-19 curriculum for 2013 and thereafter.

The County 14 to 19 strategy was rated ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted in November 2008.

6.2 Provision Post 16 in Suffolk was identified by the 2004 Ofsted Area Review (14-19) as comprehensive and accessible but it was recognised that more needed to be done truly to transform post 16 opportunity in the area.

6.3 Through the vision of the local headteachers and supported by the Suffolk LSC and the County Council a £68 million 16-19 centre for 2200 students is under construction and due to open in 2010. The centre is fully committed to the inclusion agenda and its 14-19 offer will seek to engage and enthuse all young people in S.W Ipswich from the ablest through to the those with special needs. This 16-19 centre will be an iconic building and an inspiring project that will lead the way locally and nationally in delivering the 14-19 curriculum and its underpinning entitlement. Its impact on the ambitions of the local community and on the schools and colleges will be quite profound. Undoubtedly, this is one of the strongest 14-19 Partnerships in the county and given the level of investment involved it will become the centrepiece of the BSF programme for SW Ipswich and Felixstowe sitting alongside the rebuilding of Suffolk New College (£70m), the redevelopment of Otley College (£20m) and the new University College Suffolk and its waterfront building (£70m). South Suffolk is undergoing a transformation in Education and Training 11-19 building not only ‘schools’ for the future but colleges too.

6.4 On a broader whole County front, the Learning and Skills Council in Suffolk alongside and in support of the County’s 14-19 strategy, has a capital plan that will see up to £250m invested in the infrastructure of its schools and colleges in the next four years. This investment alongside the

15

School Organisation Review and enhanced by BSF will significantly change Suffolk’s education landscape and facilitate delivery of the 14-19 entitlement through partnership working. Beyond the South Suffolk projects, the LA and LSC have developed additional projects in North and West Suffolk including:

• the North Suffolk Skills Centre in Halesworth that opened in 2008 to serve the North Suffolk 14-19 Partnership • the Stowmarket Skills centre in Stowmarket (2009) to support the Gipping Valley 14-19 Partnership • the Lowestoft Sixth Form College proposal planned for 2012 • smaller sixth form school projects are also being undertaken to increase levels of participation in lower and intermediate level qualifications as well as expanding capacity for diploma lines and the 14-19 reforms in Sudbury and North West Suffolk.

6.5 Virtual Learning and online delivery will be critical to 14-19 development and BSF will provide this through the Managed Learning Environment (MLE). T he specification of the ICT Managed Service will detail the need for common or interoperable systems to support blended learning and enable teachers to share data across including colleges and other providers. ICT will play an important part in the effective delivery of 14-19 learning and teaching through:

• a common online Learning Platform that allows easy access to individualised learning tasks, encouraging independent working within the 17 Lines of Learning • securing the use of e-portfolios and Individual Learning Plans (ILP) for all students to give easy access to all resources and provide a planning tool for progression through education and training to employment, learners and parents. • ensuring structured and differentiated learning materials will be available to students anytime, anywhere, any device and students will receive appropriate, regular feedback to develop learning and to support progress towards negotiated targets • engaging “hard to reach” students including those with additional needs, those in EOTAS and mobile learners • providing secure and integrated ICT to facilitate pupil movement and collaboration between 14- 19 institutions and providers ensuring young people achieve the full benefit of vocational hands-on training in specialist regional facilities.

6.6 The ability to track learners across all providers up to age 19 is crucial so we can ensure effective progression as the participation age is raised to 17 by 2013 and age 18 by 2015. BSF will enable this crucial information to be linked to effective Information Advice and Guidance and the managed service must provide good interoperability with Connexions. Introduction of the common application form will be an important addition across the sub region Suffolk and adjacent authorities. Discussions are underway to ensure this is fully developed.

6.7 The challenge around the raising participation age measures identified in the previous paragraph is especially urgent for BSF Wave 6 schools and the southern area of the local authority. NEET rates in Suffolk are higher than they should be, leaving the county currently at the bottom of its statistical neighbour set on this measure. Over 40% of all the young people identified as NEET in Suffolk are resident within the southern area, with nearly 400 (approximately a third of the county total) resident in Ipswich and Felixstowe. Evidence already suggests that participation rates post- 16 are higher where young people have had access to high quality practical and applied learning in their Key Stage 4 curriculum. This need is underlined by the growth in diploma provision from 2010 onwards highlighted in the following paragraph, but it relates just as urgently to the “broader curriculum offer” at Key Stage 4, including the Key Stage 4 School Engagement Programme and a range of other local initiatives aimed at preventing disengagement from learning and so promoting a positive attitude to learning (in education or work based training) post 16. This is a critical area of activity for all of the high schools associated with BSF Wave 6, not least those serving areas of significant disadvantage. BSF will provide enhanced opportunities to deliver a high quality practical and applied offer to young people within the school environment at Key Stage 4 and this will play a decisive part within the overall county strategy to deliver on the raising participation age measure and significantly reduce NEET rates.

16

6.8 There will be 7 diplomas available to about 300 students in Suffolk by September 2009 and a further 26 across levels 1 to 3 have been approved through gateway 3 and will be in place by September 2010. SWISS (South West Ipswich and South Suffolk) will offer 7 lines of learning by 2010 and the full learning entitlement of 17 lines by 2013. NICE (North Ipswich Coast and Estuaries) will offer 6 lines of learning by 2010 and all 17 lines by 2013. BSF is a key enabling factor in providing appropriate functionality of spaces and ICT for this to happen.

SWISS 2010 offer NICE 2010 offer Construction and the Built Environment Construction and the Built Environment Creative and Media Society Health and Development Society Health and Development Environment and Man Based Environment and Man Based Hair and Beauty Hair and Beauty Information Technology Information Technology Bus admin and finance Travel and Tourism

6.9 BSF will enable schools to use buildings differently in order to offer practical experience though the lines of learning. For example the new Felixstowe school intends to provide access to catering through the school restaurant, childcare through an onsite crèche and hair and beauty care through a local work based provider using on site facilities. Holywells will make use of the Gainsborough sports facilities which will be available on the new site. BSF will be important in enhancing 14 to 16 aspects principal learning and applied / specialist strands in the SWISS partnership with all 17 lines in place by 2013 and with links to all feeder schools for 14 to 16. BSF will make a big difference to the foundation learning tier in enabling the local delivery of hands on and applied learning which is required in each partnership. Wave 6 schools are planning to enhance their facilities to support skills development in priority sectors for Suffolk – for example engineering, construction, hospitality and catering and logistics and transport. This will have a direct impact on those learners at risk of disaffection and will reduce NEET levels.

6.10 The authority is working closely with the Learning Skills Council to ensure a smooth transfer of functions including commissioning of appropriate learning opportunities linked to performance and need, workforce development and quality assurance processes. Section 9 provides an outline of approaches to 14 to 19 change management linked to the Suffolk BSF Transforming Learning project and ties in closely with ISIS and CYP Workforce Development Team planning.

6.11 The aim of the Suffolk 14-19 strategy is nothing less than the transformation of the post 16 learning and performance 2015 onwards, in line with the county vision for Learning 0-19 (25). This is a very ambitious and wide ranging programme of reform designed to lift Suffolk from the national average in terms of performance, at Key Stage 4 and 5, into the top 20 education authorities. Many of the building blocks are now in place and the Phase 2 Delivery Plan seeks to build the full 14-19 Curriculum Offer and the underpinning infrastructure needed to realise the entitlement and potential of all young people 14-19 from the most vulnerable through to the most gifted .

7 To what extent is the local authority ensuring effective integration of education and other services to support delivery of the Every Child Matters agenda and other corporate priorities?

7.1 The Children & Young People’s Plan 2006 -09 has the following priorities:

• Be Healthy - children and young people and their families and carers are supported and encouraged to adopt healthy lifestyles. BSF will contribute to this by the design of buildings including sports facilities that encourage physical activity and by requiring green school travel plans which encourage non-vehicular travel to school • Stay Safe - safe environments are provided for children, young people and their families and Children and young people are protected from crime, anti-social behaviour or bullying. BSF will address these priorities through the design of buildings • Enjoy and Achieve - children and young people improve their standards of attainment; access to informal learning, leisure and recreation services for children and young people are improved; the numbers of children and young people who do not attend, or are excluded from, school are reduced. BSF will contribute to these three priorities by stimulating and promoting the

17

transformation of learning and teaching to increase attainment, and by designing facilities which provide a full range of activities both formal and informal and buildings that young people actually want to attend. • Make a positive contribution - children and young people are actively engaged with their communities and with the services provided for them. BSF will contribute to this priority by designing new buildings which maximise community use. • Achieve economic well-being - participation in post-16 learning is increased and attainment improved. BSF will contribute to this priority by providing appropriate spaces for an increased range of post-16 courses thereby encouraging increased participation.

7.2 Suffolk County Council’s services for Children and Young People are commissioned by a central commissioning team and delivered by a variety of agencies and organisations including internal providers and the Inclusive School Improvement Service (ISIS) working as a traded service. Service delivery is based on three areas of the county divided into 18 clusters based on amalgamations of school pyramids. These are the building blocks for the development of integrated service delivery including Children’s Centres, extended services and Integrated Youth Support Services (IYSS). Each of the three area based teams is led by an Area Director who is accountable for the delivery of all services including support for schools and vulnerable children’s services. These clusters are supported in their development by the Suffolk Children’s Trust. Staff from partner organisations and agencies are deployed on a cluster basis and many clusters have a strong local identity.

7.3 Within each of the community clusters staff are brought together in cluster steering groups which include head teachers and other representatives from schools. Needs analysis data across all services is provided at individual cluster level and planning is encouraged on a local level to meet locally identified needs following a strategic commissioning framework. In some areas of the county co-location is supporting the development of integrated teams. Where co-location is not possible virtual teams are being established.

7.4 Allocations of funding for the development of extended school’s services are based on this cluster model. Decisions about resources are made locally and supported in each cluster by an extended school’s development officer. Schools play a key role in Suffolk’s preventative strategy and many have responded to local need and commissioned services to support the young people in their locality. These include the development of ‘Safe Places To Be’, study support, positive activities, school based health services and targeted youth support services. The next step in the development of IYSS is to launch the Suffolk Youth Offer based on the outcomes of consultation with young people.

7.5 Information about services and activities available in each area are made available to young people through the developing ‘Young Infolink’ website and the former Connexions service website.

7.6 The Extended Schools programme supports the overall ‘Vision for Learning in Suffolk’ of:

• providing flexible, dynamic and relevant approaches to learning. • removing barriers to learning • extending learning from 0 – 19 and beyond into adulthood • ensuring that learning is successful, flexible, inclusive, accessible and ethical.

7.7 Members of the Extended Schools team do this by working with the schools and key agencies across the ECM agenda and local communities, to develop a needs-led approaches to enhancing:

• Learning within and beyond the school day • Engagement with parents and carers • Joint working • Inclusion.

7.8 Throughout this process, the Extended Schools team have recognised the need for the culture and ethos of schools and their staff to change, along with the role of the school in responding to the varied needs of their communities. This has meant supporting head teachers, staff, governing

18

bodies, agencies and communities to understand and develop the changed governance and management arrangements needed to operate in this way. There is close working with the Suffolk Workforce Development team to ensure that this complements the specific work they have already completed with schools.

7.9 Individual support, conferences, the involvement of the TDA and Eastern Leadership Centre, multi agency meetings at school and cluster level, the consistent monitoring and evaluation of progress and impact, the preparation of guidance documents, cluster planning and devolved criteria led funding have all supported these changes.

7.10 Additionally, where appropriate, the Extended Schools team have developed County wide approaches such as after school childcare in middle and secondary schools, ‘SHARE’ Parental involvement programmes to draw in parents and carers during the school day and in the evenings, holiday provision, the Suffolk Children’s University and Playing for Success, all of which will be facilitated through BSF investment in school buildings. The intention is that the chosen ICT Managed Service will provide services on school sites for these other projects programmes as part of the County Council’s strategy, making the BSF contract more attractive to the market

7.11 All schools will follow the National Healthy Schools agenda promoted by the Department of Health and DCSF and will promote a Healthy School ethos, namely, a happy and healthy place for children and the community to learn and develop. This will incorporate all areas of healthy living linking into many of the other initiatives already described.

7.12 The County Council has a P E & Sport Stakeholder group and has developed a vision for physical education and sport which includes:

• a robust and collaborative approach to partnership work that will identify the opportunities for joint funded projects that will not only maximise the potential uptake by schools and local communities alike but will deliver a wider range of sports, physical activities, creative and outdoor pursuits

• supporting schools in achieving and sustaining Healthy Schools Status. Further developing and enhancing the minimum standards and ensuring that the local community are conversant with the outcomes for physical activity, healthy eating, emotional health and well- being and personal, social, and health education (PSHE) within the school and outside with the key focus being to raise the numbers of those participating in physical activity and notably to reach those that currently do not participate.

• developing further the work of the Suffolk Physical Education and Sport Strategy for Young People (PESSYP) in line with the National Strategy (PESSYP) and the ten delivery strands. For example, supporting schools with the delivery of the five hours per week offer will be a key strand.

7.13 The opportunity of interoperability with other Children’s Services (Social, Health etc.) will allow important student data to be shared and important and timely interventions actioned. Schools will use Contact Point and the CAF to assist other children’s services and will support and enable the efficient transfer of data:

• a single (national) eCAF system, linked to existing MIS, and other administrative systems will be used to allow authorised practitioners working with children electronically to create, store and share a CAF form securely. This will promote multi agency working and early interventions, facilitate a consistent approach for all practitioners, facilitate the effective and efficient delivery of a co-ordinated service, create a holistic view of a child’s needs, reduce the need for multiple assessments and increase the transparency of work performed by other agencies;

• the County Council is committed to e-safety and will ensure that schools and the wider children’s services are safe environments for staff and learners. The LA will work with schools, Suffolk Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB), other organisations, parents and members of the wider community to implement an e-safety strategy offering safety and

19

security within the ICT learning environment at school and home. The ICT Managed Service will provide a secure reliable ICT infrastructure with appropriate policies and procedures including monitoring and feedback, whole school awareness of e-safety, an effective range of technologies to facilitate e-safety, and an e-safety education programme for all stakeholders. The LA will take the opportunity to access resources from Becta, CEOP, Childnet, IWF, Suffolk LSCB and the NEN Safeguarding Group. This is in line with the government’s Staying Safe Action Plan, launched on 5 February 2008 as well as the Home Access Initiative.

8 How does the local authority plan to champion the needs of all pupils (including those with SEN)?

8.1 Suffolk has been working together with its schools and settings over the last 2-3 years to review both the range and type of needs of its pupil population and to evaluate its current range of specialist provision. Stakeholder and public consultations led to a set of proposals to extend and develop specialist provision in the county. These proposals were developed in accordance with the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) guidance for local authorities and to meet the DCSF test on planning and developing SEN provision. Suffolk’s gap analysis has highlighted the need to develop and extend provision in the County for children with other types of need and to reduce the necessity for out-county placements As a result a set of key recommendations were approved Suffolk County Council in February 2009.

8.2 Suffolk has recently been appointed a new SEN adviser by the DCSF; the LA will be using its first meeting with the new adviser (late June 2009) to get feedback on its proposals for the development of SEN provision.

8.3 Suffolk is developing provision for children with the most severe dyslexia extending opportunities for dual placements offering intensive support for literacy and numeracy. This new provision will be based at Claydon High School and a teacher in charge has been appointed with a remit to develop outreach support aimed at embedding “dyslexia friendly” approaches in the schools in Wave 6 and throughout South Suffolk;

8.4 The LA is working with Beacon Hill school to develop tier 5 provision for a small group of young people with the most severe Autistic Spectrum Disorders who are not coping in mainstream. This builds on the County Inclusive Resource service for children with autism and will offer a highly specialist and personalised service for those with the greatest need.

8.5 Suffolk will develop day provision for children with challenging social, emotional and behavioural difficulties with three area based day schools for between 35-50 students between the ages of 11- 16 years.

8.6 BSF will be the key driver in delivering the SEN Review proposals which are in themselves an important and integral strand of the County Council’s Vision for Learning. As part of this vision the LA, together with its schools and settings, has identified the need to strengthen and develop its continuum of specialist provision to cater for the increasingly complex range of needs in the school-age population. This range extends to those with the most profound and complex learning difficulties including some who are currently educated out of county, through to those who have a range of barriers to their learning and are appropriately placed in mainstream. This range includes for example, those with severe dyslexia, those with complex medical needs, those young people with autism and those who have challenging social, emotional and behavioural difficulties.

8.7 The geography of the county and the distance from larger centres of population for those living in more rural communities, means that Suffolk needs to develop a more flexible range of provision, so that there are real opportunities for young people even with the most complex needs, to receive some of their provision more locally and to feel part of their home communities.

8.8 For some time, special schools have been championing dual placements, where pupils spend part of the week in their special school and part of the week in a local mainstream school. The pattern of dual placements varies widely, according the individual needs and feedback from families is positive about the increased choice this provides. Maintaining effective dual placements has been

20

resource intensive for both institutions, The BSF investment provides a real opportunity to utilise the expertise located in Suffolk’s good and outstanding special schools to build a more comprehensive network of support.

8.9 This will be achieved through the planned co-location of special and mainstream schools and development of the hub and satellite model enabling the LA to realise its vision for first class inclusive provision. Suffolk has a long established policy of inclusion with only 0.6% of the school age population attending special schools and a strong desire to develop locally based provision so that children do not have to travel out of county for their education. The LA will use the BSF investment to increase the flexibility of its specialist provision and to strengthen the outreach support services, provide in-reach and increase opportunities for dual placements. More locally based provision will be available in the new centre of expertise (satellite) planned for Felixstowe. This development will also provide the opportunity to co-ordinate services within an area, with the special schools linking more closely with specialist units for speech and language and hearing impairment and with the mainstream specialist support centres for children with complex moderate learning difficulties and behaviour support services.

8.10 An early example of this is Thomas Wolsey special school which opened on the Thurleston site in January 2009 and is becoming established as the first Suffolk hub special school. Partnership work has already improved provision for the full range of students in the two schools. The Thomas Wolsey ‘hub’ hosts the county assessment centre for assistive technology and also delivers the county outreach service for children with complex physical disabilities. BSF investment will support future plans to develop Beacon Hill, Belstead and Heathside as hub special schools on mainstream sites in Ipswich. These Hub Special schools will cater for children with the most complex needs developing as centres of excellence and bringing together a range of support and specialist services. The Wave 6 schools’ SfC document highlights the priority being placed on partnership with the hub special schools so that learning will be connected across the age and ability spectrums and …seen as a lifelong, fully inclusive process.

8.11 One of the key functions of the hub-schools and outreach services is to build capacity in mainstream schools; training for staff will form a very important element of this work. BSF investment will enable schools to be developed which provide the ICT infrastructure and buildings capability to deliver first class support and training. One example of this would be the development of small group working spaces in resourced provision bases with two way mirrors for training purposes. This has already proved effective at Beacon Hill in supporting mainstream staff to work with children with autism and could be extended through BSF to provide similar opportunities for learning how the meet the needs of children who sign, or require other specific, tailored programmes of support.

8.12 Similarly, new building design will address the requirements for flexible spaces which will be used to develop better multi-agency working to support students and their families and to provide specific intervention programmes to meet individual needs. This might be through the provision of therapies or the delivery of social skills / nurture programmes or circle-of-friends type support for young people with challenging behavioural difficulties.

8.13 The vision for learning in Suffolk is underpinned by a clear workforce development strategy which aims to develop all schools and settings as learning institutions. The development of the workforce is critical if BSF development is to be maximised. For children and young people with SEN and additional needs, this starts with the expectation of quality first teaching for all. The Inclusion Development Programme is one of the ways in which Suffolk is developing its workforce to build confidence and expertise in meeting children’s additional needs. To this end, plans are underway, in conjunction with the East Regional Hub, to run impact projects using the materials for Dyslexia, Speech, Language and Communication needs and Autism. This work will be supported by the county’s pool of Key Practitioners for Inclusion and by Special School outreach support teams.

8.14 As part of BSF the associated ICT strategy will help to facilitate this type of learning, improving access for all staff use the interactive and web-based CPD materials and to develop learning journals and e-portfolios to support a range of accreditation e.g. HLTA status or one of the masters level modules in inclusion or independent learning developed by Suffolk-Anglia Ruskin University.

21

8.15 Another key strand of the county’s development of provision centres on the Integrated delivery of services around the child and the family and includes: • the new Thomas Wolsey school (opened Jan 2009), which accommodates a range of professionals, i.e. therapists, social workers, and family support workers supporting the child and the family at the school’s premises; • Suffolk’s CAF which helps schools to work closely in their clusters with a variety of agencies. The use of ‘ContactPoint’ provides a quick way for those practitioners to find out who else is working with the same child or young person; • partnerships with a range of organisations, e.g. SCOPE, Havebury House Association, Further Education Colleges, and with other partner agencies including, Health, Connexions, Integrated Youth Service, Young Carers, etc. Building and developing such partnerships is a key priority. • BSF investment will support Increased opportunities for appropriate inclusion. The students at Thomas Wolsey and Thurleston are already learning alongside each other and joining for social activities; opportunities for joint participation in sport and PE has already had a positive impact on the pupil’s enjoyment and self-esteem. This opportunity will be extended to pupils in other hub-schools, offering a learning environment which promotes engagement with a wider peer group.

8.16 In particular the hub schools working in partnership with their local mainstream schools will enable:

• New courses appropriate to the needs of the young people to be developed as part of the 14-19 agenda. Chantry High has developed its personalised KS4 curriculum offer including for example a range of BTEC courses, and a pre-16 apprenticeship in Food and Drink Manufacture. Beacon Hill has developed strong links with Otley College and Suffolk New College-students in Year 11 attend college for a morning per week for a term prior to transition. The schools are developing specialisms which will enhance the learning opportunities for students across the schools - Chantry – Humanities with a literacy focus, Stoke High – technology and applied learning, Beacon Hill – communication and interaction.

• Pupils at Thomas Wolsey, Beacon Hill and the new Belstead / Heathside school to benefit from the personalised nature of being within a special school environment and at the same time gain advantage from the fact that a large campus could deliver the wider curriculum and social opportunities. BSF will allow transformational change because it will enable state of the art facilities and resources to be provided so that schools can focus on learning and not be distracted by the inadequacies of their current building (Westbourne campus schools SfC).

• The Felixstowe satellite centre will cater for pupils with complex needs and will benefit from a link with the Hub Special Schools in Ipswich. The satellite, based in mainstream provision will be developed in partnership with the Hub Schools

• BSF will enable Beacon Hill and the new Belstead/Heathside schools to provide easier access to specialist areas via wider corridors, bigger / more flexible classrooms and learning spaces with better storage facilities for specialist equipment. Heathside school has already introduced the MOVE (movement opportunities via education) programme and it will be possible to offer this to more pupils in the new buildings.

• Access to cutting edge technology, including sensory studio(s), modern PE facilities, adjustable interactive white boards, a swimming pool as well as an extensive outdoor learning environment. Access to Specialist ICT equipment and tools enables the promotion of a flexible and creative curriculum and supports inclusion. This includes access to a Learning Platform that conforms to AAA accessibility standards.

8.17.1 As outlined above, Suffolk’s strategy over a number of years has focused on developing capacity in mainstream schools, to promote the most effective inclusive learning. This has been undertaken in a number of ways:

22

• an increasing number of students are supported on dual placements spending part of the week in a mainstream school and part of the week in a special school, co-location will extend this opportunity to more pupils. • the development of personalised learning supported by appropriate ICT, for example, the use of a Learning Platform (always accessible regardless of location), making it easier for students with SEN to participate and engage with learning. Within the BSF programme schools’ ICT requirements are a key priority. An important factor in the success of the Learning Platform will be its accessibility to all young people and their families at home. Suffolk is one of two authorities to be part of a DCSF sponsored pilot project to provide home access for families on low incomes. From February 2009, families in Suffolk will be able to apply for broadband connectivity and up to two computers through this scheme; • barriers to learning will be removed by providing support and improved access to learning tools and resources (including specialist assistive technology) for those that are disadvantaged, vulnerable or hard to reach. The county’s involvement as a pathfinder in the Home Access Project will be key in helping to mitigate the financial impact of disability by providing assistive technology to pupils in low income families. The ICT strand of BSF will ensure that schools can really develop their use of ICT to support learning in ways that will maximise pupils’ use of home based equipment. • the development of anytime anywhere learning enabled by ICT that will encourage participation by those who want to enter learning, the disaffected excluded students and those not in education employment or training (NEETs); • each student will be able to have their own e-portfolio containing information about what they have been learning in school with photographic evidence of their achievements. This will help parents to share their children’s learning experience and enable a dialogue at home so that learning can be built on and reinforced. For those children who need to travel some distance to access specialist provision, the virtual learning environment will bridge the gap between home and school by providing the opportunity for regular contact with school that is often missed when children are not attending school locally; • Suffolk’s strategy for developing provision encompasses the 0-19 age range. A linked strand of work is focussing on developments for children in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS). This will sometimes be in children centres but may be developed in a Hub Special School or a Satellite Centre as appropriate to local need.

8.18 Some special schools are already collaborating with their local high schools and bidding for Specialist status in order to offer a provision within a cluster of schools on a more coherent on a basis. For example, specialist facilities at Stoke High School will support the specialism of Technology & Applied learning while at Chantry High School Humanities (with a literacy focus) is the specialism and Beacon Hill Special School will lead on Communication and Interaction: leading learning on the basic communication and relationship skills across the partnership in order to secure a future of independence and vocational experience for students. This is just one example of several initiatives and developments across the county.

8.19 The LA will use BSF investment to improve outcomes for progress and attainment for some of the most vulnerable children and young people in the County: Suffolk has a good track record in delivering the Extended Schools programme (see section 7 above). The Special Schools are fully engaging with the extended schools agenda – Heathside offers a daily after-school club and a regular parents’ support group. BSF offers significant opportunities to enhance the quality of the offer. The opportunities afforded by BSF to build new co-located special / mainstream schools will enable Suffolk to realise its vision to bring together health, family support and related services so that they are accessible in one place. Facilities at Heathside are regularly used by the CDC, the children’s hospice and for community access and voluntary organisations e.g. Crossroads. The ability to offer social care / family support and therapies as well as extended school activities will ensure a more holistic offer and enable children’s wider needs to be met in a more integrated way. The Westbourne campus schools’ SfC highlights ways in which BSF will help to develop ‘team around the child’ approaches providing easy access to essential multi- agency services and extended school activities.

23

8.20 Improved access to ICT for students and staff will ensure that tracking progress becomes routine. For students with SEN, the use of Comparison and Analysis of Special Pupil Attainment (CASPA) will provide all special schools with a common mechanism for linking student portfolios of evidence to attainment and progress data. Beacon Hill has developed robust pupil progress tracking and Belstead and Heathside are using the percentile rankings in the CASPA database to compare outcomes for the students with the most complex learning difficulties. Suffolk special schools are committed to developing a common approach and to moderating assessments at class, school, county and sub-regional level. Schools and SIPs are working collaboratively with LA advisers from Suffolk (and Norfolk) to improve practice and to focus increasingly on delivering improved outcomes for students.

8.21 Another of Suffolk’s priorities is to improve and develop vulnerable children’s independence, this is being achieved through:

• a proactive anti-bullying strategy, including information advice and guidance on strategies to combat prejudice related bullying including cyber bullying and will be launched with schools in countywide conferences in June 2009; • partnership working with the Social Inclusion Unit and heads to establish an inter-agency group to combat racism in the community. Additionally, measures have been taken to reduce the percentage of BME exclusions in schools i.e. extending the Black Exclusions Network to disseminate good practice and support and challenge schools to evaluate their practice; • action is taken to reduce the over representation of vulnerable groups including those with SEN and disabilities who are excluded from school; exclusion figures are analysis and reported on a monthly basis so that follow-up with individual schools can take place. School based planning meetings provide the opportunity to highlight training needs and to problem- solve intervention strategies. • Suffolk has developed a well regarded behaviour support service linked to its strategic development of PRU provision catering for children from 3-16. BSF investment will enhance the delivery of behaviour support through the creation of more flexible learning and quiet/time-out spaces to improve opportunities for social skills work and nurture group type activity.

8.22 The appointment of 14-19 participation and SEN champions is key to driving forward the 14-19 agenda. The Champions’ roles are to challenge the maintained, FE and employer sectors to work in partnership to develop a new framework for learning and to improve opportunities for participation, training and employment. For example, the 14-19 SEN champion has had a key role in working with the new SWISS centre to create Suffolk’s first fully integrated post-16 school catering for all learners. The 14-19 SEN champion also works with the Improving Choices Pathfinder team working from Belstead special school and the transitions teams to provide bespoke training and learning packages for young people with complex needs who previously went out county for their post 16 provision. The 14-19 champion’s role will be particularly important through the Machinery of Government changes (MOG) as elements of LSC provision come within the remit of the LA.

BSF will help Suffolk to achieve:

“…improved tolerance and understanding of difference and greater community cohesion. The [hub] site will be a centre of excellence in terms of SEN and inclusion.” (Westbourne, Whitehouse, Belstead and Heathside schools’ SfC document )

9 What is the local authority’s change management strategy for achieving transformation through BSF (including Continuous Professional Development and Workforce reform)?

9.1 The local authority is fully committed to transforming learning through the BSF process. ISIS advisers are currently working with Wave 6 schools to ensure that School Strategies for Change identify new approaches to organising and delivering learning as described in sections 5 and 6. They are working alongside technical advisers throughout the engagement process to ensure that design is driven by educational priorities. Work with the sample schools will be instrumental in providing the final shape to change management planning. . A strategic local authority change

24

management group for learning and teaching will be in place by September 2009 to support schools in leading organisational change and to steer a forward looking approach to learning, teaching and curriculum design. In addition this team will ensure that all support to BSF schools is focussed on addressing the key priorities set out in section 1 and achieving the performance indicators in appendix 1. This team will consist of:

• BSF Programme Director • Extended Services Commissioner • Head of Workforce Development and Planning • Head of School Improvement Services • 14 to 19 Strategy Manager • Senior Secondary Adviser.

9.2 This group will challenge current views about learning and provide a long term influence for driving change and making links to other CYP priorities. Key features of work to manage change will be to engage staff and school leaders (in schools and across the Local Authority and SIP team), to ensure provision of appropriate professional support, to link effective practice through partnerships and collaboration and to find new and flexible ways of addressing problems encountered as new approaches are tried out. In addition, four BSF headteachers have volunteered to represent Wave 6 schools by being more closely involved in steering change management and transforming teaching and learning through a “think tank” approach.

9.3 The change management group will consult termly with all BSF Wave 6 headteachers and will steer the work of a new Transforming Learning Project Team (TLPT) that will work intensively with teachers and support staff in Wave 6 schools. The project team will be supported and challenged to find innovative approaches to curriculum design, teaching and learning by an external consultant (Mick Waters – formerly Director of Curriculum at QCA and CEO for the City of Manchester) who will bring an outside impetus to the work so that Suffolk schools can draw on experience from elsewhere.

9.4 The BSF Transforming Learning Project Team (TLPT) will be established by January 2010 and will focus on changing practice in preparation for new learning environments, new ways of organising the curriculum and new technology. The TLPT will meet regularly to plan specific project work with BSF schools and will draw on expertise and resources from across the Children and Young Peoples Service and further afield. The team will initiate, steer and evaluate new approaches to learning and will be adjusted over time to reflect developing school priorities. It will be led by the Head of School Improvement Services (BSF Education Lead) and initially it will consist of:

• Learning & Teaching Adviser (Pedagogy and Curriculum) • Learning & Teaching Adviser (Pedagogy and ICT) • Learning & Teaching Adviser (Pedagogy and SEN) • Learning & Teaching Adviser (14 to 19 Curriculum) • Work Force Development Adviser (Schools) • Extended Schools Adviser

9.5 A change management plan (appendix 2) provides the framework within which schools will be supported. It has clear timescales and sets out key areas for development in 3 broad phases:

• start up and trialling . Development of new cultures in schools in preparation for new buildings, technology and resources, new ways of teaching, innovative ways of organising the curriculum / timetable and different approaches to supporting learning. Encouraging a flexible problem solving approach linked to the design process so that lessons learned can inform it. • embedding learning in the new buildings with new technology and new resources. • reflection and evaluation of practice, impact on learning and future planning.

9.6 The TLPT will ensure that approaches are sufficiently flexible to respond to schools’ individual circumstances and needs. This will harness the creativity and energy of those affected by these changes, ensure ownership remains with the school and build capacity by identifying and using internal expertise wherever possible.

25

9.7 Planned strategies include:

• supporting a change champion team in each school with membership drawn from across the school and related agencies. Using the School Improvement Planning Framework and other remodelling tools, this team will identify bespoke and imaginative solutions to workforce challenges. Schools will be encouraged to consider vertical change teams across the full range of staff and consider how students can contribute to change management plans • identifying examples of cutting edge practice with an impact on learning in Suffolk, across England and further afield and arranging visits / contact to share this; • using the Suffolk Learning Hub to set up a network area for discussion and sharing practice between BSF schools as a part of the programme; • organising a “Learning for the Future” conference in 2010 to share progress in Wave 6 schools and showcase developing “next practice” in Wave 6 schools and showcase developing “next practice” • providing classroom based coaching support to pilot new ways of teaching and exploring how new technology can enhance learning • focussing on new ways of organising the curriculum including the creative use of support staff in supporting personalised learning and restructuring the school day • embedding progress tracking, Assessment for Learning; and guidance / tutoring for learning • developing curriculum leadership and leadership for learning through networks of professionals with similar roles. • supporting and developing “Extended School” approaches that have a recognised track record in enhancing attainment • developing reflective classroom evaluation processes so that where there is impact on learning new strategies can be shared • enhancing the Local Authority CPD programme to share practice between all Suffolk schools and develop models for learning in the future.

9.8 Leadership for learning and transformational change will be developed and supported by external consultants, officers and advisers of the Local Authority who are playing a key role in working with headteachers and others in schools to develop the ICT Vision, ICT Output Specification and schools’ local strategies for change. They will support BSF schools to translate their visions for teaching and learning into reality through appropriate professional development and by designing buildings that are fit for purpose. This will grow into ongoing change management plans for each school and will utilise the TDA School Improvement Planning Framework Tool. SIPs have been redeployed to reflect BSF and school reorganisation clusters. Together with National Challenge Advisers they will support planning in the context of local school improvement priorities and patterns of attainment. They will help to ensure that BSF investment will lead to transformed teaching and learning and improved attainment in line with the Key Performance Indicators set out in appendix 1.

9.9. Leadership capacity will be developed and enhanced across BSF schools beyond headteachers, senior managers and CPD leaders. This wider distributed leadership team will include subject leaders, SENCOs, support staff and governors. Access to a range of local, national and international resources will be prioritised for Wave 6 schools. This will include NCSL leadership programmes, the new Models of School Leadership initiative and the Governors Toolkit for Succession Planning, the local authority Leadership Through Partnership programme as well as the Teachers International Professional Development (TIPD) and International Leadership Learning Programme (ILLP). The authority will draw on a range of TDA resources and will link closely to the East and East Midland Leadership centres. A programme to support leadership in learning and succession planning for BSF schools will be in place by January 2010.

9.10 The Governor Support Service will work with headteachers and SIPs to ensure that governors understand and are committed to the process of change. Governor support for innovative approaches to learning and new ways of personalising the curriculum will be crucial.

9.11 The Workforce Development Team will support CPD coordinators in Wave 6 schools through termly network meetings. CPD coordinators have a key role in the change management process within their school. They will be fully supported by the authority to ensure that appropriate professional development plans are in place throughout the BSF programme. Schools will be expected to

26

enhance the performance management process to ensure that individual staff development needs are met in response to new challenges. The annual Suffolk audit of CPD needs includes a focus on BSF. This will inform Local Authority CPD provision for the following year and appropriate training for BSF schools will be highlighted in the termly programme. Suffolk has well established role specific “Career Pathways” for the full range of school staff. These will be modified and developed in light of BSF experience.

9.12 BSF will provide an opportunity to build a strong multi-professional workforce around the child through co-location of children's services within schools of the future. The Local Authority will build on its Workforce Development Strategy to enhance generic skills and competencies through integrated training. This will mean that professionals who work together in BSF schools will collaborate and train together and this will be particularly important where BSF enables specialist school provision to be co-located on mainstream school sites.

9.13 National Strategy training will be extended for BSF schools to ensure that the Key Stage 3 curriculum is fully developed to build foundations for learning in the 14 to 19 phase. Schools will be expected to embed Assessment for Learning, Functional Skills and Personal Learning and Thinking Skills (PLTS). BSF schools will be supported to remodel the curriculum and develop new approaches to organising time to facilitate more flexible project based learning and the introduction of diplomas. There will be an emphasis on creativity, whole curriculum links, progression and personalisation of approaches to learning. Examples of best innovative practice will be highlighted in order to change the hearts and minds of the school workforce so that it embraces change.

9.14 The 14 to 19 curriculum and the diplomas bring significant challenges for workforce development. Staff in BSF schools will require new knowledge, skills and expertise. A workforce development audit will be completed for all BSF schools by July 2009. This will identify specific training needs within 14 to 19 partnerships and will encourage schools to plan for changes to their whole school workforce. A 14 to 19 Learning & Teaching Adviser within the project team will drive this work forward and will collaborate with the Workforce Development Team and ISIS to ensure that teachers and other support staff are recruited, trained and developed appropriately. Current strong links with the Education Business partnership will be developed to enhance collaboration between education and employers in Suffolk and showcase examples of learning in partnership. This network will promote future good practice and demonstrate the value and impact of work related learning

9.15 This work will be complemented by the change management programme linked to the ICT Managed Service. People are at the heart of successful change and this programme aims to streamline and improve current practices and activities, as well as introduce new ways of learning and teaching. BSF will help school staff build confidence and expertise in their specialist areas and the intelligent application and use of ICT systems so that they have a lasting positive impact on the school and the surrounding community. BSF will provide a comprehensive training and transformation programme which will make a real impact on pedagogy. It will raise aspirations and attainment, improve motivation and attendance and develop a passion for learning. Teachers, students and the wider community will benefit from a planned and timely programme which will complement other initiatives such as Computers for Pupils, Home Access, E-Safety and addressing the digital divide. Schools are already encouraged to run the Framework for ICT Technical Support (FITs) and implement the Becta Self Review Framework (SRF). The Local Authority, with the support from Becta, will continue to promote these two very important elements of a change management programme. Currently 107 out of the 355 schools (including 11 Secondary / 78 Primary / 8 Middle) use SRF and 1 school has obtained the ICT Mark (Parkside PRU).

9.16 The principles of the ICT training and transformation programme areas are as follows:

• a modular approach will be provided where a list of core and optional modules will be offered • all staff to be skilled in making the very best and most appropriate use of ICT to enhance learning, teaching and administration • a programme delivered through a combination of face-to-face, online, individual and group working (workshops and seminars), to meet the needs of individuals and share best practice • new approaches with a focus on improving the personalised learning experience for individual learners.

27

9.17 The ICT training and transformation programme will focus on change management, for all staff and will provide:

• operational training, for all staff who support learners • curriculum training, for staff to develop personal confidence and competence and professional efficacy in the use of ICT in learning and teaching, personalisation, raising standards and innovation • administrative training, for staff to develop personal confidence and competence and professional efficacy in the use of ICT in management and administrative roles / tasks, to enhance their role.

9.18 The Council fully endorses the workforce reform initiative that enables staff to focus on their core professional duties. ICT will provide opportunities for staff to undertake their daily duties in an effective and efficient manner, by reducing the time spent on tasks in key areas. ICT systems will reduce the workload in these areas by tracking attendance across 14 to 19 partnerships, providing cashless payment for meals, pulling together information about students for tracking, providing good storage systems for curriculum materials and controlling security and access to buildings. ICT will also have a major impact on learners when they have much greater access to learning resources outside school and outside normal school hours. Through the use of the MLE, learners will also be able to communicate, collaborate and share more effectively and initiatives such as the Home Access Initiative will enable greater e-learning opportunities for all.

9.19 Effective new practice will be shared between BSF schools and disseminated across Suffolk. BSF will be used as a catalyst for change in all schools and to develop and evaluate new approaches to teaching, learning and use of ICT. Successful partnership projects that link schools in working together using a coaching model are already in place. This partnership approach will be significantly developed through BSF to transform learning and pedagogy and will be used to stimulate innovation and ensure that best practice and creative forward looking approaches are shared and supported

9.20 BSF schools are expected to improve engagement and raise standards, significantly from the current baseline set out in section 1 so evaluating impact will be crucial. The authority will support reflective classroom practice and encourage feedback into school development planning and the BSF design process. This will be through networks and meetings, the Suffolk learning Hub and a “Learning for the Future” conference in 2010. In addition schools will be able to link with local higher education providers University Campus Suffolk (UCS) and Suffolk Anglia Ruskin University (SARU) to gain external support to validate their evidence. Individual members of school staff can register for reflective research modules which can provide credits for further degrees and higher level qualifications. Advice on how to set up research based reflective evaluation processes will be provided though the TLPT team and a modular ‘learning for the future’ post-graduate certificate is being developed for 2010.

9.21 The Local Social Partnership Group with membership including union and Authority representatives is well established and discusses workforce development issues including effective deployment and good practice with a focus on BSF when appropriate.

10 How will the local authority harness the opportunity of BSF to drive down carbon emissions from schools and promote sustainable behaviours among pupils and their communities?

10.1 It is important that in achieving this objective the local authority leads by example. By building on Suffolk’s commitment to “Create the Greenest County” within the Sustainable Communities Strategy; the County Councils contribution in its Environmental Action Plan; and by developing a strategy that recognises and adopts the National Framework’s eight ‘doorways’; the BSF programme will drive down carbon emissions and promote sustainable behaviour.

10.2 DCSF’s sustainable schools strategy and framework envisages all schools being fully sustainable by 2020. Suffolk already has 165 schools registered as eco-schools and will have 200 by 2010. All BSF schools will be eco-schools.

28

10.3 The County Council’s Environmental Action Plan (EAP) contains eight themes; Community Leadership, Property and Energy, Procurement; Waste; Children and Young People; Transport, Landscapes; wildlife and the historic environment; and implementation. These align with the eight doorways to sustainability which are; Food and Drink; Energy and Water; Travel and traffic; purchasing and waste; buildings and grounds; inclusion and participation; local wellbeing; and global dimension. The Environment Action Plan and the eight doorways together will be used to develop a strategy to address this important area.

10.4 The BSF programme will consider developments within the Construction Industry and develop strategies that incorporate the leading thinking in school design and construction including, Rethinking Construction, Design for Manufacture, Design with Distinction and Design Quality Indicators and continue to reflect Suffolk County Council’s high ambitions for sustainability.

10.5 Appendix 3 identifies the areas for consideration during the design, construction and operational stages of the schools programme and has been prepared to provide guidance on possible sustainability strategies deemed advisable in order to meet the principles laid out under sections 106 -113 of the ‘Strategy for Change: Guidance for Local Authorities in BSF Wave 5 – published by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF).

10.6 Food and Drink : Suffolk County Council’s schools will be model suppliers of healthy, local and sustainable food and drink. School design should allow for the preparation of food on site in the number and layout of rooms but also in the provision of land for production. Contractors will be encouraged to use fresh local produce and offer healthy meals.

All information on production, resources, nutritional values etc can act as an educational tool leading to greater pupil and parent awareness. Combining with an effective strategy for active lifestyles, this will drive the Healthy Ambitions initiative that is a key priority for the county.

10.7 Energy and Water : 20.5% of the county council’s carbon emissions come for energy consumption in buildings. It has set itself an aspirational target of a 60% reduction in emissions by 2025 and the schools within the BSF programme will be a major contributor to that. Our aim is to have all wave 6 BSF schools with a 60% carbon reduction (independent of new build or refurbishment) and aim to have one school in wave 6 zero carbon. In future BSF Waves our aim is for all schools to exceed the 60% reduction in carbon emissions and to use the learning from the Wave 6 zero carbon school to deliver two schools in each wave that are zero carbon. Consequently carbon reductions will be addressed through effective design, energy efficiency, renewable energy generation, transport and waste and water management. The setting of a BREEAM Excellent target will assist with this and will be applied on all projects. The schools also have an opportunity to showcase technologies such as wind, solar and bio-fuel energy, water reduction technologies and rainwater capture and reuse. Suffolk has already been at the forefront of this and has both trained in-house and assessors through their technical advisors. With the introduction of fiscal measures such as the Carbon Reduction Commitment it is important that schools are the most energy efficient as possible. Suffolk has been developing a long term strategy to introduce wood fuel as the primary heating source in schools and has developed in partnership with wood suppliers a local wood sourcing, chipping, pelletting and delivery supply chain.

10.8 Travel and traffic: The County Council is committed to reducing the carbon emissions and congestion related to schools and have a target that every school will have a Green Travel Plan by 2010. There is a vital role for designs that limit vehicular access within the sites and encourages safe alternatives to the use of private vehicles. During construction consideration can be given to reducing traffic through utilising consolidated logistic centres, clean vehicle fleets and the bussing of operative to site reducing individual car journeys. The County Council’s school bus service can be encouraged to consider alternatively fuelled vehicles. The schools can also act as an information centre regarding travel and traffic encouraging the use of public transport; promote walking and cycling (in so doing contributing towards the Healthy Ambitions agenda) and providing advice on alternatives available.

10.9 Purchasing and waste: Themes three and four of Suffolk County Council’s EAP consider Procurement and Waste. The Council is committed to reducing the carbon emissions related to waste by ensuring that the organisation uses resources efficiently and adheres to the waste

29

hierarchy. Schools can contribute during design by considering Design for Manufacturing, eliminating waste at source, ensuring that materials specified contain, where applicable, a high recycled content, by allowing sufficient space within the buildings for the segregation of recycled materials and for larger recycling facilities within the school grounds which can encourage staff, pupils, parents and locals to recycle.

Throughout the design, construction and operation strategies for sustainable procurement will need to be developed which consider, amongst other things, the reduction of the use of natural resources, reduction of traffic congestion, use of local and ethical suppliers, low impact goods, minimisation (or elimination) of packaging and the recycling, repair and reuse of materials.

10.10 Buildings and grounds: sustainable school design will be showcased through the visible use of sustainable design features such as low and zero carbon technologies, interior fittings and equipment with a low impact on the environment.

The school grounds can be developed in ways to help pupils learn about the natural world and sustainable living through consideration of enhanced biodiversity, nature trails, water capture and treatment works, the production of organic/sustainable food, recycling centres, information centres.

Buildings will integrate ICT and SMART building systems to ensure that all building control systems are integrated and can be used as teaching resources and allow flexible and joined-up control of building automation and ICT systems.

10.11 Inclusion and participation: during the design, construction and operation Suffolk Schools aim to be the model of social inclusion, enabling all pupils to participate fully in school life. This can be extended to involve staff, parents and the local community through stakeholder engagement groups and activities, the appointment of a community liaison officer and the continual exchange of information between the BSF programme and design team and all those within the local community who have an interest.

10.12 Local wellbeing: during the design, construction stages of the BSF Programme and also during the schools’ operation Suffolk Schools aim to be the model of good corporate citizenship, ensuring the design of new schools is flexible enough to allow and promote out of school hours learning and encourage local community involvement. Opportunities will be identified to ensure that out of hours learning and local wellbeing can link through a range of PE, Dance and sporting activities offered to the whole community.

10.13 Global dimension: During the design, construction and operation Suffolk Schools aim to be the model of good global citizenship. 165 Suffolk Schools are registered as part of the Global Eco- Schools initiative and while many are working toward award and flag status more could be done as part of the BSF Programme to move these forward. As a global initiative this is an ideal tool to assist schools with international contacts and demonstrating Global Citizenship.

These sustainable aspects of the BSF programme have full endorsement from the County Council Environment Panel and there is a commitment in principle to contribute capital money to help support these aims.

11 Procurement strategy

11.1 The County Council’s Cabinet has already endorsed procurement of the BSF programme through a Local Education Partnership (LEP) and a Memorandum of Understanding has been signed to this effect. The County Council also commits to the use of the following standard BSF contractual terms:

• Template ITCD documentation • Template output specifications for PFI, Design & Build and ICT • the Strategic Partnering Agreement • the Shareholders’ Agreement • the PFI contract • the Design & Build contract

30

• the ICT contract

as revised from time to time by PfS.

11.2 The County Council envisages that the LEP will be procured in such a way that it could deliver a wider range of services than BSF, such as the Primary Capital Programme and other capital developments such as leisure facilities, without committing the County Council and its partners to this. Whether the LEP is used for any such additional work would depend on its performance and the County Council’s requirements as set out in its wider investment strategy. It is, however, expected that the LEP will provide the ICT managed service and some existing contracts have been so managed that this would be possible, others require further consideration between now and the submission of the OBC. It is expected that the ICT managed service will be available county-wide and not just in Wave 6 schools making the package attractive to potential bidders by including as wide a range of additional opportunities as possible..

11.3 The County Council is currently subject to a recommendation by the Boundary Committee for England (BCE) concerning unitary local government proposals. The recommendation from the BCE has now been postponed until 15 July 2009 including a further period of consultation. The Local Government (Structural Changes) (Transitional Arrangements) (No2) Regulations 2008 deal with continuity arrangements. Regulation 4(3) says (amongst other things) that anything done by an outgoing council in connection with a function that will pass to its replacement unitary council shall have effect as if done by the replacement unitary council. These regulations also deal with matters that are in progress when the transfer to a unitary authority takes place. Regulation 4(2) says that anything which is in the process of being done by an outgoing authority immediately before the reorganisation date may be continued by the new unitary authority

11.4 In the event that the BCE recommends, and government agrees, a multi-authority future for Suffolk, consideration has been given to the effect that this would have on the procurement of the BSF Programme. Elected members of the County Council, Ipswich Borough Council and Suffolk Coastal District Council agreed, when developing the North Haven Business Case for submission to the BCE, that the BSF Programme for Suffolk should be maintained as a single programme and a statement to this effect was included in that Business Case as follows: “8.10 We must not risk any delay in delivering BSF and would set up a single LEP with joint North Haven and Suffolk (Rural) membership.”

In addition, this Strategy for Change Part 2 document has been considered and supported by the Cabinets of both Ipswich Borough and Suffolk Coastal District Councils.

11.5 The reasons for agreeing a single LEP are that it would maintain an overall programme of sufficient size to be more attractive to potential private sector partners, and would save the considerable cost of a separate procurement exercise, both in terms of procuring and contracting with a range of external advisers and having only a single internal procurement team.

11.6 There are a number of issues to be resolved if it is necessary to put this into practice, in particular: • which authority will employ the project team and external advisers? • on what basis will the costs be distributed between authorities? • where will the project team be based? • how will the LA representation on the LEP be arranged? These issues will be addressed between now and the submission of the OBC if a multi-authority recommendation is made by the BCE. 11.7 It is proposed to utilise the public procurement process, and particularly the competitive dialogue part, to drive the best possible value from the market for the BSF investment. Soft market testing with individual organisations has been ongoing since spring/summer 2008 and a first bidders’ day is planned for September 2009. Considerable interest has been shown in the Suffolk BSF Programme and a full list of organisations with which discussions have been held is shown in appendix 4. A programme of visits, including school representatives, is underway to all the major ICT managed service providers. The progress of earlier wave schemes is being monitored to ensure that any lessons learnt can be utilised during the procurement process. The Programme

31

Director and Manager, who are in regular contact with their opposite numbers in other Wave 6 projects, will provide professional leadership throughout the procurement phase and will manage bidder engagement with schools’ teams.

11.8 The County Council is committed to protecting the investment through BSF by putting in place adequate facilities management as an integral part of the programme. It is proposed that some or all of this FM will be delivered by the Local Education Partnership as an integral part of the package for PFI schemes and could also be offered to the design and build schemes as a managed service. It is intended that facilities management will assist the overall BSF programme to achieve value for money and affordability targets required for the Outline Business Case (OBC). This will be entrenched by incorporating the principles of whole life costing at feasibility stage and in developing specifications and instructions to bidders during procurement.

11.9 At OBC arrangements will be made to engage the schools and stakeholders on the principles and merits of this approach with the view to obtaining buy-in and a commitment in principle to the projected contributions which would be required. As part of the feasibility studies at OBC, relevant information from the schools will be obtained based on their existing provision and through benchmarking and soft market testing in order to demonstrate value for money. Discussions will be held corporately about the options for facilities management and the implications for existing traded services.

12 An assessment of the local authority’s existing asset base and pupil numbers

12.1 This section focuses on the schools contained in wave 6 which fall within the remit of this Strategy for Change. The secondary and special school estate can be categorised by five main building categories: • Victorian Buildings • Interwar and 1950s • Additions and/or replacements in the 1960s and 1970s • Buildings built in the last 20 years • Temporary mobile structures.

12.2 Standards of maintenance vary across the schools, but all schools have significant backlog maintenance issues and in most cases will require significant expenditure to get them to a condition that meets current expectations, let alone the enhanced expectations of the Education Vision. The layout and design of many buildings is a significant barrier to maintenance, particularly when considering regulations relating to safe access for maintenance.

12.3 The design and layout of many existing buildings also presents significant problems for the operation and running of the schools, a problem that will be exacerbated as schools try to deliver the Education Vision. Supervision on several sites is particularly difficult because of the nature of the site layout, which creates many nooks and crannies that allow bullying. Lack of proper social and circulation space is also a common feature, which can contribute to behaviour and discipline problems.

12.4 Overview: the secondary school estate in the Felixstowe and Ipswich Wave 6 BSF area is varied in terms of the type and history of the buildings within it. Some schools have received significant investment while others have developed with token extensions and a “patch and mend” approach typified with reactive repairs, all characteristic of successive funding led approaches over the years prior to the opportunity of BSF. This has until now been the only way the Council has been able to respond to demographic changes or new educational initiatives. This has resulted in a school estate across the County (including Felixstowe and Ipswich) that is made up of learning environments which, in many places, are not suited to meet the needs of the current let alone future curriculum. They are therefore inadequate to meet the challenges and requirements of 21st century education, the transformational objectives of the BSF programme, the County Vision for Learning and the LA ICT vision.

32

The analysis set out in appendix 5 focuses on the schools contained in Wave 6 which fall within the remit of this Strategy for Change.

12.5 Ten year pupil number forecasts were included in the County Council’s Strategy for Change Part 1 and have been agreed with PfS officials. They are included in the table in Appendix 1.

13 Prioritisation of BSF investment

13.1 The programme for Wave 6 includes 14 (to be reduced to 13 following the proposed replacement of Heathside and Belstead Special Schools by a single all-age school) schools in total (including secondary, special schools and PRUs). The phasing of the construction work on these schools within Wave 6 will be based on the need to have sample schools which test the procurement of both PFI and D & B processes. In addition the following criteria will be used:

• readiness for change at the school level – based on the capacity of the senior management team to effectively participate in BSF planning and to lead the school through a complex and demanding change management process; • the need to maintain a balanced profile of new build, refurbishment, and refresh across the LEP; • the complexity of the construction project – taking account of site issues and other constraints; • minimising the length and nature of disruption for children • SEN co-location • decanting requirements for learners and staff.

This approach has been approved by the BSF Programme Board, of which the S151 officer is a member.

13.2 Blight of schools in later phases : in the transitional period it will be necessary to ensure that ‘planning blight’ does not lead to the deterioration of the current buildings. We will ensure that all the school buildings are maintained to an adequate standard.

13.3 It will also be necessary to ensure that educational standards are maintained in all the schools during the transitional period (both leading up to building works and during them). The County Council is working closely with all the heads in Wave 6 to ensure co-operation in providing continuity for all staff. The authority has considerable experience in undertaking building works with schools in situ to minimise any disruption and therefore stress on staff. The emphasis will be on curriculum continuity. 13.4 Work will be carried out with the chosen ICT Managed Service Provider, to establish an approach so that non BSF schools not in Wave 6, will be able to access a number of products and services.

14 Estate options

14.1 The County Council has undertaken a strategic options appraisal to ensure that the vision and capital strategy align, are coherent, achievable and affordable. Options appraisals have been undertaken for all schools in Wave 6 and Appendix 6 contains the individual school workbooks. . The process for this is set out in appendix 7 and the results are summarized below:

School Option % of Programme Budget Spend New Build Refurbish Refresh Felixstowe New 34,720,000 22.2% 100%

Chantry High 22,510,000 14.4% 95% 5%

Holywell High 32,760,000 20.9% 100%

Stoke High 14,040,000 9.0% 9% 74% 18% Thurleston High (inc. Thomas Wolsey) * 7,780,000 5.0% 18% 17% 8%

33

Westbourne High/Belstead/Heathside 33,480,000 21.4% 46% 54%

Parkside PRU 610,000 0.4% 40% 60%

Westbridge PRU 640,000 0.4% 58% 42%

Alderwood PRU** 1,300,000 0.8% 100%

Beacon Hill 8,570,000 5.5% 35% 65% *plus 57% unaffected **phase 2 of a project, phase 1 being SCC funded

14.2 The County Council proposes to dispose of the Heathside, Belstead, Deben and Holywells School sites. The proposed new site for Holywells School is already within the County Council’s ownership. The Orwell site, to be used for the new Felixstowe School (see paragraph 3.6 above), would benefit from new road access and discussions are underway with the neighbouring landowner to effect this. 14.3 In terms of sample schemes, the County Council wishes to have the minimum number of samples consistent with testing: • PFI procurement • Non-PFI procurement • Special school provision. As may be seen from the table above, there are three schools which potentially ‘qualify’ as PFI schools being 100% new build of which Holywells is proposed as an academy and therefore not suitable for PFI. Neither of the remaining new build schools has any significant special needs provision so this will have to be tested through a non-PFI project. Of these, the most advanced in terms of educational planning and joint working is the formal ‘cluster’ of schools comprising Chantry High, Stoke High and Beacon Hill Special School and it is therefore proposed that this cluster should be the sample scheme. Chantry would be the PFI build and Stoke/Beacon Hill the non-PFI including special education provision. It is proposed that the new school in Felixstowe will have its design work advanced to the same stage as et samples such that it can be introduced into the procurement process at preferred bidder stage. 14.4 In summary, the educational drivers for each of the schools are as follows: • Thurleston/Thomas Wolsey: work on Thurleston part of the combined buildings is designed to increase integration between mainstream and special education provision • Westbourne High/Belstead Special/Heathside Special: objective is to produce an integrated campus for the mainstream school and the amalgamated special schools • Chantry High/Beacon Hill Special: objective is to increase the level of integration between the currently adjacent mainstream and special schools • Stoke High: work to increase community presence and access to build on existing facilities (e.g. public library) • Holywells High: the opportunity to relocate to a new Council-owned site which includes a leisure centre would provide an enhanced community presence and profile for a national challenge school • Felixstowe: the intention is to provide a single school for the town (see paragraph 3.6) on the site of the current Orwell High as the current Deben High site is not large enough for the new school • Parkside and Westbridge Pupil Referral Units: in the absence of potential alternative sites, the current buildings offer the potential only for updating and ICT investment • Alderwood Pupil referral Unit: the intention is to replace existing temporary mobile buildings with permanent accommodation.

34

In all cases the design principles have been informed by the deliberations of the P E & Sports and Arts Stakeholder Groups and by regular meetings with district council leisure officers in order to establish a strategic approach to the provision of co-located facilities.` 15 ICT Managed Service 15.1 ICT is an extremely powerful catalyst and agent for transforming learning, teaching, leadership and management. As a local authority, Suffolk is committed to an effective ICT Managed Service as a major vehicle for transformation, thus achieving the risk transfer sought through the BSF project from the school to the ICT managed service provider. While an external ICT Managed Service will be procured it is intended that expertise from local facilitators will be utilised and an agreement achieved through the BSF process. The County Council will ensure that the ICT Managed Service will meet the aims of Harnessing Technology, in particular supporting:

• personalised learning • engaged and empowered learners • effective, responsive and technology-confident education providers • an enabling technology infrastructure • effective system leadership.

15.2 SCC endorses the benefits of the ICT Managed Service, as part of BSF, and it will be based on a standard model. It is: • Strategic : enabling the delivery of National Strategies and Initiatives including Every Child Matters, National Curriculum, The Big Picture, Extended Schools, 14-19 E-safety, Home Access, National Education Network and Workforce Reform. Plans will be in place to ensure that the ICT Managed Service will meet the aims of Harnessing Technology, in particular supporting personalised learning, engaged and empowered learners, effective system leadership and an enabling technology infrastructure. • Local : where the BSF provision of an ICT Managed Service will assist and support schools to develop personalised learning. ICT provision is an agent for change, enabling teaching staff and pupils to transform the way they work and learn. Each school is to have their own personalised approach to ICT, as reflected in their ICT Vision, School Strategy for Change and ICT Output Specification. All schools will be entitled to a number of training and consultancy days per year, which, following compulsory implementation stage training, the schools will be able to choose from a wide range of modules in change management, curriculum and administration training. Those Wave 6 schools that have achieved their targets and KPIs, as reflected in their School Strategy for Change, will be able to convert some of their training/consultancy days to additional local choice funding, in doing so allowing them to further develop their ICT provision to support their aspirations. • Reliable : the ICT Managed Service provider will need clearly to demonstrate an industrial-strength area-based solution, underpinned by clear, strong KPIs integrating schools across the entire LEP and be scalable across the life of the BSF programme. The area-based solution will enable access from a single logon to all services, with the ability to share information across agencies and the effective integration and interface of the provided ICT services with other secondary schools, the primary schools, post-16 educational establishments and the wider community. • Affordable and Sustainable – the Funding Allocation Model includes Capital ICT funding of £1450 per pupil for the ICT Managed Service (including the Managed Learning Environment – MLE), computers, peripheral equipment and the infrastructure, in addition to the £225 per pupil for each school’s passive infrastructure. Any good legacy hardware that already exists in our Wave 6 schools will be retained, which will enable the schools’ ICT equipment to be refreshed in a measured and planned way rather than having to refresh across all of the Wave 6 schools at the beginning of the process. The BSF schools will make an estimated annual contribution in the region of £140 per pupil to the running of the ICT Managed Service for the duration of the contract. For the OBC, details of the ICT Managed Service on offer will help to determine the exact school revenue contribution required.

35

• Flexible – it is planned to ensure that the ICT Managed Service is robust, represents value for money and is appropriate, delivering a variety of universal and specialist/specific facilities. Rather than opt for a one-size-fits-all solution, schools will be offered a local choice ‘catalogue’ where they can choose from a wide range of products and services sourced by the ICT Managed Service Provider and its supply chain. In this way the schools will be empowered to make local decisions. ICT advisors have run a workshop for the Wave 6 schools to ensure they understand the Total Cost of Ownership in relation to what they currently procure and pay and what value added they may be achieve when procuring through the ICT Managed Service (such as additional technical support, hardware, software, training). The fact that the schools will be able to determine their own priorities for learning and teaching means they will need the ability to define their own ICT solution to support this. Economies of scale and standardization will be achieved via the central server farm, local school based servers and associated technology and the use of the ICT Managed Service provider’s preferred supply chain. • Scalable – bidders will be challenged to ensure that their proposals not only meet the requirements of the Wave 6 schools but also consider other Suffolk schools in future waves as well as what opportunities exist for primary schools through the Primary Capital Programme. • Future Proof – it is expected that the ICT MS provider, as a valued and important partner, will help to identify, adopt and implement new technologies as they emerge. Schedule 1 will reflect this within the contract with innovation and research & development to be a high priority. It is expected that teachers and learners will be able to access many opportunities to explore new approaches and tools and to enrich, empower their teaching and learning. 15.3 A BSF ICT Stakeholder Group has been established with a focused remit and several ICT workshops have been run for the Wave 6 schools to consider aspects such as benefits realisation and total cost of ownership of the ICT Managed Service. Appointed ICT consultants (EdICTs) are working very closely with the Wave 6 schools and the County Council to develop the education vision and design development work, and with the County BSF project team to ensure that ICT is not only an important aspect of the project but is woven into the overall aspirations. 16 Affordability

16.1 The County Council has undertaken an initial affordability assessment for SfC purposes. The assessment is in line with Partnerships for Schools guidance and confirms that the scheme is affordable to the Council in terms of proposed capital expenditure and the associated capital funding available (both from DCSF and any other internal and external funding identified). 16.2 For the purposes of the financial assessment, cost assumptions for all the schools in Wave 6 have been made. 16.3 The affordability assessment uses the capital cost assumptions made in the Funding Allocation Model (FAM). The FAM has been based on the PfS funding guidance prepared and reviewed by external technical advisers (Gleeds) and financial advisers (BDO Stoy Haywood). A summary of the FAM is enclosed in appendix 8. 16.4 For the facilities management and lifecycle costs , the Council supports the DCSF policy that schools should be maintained to a standard that maximises the useful economic life of their facilities. The Council is committed to maintaining its conventionally procured schools to appropriate standards. As part of the development of the Outline Business Case, SCC will make a more detailed assessment of the level of service needed. At present it has been assumed that costs will be managed within current budgets – both at county and school level – for those schools being procured conventionally. 16.5 Other Sources of Funding : BSF funding is only available to meet the DCSF area guidelines for schools (in BB98 and BB77). Joint use of facilities will be an important step towards achieving the Extended Use Strategy, but for the full potential of Extended Schools to be realised, other sources of funding may need to be tapped.

36

16.6 The Council will continue to explore the opportunities for obtaining additional funding. This will include discussions with other agencies, such as the LSC, ODPM and the PCT. The LSC’s letter of support for the proposed level of capital investment is in appendix 9. 16.7 Governing Body Contributions : SCC’s intention is that the governing bodies contributions should be based on the following general principles: • schools that receive services under a PFI contract should contribute an appropriate part of their delegated budgets towards the cost of those services, as per the PfS/DCSF guidelines; • schools that receive services under the ICT contract should contribute an appropriate part of their delegated budgets towards the cost of those services, as per the PfS/DCSF guidelines; • the level of contributions should increase each year in accordance with a generally anticipated measure of inflation; • the governing bodies may be asked to contribute an appropriate part of their devolved formula capital monies towards the costs of the Projects. 16.8 Capital Affordability : the capital funding consists of the funding generated by the FAM, anticipated additional income related to DCSF carbon reduction targets and the income from the sale of sites. The estimated capital costs have been developed on an individual site basis. These are set out in paragraph 14.1 above. The funding gap between the funding and the estimated costs of rebuilding and refurbishment is £3.5m. 16.9 These costs will not be incurred until the next CSR round and although it is difficult to predict future capital allocations, particularly in light of the current economic climate, the funding strategy to cover this relatively modest gap includes the following options: • Devolved formula capital (DFC) – following the agreed policy for the capital costs of the School Organisation Review, schools will be asked to contribute some of their DFC towards the build cost; a total of approximately £1.9m • Borrowing – against future savings which would be funded by the DSG, subject to the adequacy of the settlement and the agreement of Schools Forum • Reserves and balances - use of current reserves and balances. In addition, following the local government reorganisation, capital funding from the new authority(ies) may be available. For example, district councils may have capital reserves which are not currently available to support BSF • Opportunities for further land receipts may be explored. • Value engineering – will be manageable as the remaining funding gap is approximately 1% of the total estimated cost.

This approach has been approved by the BSF Programme Board of which the S151 officer is a member.

16.10 Risks: there are a number of risks which include:

• the realised sale value of the sites • the timing of the sale of sites • 100% of sale proceeds are assumed in the funding • inflation; either positive or negative • the costs of managing abnormals exceeds the agreed level of abnormal funding.

It is believed the above sources of additional funding and close managerial cost control will mitigate these risks. 16.11 ICT Funding and Hardware: the FAM includes ICT funding at a fixed rate per pupil for hardware and infrastructure work. The costs will be managed within the anticipated ICT Hardware funding.

16.12 BSF Revenue Affordability: BSF schools will face a number of revenue budget pressures. This section sets out how these will be managed.

• Managed ICT Service. Most schools now receive ICT support from a number of sources; service provided by CSD (a joint venture between Suffolk County Council, Mid Suffolk District Council, and BT), in

37

house IT technicians employed by the school, and from a range of private sector IT companies. This ‘patchwork’ of ICT provision will be replaced by a managed service. At this time we expect the revenue costs of this ICT Managed Service to be in line with the benchmark of £140 per pupil per annum.

Work is has been undertaken by the external ICT consultants to identify total ICT spend in each school, and this will form the baseline resource that schools will have to set aside for the costs of the ICT Managed Service. Schools now understand that expenditure on ICT may need to be increased in the medium term both as the amount of equipment they own increases and as ICT becomes more important to delivering the curriculum. This process of increased investment in ICT will start in 2009/10 with schools paying significantly more for the CSD ICT package in return for an enhanced level of service. This is not equivalent to a fully managed service but is a step towards it both in terms of service provision and cost.

• Facilities Management and Energy costs As with ICT there is currently a number of different arrangements for hard and soft facilities management in schools, including bought-in services from Suffolk County Council’s Property Division, Grounds Maintenance service, and Cleaning and Caretaking Service. These will either provided through a managed service or by existing arrangements and it is not envisaged that schools will face significant, if any, additional costs from this. Any cost increases will be mitigated by possible savings on energy budgets, as new buildings will be significantly more energy efficient that those they replace.

17 Consultation

17.1 A well developed communication plan providing the framework for extensive engagement with a wide range of partners and stakeholders has been operational since early 2008. The Plan is attached as appendix 10. From November 2008 to March 2009 individual engagement meetings were held between the BSF Programme Team, technical advisers and architects and representatives of each Wave 6 school.

17.2 During the summer term 2007 the County Council undertook reviews of, and public consultation exercises on, secondary provision in Felixstowe and special school provision in Ipswich. Central to this was the distribution of 14,000 consultation documents to all parents in Felixstowe, both primary and secondary, and in community outlets such as libraries, and 18 public consultation meetings at schools, also including primaries, across the two areas. Meetings with staff and governing bodies at individual schools were also held.

17.3 Meetings and briefings have been held with the PCT, with officers and members of Suffolk Coastal District Council and Ipswich Borough Council, staff associations and unions, the Felixstowe Regeneration Steering Group, the Haven Gateway Partnership and the Felixstowe Learning Alliance. An Arts group has also been established with representatives from the County and district councils covering the visual arts, performing arts and music.

17.4 Engagement with children and young people is regarded as fundamental to the success of BSF. The County Council engaged the Sorrell Foundation to undertake consultation with students in all the Wave 6 secondary (including special) schools. Individual schools are also developing ways to engage with and involve students in BSF as it develops.

17.5 A PE & Sports Partnership Group has been established which has a diverse membership, tasked with providing a strong strategic lead for the PE & Sport aspects of the programme. The group is working closely with the Wave 6 schools to develop the proposals and ensure a menu that seeks to meet the needs of all pupils as well as attracting the community to ensure extensive community use of the facilities. As reflected throughout our programme, ICT will play a key part in supporting the delivery of activities. The work of the PE & Sports group will continue in the long term, with representatives from the group starting to work closely with the schools to support the development of education transformation and wider participation.

17.6 An ICT Stakeholder’s Group has been established which is chaired by the BSF Programme Director and represents primary and secondary schools. The Group also includes representation

38

from the Borough and District Councils. Establishing this group has been well received by relevant partners, reflected by the commitment to identify strategic opportunities across Wave 6 and beyond.

17.7 Finally an Arts Stakeholder Group has been established representing the range of art disciplines at County level, the arts development officers of the two relevant district councils, the voluntary sector and the Regional arts association.

18 Managing the process

18.1 The project governance arrangements have been approved by Cabinet and are set out in the organogram in Appendix 11. This shows that the Programme Owner is the Director for Children and Young People, who chairs the Programme Board, (temporarily replaced by the Chief Executive) which is in turn supported by the Project Team, managed by the Programme Director. The Programme Board feeds into the County Council’s corporate governance structure. The Board includes representatives of both district councils involved in Wave 6 as well as Cabinet lead members and senior officers from across the County Council.

18.2 The structure and composition of the Project Team is shown in the organogram in Appendix 12. This sets out the various workstreams that comprise the Project Team, their roles and responsibilities and the interrelationships between them. The County Council’s robust approach to project management is based around the Prince 2 methodology. All projects, including the BSF Project, are required to comply with the structured arrangements involved in such an approach, with particular attention being given to project planning, progress monitoring, risk management and governance. Further information on this issue was contained in the Readiness to Deliver and SfC Part 1. The programme has been subject to both 4ps Gateway Review 0 and a Shills and Capacities Audit, the findings of which are being implemented.

18.3 The County Council’s commitment to high quality design is demonstrated by the high level of resources devoted to its achievement and the priority placed on design in the evaluation of the scheme’s development. The specific resources devoted to achieving design quality and flair from the County Council’s perspective include:

• Sui-Te Wu, CABE Enabler, • Curl La-Tourelle and Arcreate as Client Design Advisers, • Scott Brownrigg and AStudio architectural practices working on feasibility proposals.

18.4 The indicative project plan through to financial close is contained in Appendix 13. This shows a procurement phase of nineteen months, resulting in Financial Close in spring 2011. This programme will be reviewed and the procurement phase further detailed at OBC stage.

18.5 The project team budget and resource approvals stands at £1.3 million in the current financial year rising to £1.8 million for the 2009/10 and 2101/11 financial years. All workstreams have devoted and specific resources to support the delivery of each aspect of the programme. Revenue funding has been allocated to support all schools in the programme to engage in the design process. Details of the cost and resource approvals, including spend to date can be provided on request.

18.6 The County Council and its partners, together with other stakeholders, have the capacity and capability to deliver this transformational programme. The County Council’s experience of the procurement of strategic partners ensures that it will fulfil the role of expert client. The commitment of the County Council’s partners and stakeholders is evidenced by the commitment of schools and district councils through their ongoing engagement in the process, membership of and attendance at Board meetings and, the case of Ipswich Borough and Suffolk Coastal District Council, Cabinet support for this strategy document.

18.7 The County Council has appointed, in addition to those set out in 17.1 above, the following external advisers:

• Gleeds as technical advisers • BDO Stoy Hayward as financial advisers

39

• Sharpe Pritchard as legal advisers • EdICTs as ICT advisers.

All have been engaged in the programme from Strategy for Change Part 1, regularly attend workstream meetings, training sessions and risk workshops, operating as part of the internal project team.

18.8 The County Council has a well established and robust approach to risk management for all its major programmes, including BSF, using a proprietary web based risk management system (JCAD), which is proving to be an invaluable tool in capturing key risk data in relation to identifying, categorising, analysing and mitigating the risks and helping to identify opportunities associated with the programme. Each workstream owns its own risk register and there is also a programme level risk register to cover over-arching and interface issues. A process is followed by all Project Team members where each workstream register is reviewed and updated each month and then the 'red' risks are discussed at the Project Team who agree which red risks should be escalated to the Programme Board for discussion. Risks and opportunities are discussed at all Project Team and Board meetings. The system is a versatile tool that is used to produce a variety of reports and also provides for a proactive approach to monitoring of activity in relation to a systematic review. An extract from the risk guidance and the risk register is attached as Appendix 14.

18.9 The commitment of all the school in Wave 6 has been outstanding; heads have a three-weekly meeting with the Programme Director and school staff have attended a wide range of workshops and visits to other authorities.

18.10 The arrangements and resources for change management are set out in section 9 above.

18.11 The communications strategy is contained in the Communications Plan, which has been developed over the last year and is contained in Appendix 10. The plan has been approved by the BSF Programme Board and will be reviewed on a regular basis.

40

Appendix 1a – Table of schools in Wave 6

School Type of Social and NOR Sept Ofsted Post BSF Post BSF Achievement & 2007 school Economic 2007 Special Category Governance NOR Proj. Standards Results now Profile 11-16 ism(s) Sept 2018 (16+) 11-16 (16+) [capacity]

Chantry Community 59% HP, 7% 949 Humanities Good (2008) Trust application 1035 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng 27% High School MM, 24% CO, (164) made (0) & Maths 1% UP,8%WA KS2 to 3 FFT In line and 15% FSM 6th . Form to [1050] KS2 TO 3 DCSF 100.3 transfer to KS 3 to 4 FFT sig+ SWISS from KS 3 to 4 DCSF 1013.5 2010 KS 2 to 4 FFT sig+ KS 2 to 4 DCSF 1020.4

Attendance % of sessions 91.8% FT Exclusions per 100 on 21.17 roll 0.18 Permanent Exclusions per 100 on roll Deben High Community 18% HP, 14% 795 Visual and Satisfactory Trust application 667 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng 38% School MM, 31% CO, (119) Performing (2005) made (127) & Maths 3% Arts KS2 to 3 FFT In line UP,34%WA Formal [900] KS2 TO 3 DCSF 100.0 and 9% FSM consultation KS 3 to 4 FFT Sig- commencing KS 3 to 4 DCSF 987.9 22/9/08 on KS 2 to 4 FFT Sig- possible single KS 2 to 4 DCSF 988.1 secondary for Felixstowe Attendance % of sessions 91.7% FT exclusions per 100 on 8 roll 0.12

41

School Type of Social and NOR Sept Ofsted Post BSF Post BSF Achievement & 2007 school Economic 2007 Special Category Governance NOR Proj. Standards Results now Profile 11-16 ism(s) Sept 2018 (16+) 11-16 (16+) [capacity]

Permanent Exclusions per 100 on roll Holywells Community 60% HP, 6% 860 None Satisfactory Academy at EOI 1337 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng 20% High School MM, 28% CO, (0) (2005) stage (200) & Maths 2% UP,4%WA KS2 to 3 FFT In line and 24% FSM [1550] KS2 TO 3 DCSF 100.4 KS 3 to 4 FFT Sig- KS 3 to 4 DCSF 998.3 KS 2 to 4 FFT Sig- KS 2 to 4 DCSF 993.6 Attendance % of sessions 89.1% FT exclusions per 100 on 49.2 roll 0.57 Permanent Exclusions per 100 on roll Orwell High Community 21% HP, 16% 742 Technolog Satisfactory Trust Application 713 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng 42% School MM, 39% CO, (107) y (2007) made (131) & Maths 1% KS2 to 3 FFT - Sig- UP,24%WA Formal [900] KS2 TO 3 DCSF 99.3 and 9% FSM consultation KS 3 to 4 FFT In line commencing KS 3 to 4 DCSF 1013.8 22/9/08 on KS 2 to 4 FFT In line possible single KS 2 to 4 DCSF 998.8 secondary for Felixstowe Attendance % of sessions 92.5 % FT exclusions per 100 on 28.04 roll 0.67 Permanent Exclusions per 100 on roll Stoke High Community 37% HP,17% 799 Technolog Outstanding Trust application 1202 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng 32% School MM, 36% CO, (0) y (2006) made & Maths

42

School Type of Social and NOR Sept Ofsted Post BSF Post BSF Achievement & 2007 school Economic 2007 Special Category Governance NOR Proj. Standards Results now Profile 11-16 ism(s) Sept 2018 (16+) 11-16 (16+) [capacity]

3% UP,7%WA [1200] KS2 to 3 FFT Sig+ and 19% FSM Vocational KS2 TO 3 DCSF 100.9 KS 3 to 4 FFT In line KS 3 to 4 DCSF 1005.5 KS 2 to 4 FFT In line KS 2 to 4 DCSF 1006.4

Attendance % of sessions 91.7 % FT exclusions per 100 on 22.87 roll 0.25 Permanent exclusions per 100 on roll Thurleston Community 43% HP,5% 748 Science Satisfactory Trust application 614 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng 34% High School MM, 43% CO, (0) (2008) made & Maths 1% UP,8%WA [750] KS2 to 3 FFT In line and 11% FSM KS2 TO 3 DCSF 99.5 KS 3 to 4 FFT In line KS 3 to 4 DCSF 1004.4 KS 2 to 4 FFT In line KS 2 to 4 DCSF 995.5

Attendance % of sessions 91.4 % FT exclusions per 100 on 49.88 roll 0.37 Permanent exclusions per 100 on roll

43

School Type of Social and NOR Sept Ofsted Post BSF Post BSF Achievement & 2007 school Economic 2007 Special Category Governance NOR Proj. Standards Results now Profile 11-16 ism(s) Sept 2018 (16+) 11-16 (16+) [capacity]

Westbourne Community 31% HP,25% 1018 Sport Good (2008) Trust application 1354 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng 31% Sports MM, 37% CO, (161) made & Maths College 2% UP,4%WA [1350] KS2 to 3 FFT – sig + Sig + and 19% FSM 6th . Form to KS2 TO 3 DCSF – 100.6 100.6 transfer to KS 3 to 4 FFT in line In line SWISS from KS 3 to 4 DCSF- 997.2 997.2 2010 KS 2 to 4 FFT in line In line KS 2 to 4 DCSF 1010.1 1010.1

Attendance % of sessions 92% FT exclusions per 100 on 8.03 roll 0.2 Permanent Exclusions per 100 on roll Beacon Hill Community n/app 5-10 MLD Good To be part of 4-10 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng Special 43 (2006) integrated 49 & Maths School 11-15 campus with 11-15 KS2 to 3 FFT 120 existing 138 KS2 TO 3 DCSF neighbour, KS 3 to 4 FFT Chantry High KS 3 to 4 DCSF School KS 2 to 4 FFT KS 2 to 4 DCSF

Attendance % of sessions FT exclusions per 100 on roll Permanent exclusions per 100 on roll Belstead Community n/app 11-15 SLD Satisfactory Proposal to merge Combined %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng & Special 37 (2006) with Heathside to Belstead/Heat Maths School 16-19 provide all through hside KS2 to 3 FFT 35 school on KS2 TO 3 DCSF

44

School Type of Social and NOR Sept Ofsted Post BSF Post BSF Achievement & 2007 school Economic 2007 Special Category Governance NOR Proj. Standards Results now Profile 11-16 ism(s) Sept 2018 (16+) 11-16 (16+) [capacity]

Westbourne site 3-11 KS 3 to 4 FFT consulted on. 79 KS 3 to 4 DCSF 6th . Form to SWISS 11-15 KS 2 to 4 FFT from 2010 43 KS 2 to 4 DCSF 16-19 0 Attendance % of sessions FT exclusions per 100 on roll Permanent exclusions per 100 on roll Heathside Community n/app 3-11 SLD Good Proposal to merge %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng & Special 69 (2006) with Belstead to Maths School provide all through KS2 to 3 FFT school on KS2 TO 3 DCSF Westbourne site KS 3 to 4 FFT consulted on. KS 3 to 4 DCSF KS 2 to 4 FFT KS 2 to 4 DCSF

Attendance % of sessions FT exclusions per 100 on roll Permanent exclusions per 100 on roll Thomas Community n/app 3-11 PD Good Built and co- 4-10 %5+ GCSE + A*-C incl. Eng & Wolsey 38 (2006) located with 44 Maths Special 11-15 Thurleston 11-15 KS2 to 3 FFT School 50 58 KS2 TO 3 DCSF 16-19 6th . Form to SWISS 16-19 KS 3 to 4 FFT 10 from 2010 0 KS 3 to 4 DCSF KS 2 to 4 FFT KS 2 to 4 DCSF

Attendance % of sessions FT exclusions per 100 on roll Permanent exclusions per 100 on roll

45

School Type of Social and NOR Sept Ofsted Post BSF Post BSF Achievement & 2007 school Economic 2007 Special Category Governance NOR Proj. Standards Results now Profile 11-16 ism(s) Sept 2018 (16+) 11-16 (16+) [capacity]

Alderwood n/app 4-10 n/app Outstanding No change 4-10 n/app n/app Pupil Referral 12 (2006) 12 Unit 11-15 11-15 12 12 Parkside Pupil n/app 11-15 n/app Outstanding No change 11-15 n/app n/app Referral Unit 32 (2007) 32 Westbridge n/app 11-15 n/app Good No change 11-15 n/app n/app Pupil Referral 32 (2008) 32 Unit

2007 5+ A* -C GCSE incl. English and Maths Suffolk average 47%, England average 47%

Social and Economic Profile Categories : - HP=Hard Pressed, MM=Moderate Means, CO = Comfortably Off, UP=Urban Prosperity, WA=Wealthy Achievers FSM=Free School Meals

KS2 to 3 data normed on 100, KS2 to 4 and 3to 4 data normed on 1000.

46

Appendix 1b – KPIs for individual schools

Chantry High School 2006 Result 2007 Result 2008 Result 2010 Target 2017 target 5+ A* to C inc Eng and maths 30% 25% 27% 33% 55% (5+ACEM) * 5+ACEM SEN ^ 6% 2% 3% 17% 28% 5+ACEM non SEN ^ 41% 35% 39% 56% 65% 5+ACEM FSM ^ 20% 28% 14% 25% 42% 5+ACEM non FSM ^ 32% 25% 29% 48% 65% 5+ACEM Male ^ 23% 27% 23% 28% 55% 5+ACEM Female ^ 37% 24% 31% 58% 60% CVA * 1003.9 1020.4 1004.7 1004 1010 English 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 44% 48% 40% 45% 50% Maths 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 43% 38% 42% 45% 50% NEET Year 11 # 11% 10% 7% 7% 0% NEET Year 12 # 5% 2% 3% 2% N/A NEET Year 13 # 4% 4% 0% 0% N/A Overall absence *** 9.67% 8.68% 7.96% 8% 5% Persistent absence < n/a n/a 6% 5% 2% Exclusions – permanent ** 5 4 2 2 0 Exclusions – temporary ** 260 213 119 100 50

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will aim to maintain a CVA value exceeding 1000 • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

47

Current Specialist Status Planned additions / changes to Specialist Status None Humanities

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Good Outstanding

Current Diplomas Approved Planned Diplomas to be introduced in next few years

SHD, travel and Tourism, construction, creative and media Information See entry for SWISS technology, Environment and Land based, hair and beauty. Gateway 3 (as part of local partnership)

Table sourced from following data sources: Appendix 4 DCSF Attainment Tables Data ^ From LA January Census Rolls and Fischer Data # Local Authority Destinations Data *** From the Annual (whole year) Absence Data supplied by the to LA for Target Setting ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system < DCSF Attainment Tables Autumn Spring Term

48

Stoke High School 2006 Result 2007 Result 2008 2010 Target 2017 target Result 5+ A* to C inc Eng and maths 34% 33% 34% 41% 58% (5+ACEM) * 5+ACEM SEN ^ 11% 8% 7% 10% 15% 5+ACEM non SEN ^ 38% 39% 48% 50% 55% 5+ACEM FSM ^ 15% 30% 14% 30% 33% 5+ACEM non FSM ^ 37% 33% 37% 39% 48% 5+ACEM Male ^ 34% 31% 34% 35% 40% 5+ACEM Female ^ 33% 34% 33% 40% 44% CVA * 1018.7 1006.4 1004.2 1007 1115 English 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 61% 65% 64% 66% 68% Maths 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 41% 47% 53% 56% 58% NEET Year 11 # 8% 8.42% 8.58% 8% 8% NEET Year 12 # NEET Year 13 # Overall absence *** 8.4% 8.3% 8.3% 8.2% 7% Persistent absence < n/a n/a 9.1% 8% 5% Exclusions – permanent ** 1 2 1 1 1 Exclusions – temporary ** 218 185 150 120 80

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will aim to maintain a CVA value exceeding 1000 • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

49

Current Specialist Status Planned additions / changes to Specialist Status Technology and Applied Learning None at present

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Outstanding Outstanding

Current Diplomas Approved Planned Diplomas to be introduced in next few years None Construction Society Health & Development Creative & Media Environment & Land Based Information Technology Hair & Beauty Travel & Tourism Table sourced from following data sources: Appendix 5 DCSF Attainment Tables Data ^ From LA January Census Rolls and Fischer Data # Local Authority Destinations Data *** From the Annual (whole year) Absence Data supplied by the to LA for Target Setting ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system < DCSF Attainment Tables Autumn Spring Term

50

Holywells High School 2006 Result 2007 Result 2008 Result 2010 Target 2017 target 5+ A* to C inc Eng and maths 14% 20% 31% 33% 55% (5+ACEM) * 5+ACEM SEN ^ 0% 4% 2% 5 10 5+ACEM non SEN ^ 22% 26% 40% 45 60 5+ACEM FSM ^ 6% 14% 14% 20 25 5+ACEM non FSM ^ 20% 21% 34% 40 50 5+ACEM Male ^ 14% 13% 31% 33 55 5+ACEM Female ^ 17% 26% 31% 33 55 CVA * 993.7 993.6 988.6 1000 1002 English 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 30% 37% 46% 55 65 Maths 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 39% 42% 47% 55 65 NEET Year 11 # 10% 8% 8% 7 5 NEET Year 12 # Na 6 NEET Year 13 # Na 7 Overall absence *** 12.17% 10.88% 10.23% 7% 6 Persistent absence < n/a n/a 13.4% 10 8 Exclusions – permanent ** 7 5 13 3 0 Exclusions – temporary ** 298 431 372 300 200

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will aim to maintain a CVA value exceeding 1000 • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

51

Current Specialist Status Planned additions / changes to Specialist Status None 1st - Business & Enterprise 2nd – PE & Sports 3rd – Inclusion

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Satisfactory Good

Current Diplomas Approved (As part of the NICE group of Planned Diplomas to be introduced in next few years schools): Society, Health and Development As left Construction and the Built Environment Landbase and the Environment Business and IT Engineering Table sourced from following data sources: Appendix 6 DCSF Attainment Tables Data ^ From LA January Census Rolls and Fischer Data # Local Authority Destinations Data *** From the Annual (whole year) Absence Data supplied by the to LA for Target Setting ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system < DCSF Attainment Tables Autumn Spring Term

52

Deben High School 2006 Result 2007 Result 2008 2010 Target 2017 target Result 5+ A* to C inc Eng and maths 37% 38% 40% 58% 65% (5+ACEM) * 5+ACEM SEN ^ 18% 3% 8% 18% 28% 5+ACEM non SEN ^ 42% 49% 48% 60% 70% 5+ACEM FSM ^ 18% 9% 0% 40% 62% 5+ACEM non FSM ^ 39% 41% 43% 54% 65% 5+ACEM Male ^ 34% 33% 35% 50% 64% 5+ACEM Female ^ 39% 47% 44% 55% 67% CVA * 1007.9 988.1 999.2 1002 1010 English 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 51% 46% 58% 66% 72% Maths 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 57% 49% 49% 55% 66% NEET Year 11 # 8% 5% 2% 1% 0% NEET Year 12 # 2% 7% 2% 1% 0% NEET Year 13 # 2% 5% 7% 3% 0% Overall absence *** 9.07% 8.44% 8.62% 7.2 % 6% Persistent absence < n/a n/a 9.4% 5% 3% Exclusions – permanent ** 1 1 1 0 0 Exclusions – temporary ** 103 67 51 40 0

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will aim to maintain a CVA value exceeding 1000 • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

53

Current Specialist Status Planned additions / changes to Specialist Status • Visual and Performing Arts • Business and Enterprise (Deben and Orwell / New School)

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Satisfactory Outstanding

Current Diplomas Approved Planned Diplomas to be introduced in next few years • Hair and Beauty • Creative and Media • Land and Countryside • Engineering • Construction Table sourced from following data sources: Appendix 7 DCSF Attainment Tables Data ^ From LA January Census Rolls and Fischer Data # Local Authority Destinations Data *** From the Annual (whole year) Absence Data supplied by the to LA for Target Setting ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system < DCSF Attainment Tables Autumn Spring Term

54

Orwell High School 2006 Result 2007 Result 2008 Result 2010 Target 2017 target 5+ A* to C inc Eng and maths 36% 42% 36% 52% 65% (5+ACEM) * 5+ACEM SEN ^ 6% 13% 9% 17% 28% 5+ACEM non SEN ^ 49% 56% 45% 56% 70% 5+ACEM FSM ^ 18% 33% 33% 51% 62% 5+ACEM non FSM ^ 38% 43% 36% 55% 67% 5+ACEM Male ^ 36% 29% 36% 51% 64% 5+ACEM Female ^ 37% 58% 36% 54% 67% CVA * 992.7 998.8 997.0 1002 1010 English 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 40% 47% 57% 62% 72% Maths 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 43% 45% 48% 52% 66% NEET Year 11 # 6% 6% 10% 2% 0% NEET Year 12 # 7% 2% 2% 1% 0% NEET Year 13 # 6% 8% 5% 1% 0% Overall absence *** 8.5% 7.43% 7.09% 7.1% 6% Persistent absence < n/a n/a 7.4% 4.5% 3% Exclusions – permanent ** 1 5 3 0 0 Exclusions – temporary ** 256 210 124 40 0

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will aim to maintain a CVA value exceeding 1000 • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

55

Current Specialist Status Planned additions / changes to Specialist Status New school will include the combined specialisms of the two schools: Technology Technology and Arts. However we will be furthering conversations following the end of the school competition to look at possibly developing a Business and Enterprise specialism.

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Satisfactory Outstanding

Current Diplomas Approved Planned Diplomas to be introduced in next few years Hair & Beauty Engineering Land & Countryside Creative & Media Construction (All diploma lines to be accessible through the Southern Area Consortium.) Table sourced from following data sources: Appendix 8 DCSF Attainment Tables Data ^ From LA January Census Rolls and Fischer Data # Local Authority Destinations Data *** From the Annual (whole year) Absence Data supplied by the to LA for Target Setting ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system < DCSF Attainment Tables Autumn Spring Term

56

Thurleston High School 2006 Result 2007 Result 2008 Result 2010 Target 2017 target 5+ A* to C inc Eng and maths 35% 34% 32% 45% 55% (5+ACEM) * 5+ACEM SEN ^ 8% 0% 3% 10% 20% 5+ACEM non SEN ^ 37% 39% 35% 49% 65% 5+ACEM FSM ^ 33% 13% 0% 33% 45% 5+ACEM non FSM ^ 34% 35% 30% 46% 65% 5+ACEM Male ^ 33% 29% 26% 43% 53% 5+ACEM Female ^ 34% 39% 31% 46% 57% CVA * 990.0 995.5 984.7 1000 1007 English 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 36% 62% 50% 66% 75% Maths 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 39% 35% 31% 55% 70% NEET Year 11 # 7% 9% 9% 7% 2% NEET Year 12 # NEET Year 13 # Overall absence *** 9.07% 8.42% 7.46% 7.5% 5% Persistent absence < n/a n/a 7.4% 6% 3% Exclusions – permanent ** 6 3 1 1 0 Exclusions – temporary ** 248 406 138 120 40

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will aim to maintain a CVA value exceeding 1000 • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

57

Current Specialist Status Planned additions / changes to Specialist Status Science

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Satisfactory Good

Current Diplomas Approved Planned Diplomas to be introduced in next few years via SWISS Table sourced from following data sources: Appendix 9 DCSF Attainment Tables Data ^ From LA January Census Rolls and Fischer Data # Local Authority Destinations Data *** From the Annual (whole year) Absence Data supplied by the to LA for Target Setting ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system < DCSF Attainment Tables Autumn Spring Term

58

Westbourne High School 2006 Result 2007 Result 2008 Result 2010 Target 2017 target 5+ A* to C inc Eng and maths (5+ACEM) * 28% 31% 26% 35% 55% 5+ACEM SEN ^ 6% 2% 6% 6% 12% 5+ACEM non SEN ^ 32% 40% 32% 40% 65% 5+ACEM FSM ^ 10% 9% 9% 11% 40% 5+ACEM non FSM ^ 29% 34% 27% 36% 58% 5+ACEM Male ^ 24% 27% 17% 33% 55% 5+ACEM Female ^ 30% 34% 33% 37% 57% CVA * 1006.7 1010.1 997.8 1010 1030 English 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 ^ 61% 56% 49% 60% 70% Maths 3 Levels Progress KS2 to 4 36% 45% 41% 42% 70% NEET Year 11 # 9% 6% 6% 5% 0% NEET Year 12 # 12% 2% 5% 5% 3% NEET Year 13 # 12% 8% 8% 5% 3% Overall absence *** 9.22% 8.01% 5.72% 6% 4% Persistent absence < n/a n/a 3.5% 3.5% 3% Exclusions – permanent ** 4 2 1 2 0 Exclusions – temporary ** 170 82 53 60 40

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will aim to maintain a CVA value exceeding 1000 • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

59

Current Specialist Status Planned additions / changes to Specialist Status A further specialism in Training Sports

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Good Outstanding

Current Diplomas Approved Planned Diplomas to be introduced in next few years As part of the SWISS consortium from 2010 As part of the SWISS consortium from 2011 Construction Creative & Media Information Tech Soc. Health & Dev. Env. And Land based Hair & Beauty Travel & Tourism Table sourced from following data sources: Appendix 10 DCSF Attainment Tables Data ^ From LA January Census Rolls and Fischer Data # Local Authority Destinations Data *** From the Annual (whole year) Absence Data supplied by the to LA for Target Setting ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system < DCSF Attainment Tables Autumn Spring Term

60

Beacon Hill 2008 baseline 2010 Target 2017 target

% whole school absence 6.5% 8% 7.0%

% students who meet individual “P” Scale targets 75% 80% 85%

% students who achieve appropriate accreditation through a relevant programme 100% 100% 100%

% students who take an active part in their review 70% 75% 80%

% students who receive a person-centred transition review 100% 100% 100%

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will promote 2 hours of high quality PE and an additional 3 hours of sport by 2011

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection

Outstanding Outstanding

61

Belstead and Heathside 2008 baseline 2010 Target 2017 target

% whole school absence Belstead Belstead 8.5% 6% Heathside Heathside 8.15% 6.8% % of targets from IEP achieved by individual pupils 72% 77% 82%

% of pupils who maintain or improve their percentile ranking based on CASPA data 60% 65% 75%

% students who meet individual “P” Scale targets 80% 90% 100%

% students achieving pre-entry and entry level 1 vocational accreditation 40% 60% 75%

% students who take an active part in their review 30% 100% 100%

% students who receive a person-centred transition review 10% 100% 100%

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will promote 2 hours of high quality PE and an additional 3 hours of sport by 2011

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection

Heathside – Good Good with more outstanding features Belstead – Satisfactory Good

62

Thomas Woolsey 2008 baseline 2010 Target 2017 target % whole school absence 7.8% 7.8% 7.6%

% students who meet individual “P” Scale targets 71% 80% 83%

% students who achieve appropriate accreditation through a 85% 90% 90% relevant programme

% students who take an active part in their review 68% 75% 80%

% students who receive a person-centred transition review 56% 100% 100%

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will promote 2 hours of high quality PE and an additional 3 hours of sport by 2011

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection

Good Outstanding

63

Alderwood PRU 2008 baseline 2010 target 2017 target Attendance 92% 95% 98% Behaviour (improvement) 75% - 83% * 85% ** 90% ** Increasing emotional wellbeing and development at 80% 85% 90% Alderwood Increasing emotional wellbeing and development in 90% 92.5% 95% partner schools Reintegration 62.5% 75% 80% All pupils to return to mainstream (or suitable full-time (100%) (100%) (100%) provision) KS2 English 86% reading 90% reading 95% reading 1 year’s progress in 2 terms 71% spelling 90% spelling 95% spelling KS3 English 90% reading 92% reading 95% reading 1 year’s progress in 2 terms 89% spellling 91% spelling 95% spelling KS2 maths 71% 80% 90% 2/3 level progress in 2 terms KS3 maths 90% 92% 95% 2/3 level progress in 2 terms CVA (currently not able to be measured) at least on a par with at least on a par with mainstream schools mainstream schools Exclusions permanent 0 0 0 Exclusions temporary 8 0 0 Outreach service maintain pupils in mainstream schools not measured 80% of referrals 90% of referrals Healthy Schools accreditation not completed achieved maintained 5 Hours high quality PE offered 3 hours 5 hours 5 hours maintained Full service extended schools offer available to pupils Core offer Full offer Sustainable provision and families

64

National KPIs for PRUs are being planned by DCSF but are not currently available

Current OFSTED judgement Targeted Ofsted judgement Outstanding Outstanding

65

Parkside PRU 2006 Result 2007 Result 2008 Baseline 2010 Target 2017 target To achieve a recognised qualification at KS 4 in English 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% To achieve a recognised qualification at KS 4 in Maths 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% % of students who achieve at least one GCSE/or 87.5 95 95 98 100 equivalent A*-G % of students who achieve at least three GCSEs/or 81.25 70 75 80 85 equivalent A*-G % of students who achieve at least five GCSEs/or 60 50 50 60 60 equivalent A*-G % of students engaged in a ‘vocational’ option 65 70 85 90 100 % students who have educational/career plan in place 100 100 100 100 100 upon leaving % of students who improve their attendance against their 87 90 95 95 100 baseline level on admission Exclusions – permanent ** 0 0 0 0 0 Exclusions – temporary ** 0 0 0 0 0

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010 • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Outstanding Outstanding Table sourced from following data sources: ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system

66

Westbridge PRU 2008 Baseline 2010 Target 2017 target To achieve a recognised qualification at KS 4 in English 10 80 100 To achieve a recognised qualification at KS 4 in Maths 75 95 % of students who achieve at least one GCSE/or equivalent A*-G 80 90 100 % of students who achieve at least three GCSEs/or equivalent A*-G 60 75 85 % of students who achieve at least five GCSEs or equivalent A*-G 8 40 70 % of students who achieve at least five GCSEs or equivalent A*-G incl En and Maths 8 25 55 % of students engaged in a ‘vocational’ option 80 90 100 % students who have educational/career plan in place upon leaving 85 100 100 % of students who improve their attendance against their baseline level on admission 75 85 95 Exclusions – permanent ** 0 0 0 Exclusions – temporary ** 1 0 0

• All BSF schools will achieve Healthy schools Accreditation and full Core Offer for Extended Schools by 2010y • All BSF schools will promote 5 hours of high quality sport and PE by 2010

Current Ofsted Judgement Target Ofsted Judgement for next inspection Good Outstanding

Table sourced from following data sources: ** From Exclusions data on the Local Authority EMS system

67

Headline KPIs for the local authority around diversity, choice, access and education outcomes

KPI Suffolk schools BSF Wave 6 2007 wave 6 cohort Wave 6 schools 2007 baseline data schools 2007 size target for 2017 baseline data Reduce the gap between girls and boys Gap of 8.6% Gap of 14.5% 1298 Gap of 2% performance at 5+ GCSE A* -C incl. Eng. and Maths. Reduce the gap between Black Gap of 25% Gap of 4.7% 11 Gap of 4% Caribbean and all pupils on above measure Reduce the gap between SEN Gap of 46% Gap of 59% 105 Gap of 30% statemented and all pupils on above measure Fixed Term Exclusions, Mixed White and 7% 28% 56 6% Black African pupils Fixed Term Exclusions Mixed White and 8.1% 12% 274 6% Black Caribbean pupils Permanent Exclusions, Black and 14 6 379 5 Minority Ethnic Groups Persistent Absence rates in secondary 5% n/a n/app 3%

68

Appendix 2 Transforming teaching and learning – Change Management Plan

Strategic Objectives:

• To prepare teachers and other school staff for working in transformed spaces with personalised approaches to learning and cutting edge ICT provision • To ensure that every pupil has an appropriate curriculum which is personalised to their needs and learning style • To ensure that ICT is used effectively to manage schools, track progress in learning, identify underperformance and support learning for school staff, students and families • To improve standards of all students and open life chances for all by narrowing gaps in performance for under attaining groups

Schools are expected to mirror these prompts for change management within individual development plans.

Key Focus of Development Resource Target group

2009 Develop school visions and set aspirational targets including joint project with Norfolk on special school SIPs and ISIS School leaders to target-setting and setting high expectations for progression. . Clear focus on standards and 2010 underperforming groups through whole BSF process.

Create school / local agency change champion teams to work with BSF Transforming Learning Project Team in developing and implementing change plans. Schools / Local Agencies School leaders / WFD Draw on effective practice in England and internationally to engage on programme of school based innovation and research to develop teaching and learning in new spaces (Chantry & Westbourne) DCSF / LA funding Teachers and school Development of special schools in co-located provision on mainstream sites linked to countywide and matched by schools leaders national developments for progression and attainment of children and young people working significantly below age-related expectations. ISIS / SIPs with special School leaders, school HTs teachers and support Learning Platform in place for all schools (Connected Learning Across Suffolk – CLASS project) staff

Comprehensive modular ICT training and transformation programme in place and developed in line Uniservity / CLASS team Teachers and with emerging managed service support staff ISIS / WFD / managed service provider Teachers and

69

support staff SET up learning Platform “Hub” space for BSF schools to share effective development work Uniservity / CLASS team Teachers and support staff

Appointment of TLPT project team with external consultant (Mick Waters) and four new additional ISIS advisers Teachers advisers to provide intensive support to Wave 6 schools for teaching and learning, curriculum development and use of ICT and manage the teaching and learning ISIS project team

SAMLearning in place for all Wave 6 schools AIMHigher Teachers

“Home Access” project in place so all families can use Internet and access work away from school BECTA / LA team Teachers including those needing assistive technology.

Focus on developing effective transitions for young people 14-19 (25) using person-centred Transition teams, ISIS School leaders, approaches to improve outcomes in line with Valuing People Now. advisers, 14-19 team, teachers and support Adult Services. staff

2010 School based action research in classrooms with feedback to the design process to test and develop ISIS / UCS Teachers and CPD to new approaches to pedagogy and use of ICT to support learning set out in school visions (with coordinators 2013 University Campus Suffolk and Suffolk Anglia Ruskin University)

Significant curriculum development at Key Stage 3 with focus on AfL, Functional Skills, Personal, Learning and Thinking Skills (PLTs) and project based personalised learning ISIS Teachers and curriculum leaders Significant development of the 14 to 19 curriculum based on partnership working to offer wide personalised choice including diplomas. Increase coherence of the route from 11 to 19 by developing ISIS / 14 to 19 advisers Teachers and the secondary curriculum to enhance learning opportunities and progression. Strengthen the links curriculum leaders between phases so that students can move through the curriculum at their own pace

Embedding Assessment for Learning and effective tracking systems for individuals and groups ISIS advisers Teachers and support staff Continue to develop and extend BSF hub on learning platform to share effective practice across Wave Uniservity / CLASS team Teachers and 6 schools and wider support staff

70

Focus Teachers International Professional Development (TIPD) and International Leadership Learning WFD School leaders, Programme (ILLP) on Wave 6 schools teachers and support staff

Leadership for learning – develop and strengthen wider school leadership teams, succession planning ISIS / WFD / NCSL / TDA School leaders and curriculum leadership

Development of the wider workforce in the context of changes anticipated – including classroom WFD / ISIS Support staff assistants, learning mentors, ICT technicians, school librarians, parent support advisers and admin staff.

Development of school MIS systems to support learning though tracking of attainment and attendance. CSD / ISIS and School leaders and Including communication with parents and online reporting. Infrastructure team support staff

Development of staffing structures to match new ways of working and timetabling including changes to WFD / ISIS advisers School leaders the school day and school terms

Enhancing opportunities for special schools to access mainstream integration and vice versa through ISIS advisers, outreach Teachers co-located school developments. teams, special school staff.

2013 Planning to equip new buildings with appropriate range of resources and curriculum materials IBSF team / SIS / 14 to to 19 advisers / WFD team 2015 Opening of new and refurbished buildings with new spaces and ICT provision

Evaluate and modify ways of working. Share effective practice across Wave 6 schools and with all WFD / ISIS advisers other Suffolk schools.

2015 Full evaluation of impact of changes on learning and standards. Sharing of effective strategies and ISIS / UCS / SARU / to practice across Suffolk and beyond WFD 2017

71

Appendix 3: Sustainability area for consideration

Door Way To Design Construction Operation Sustainability Food and Kitchen and catering Construction catering Incorporate the Drink facilities designed to to promote healthy, promotion of healthy, facilitate production and local and sustainable local and sustainable preparation of local food. food. food and drink into Set aside space for curriculum. internal/external Locally & ethically horticulture. sourced food & drink Increase students understanding of food, in terms of healthy eating, where it comes from, & its environmental impact Balanced nutritionally Reduction of waste Minimising packaging Energy and Maximise building Meter all temporary Measure, monitor and Water orientation, thermal electricity, gas and report energy and efficiency to minimise water provided for water usage. energy demand. construction works. Produce and display Use highly efficient Measure monitor and Display Energy equipment. report. Certificates. Provide energy supply Introduce SMART from renewable sources. targets for energy and Meter all systems and water use. circuits. Design in Ensure maintenance Automatic monitoring and regimes allow for targeting equipment and improvements in software. efficiency of Include ways to display technologies. energy and water use to Incorporate renewable visitors, staff and pupils. energy and energy Incorporate low water use and water metering equipment. and monitoring into Consider rainwater curriculum. harvesting, greywater Participate in Suffolk’s recycling and blackwater schools award system treatment systems, that promotes including reedbeds. sustainability. Consider designs that Educating pupils & minimise ‘wet trades’. staff on eco-efficiency, Exceed building along with the wider regulations energy targets community to achieve BREEAM Excellent. Consider low carbon fuel sources and possible links to local sources. Travel and Design circulation to Consider Clean Work with local school Traffic minimise vehicular Vehicle scheme for bus service provider intrusion into the school all contractor to measure, monitor campus. deliveries. and reduce emissions. Incorporate cycle path Consider Use social network to around/through school to Consolidated promote car sharing, all points of access/exit. Logistic Centre to provide information on

72

Provide cycle storage. manage and co- cleaner more efficient Link into local cycle routes. ordinate materials vehicles. Work with the Local deliveries to avoid Increase pupils Authority to introduce Safer congestion and mobility and road Streets initiative. reduce emissions. safety awareness Consider design of traffic Consider bussing flows to avoid congestion. operatives to reduce car miles. Purchasing Design for Manufacture. Consider including Develop school waste and Waste Consider specifying evaluation criteria management plans. materials/products from relating to Promote reduce, local suppliers. sustainable reuse, recycle within Specify products that procurement school through avoid, reuse, recycle practices in curriculum and packaging. contractor selection. awareness Specify materials Rated A Develop robust Site campaigns. according to the Green Waste Management Appoint Waste Guide to Specification. Plan. Champion. For schools involving Set targets and Source locally & demolition consider Pre- monitor waste. ethically Demolition Audits and Allow sufficient time Reduction in reclamation of demolition within programme for excessive packaging materials. pre-demolition audit Promoting the above Inclusion of recycling areas and reclamation of amongst pupils & staff both within buildings and materials if within the school grounds. applicable Building and Sustainable school design Protect, maintain Maintain and monitor Grounds will be showcased through and/or enhance the ecology and the visible use of ecological features of biodiversity within and sustainable design the site. adjacent to the features such as low and Provide educational schools zero carbon technologies, seminars, lessons interior fittings and identifying impacts of equipment with a low construction works impact on the environment. and possible The school grounds can be mitigating actions. developed in ways to help pupils learn about the natural world and sustainable living through consideration of enhanced biodiversity, nature trails, water capture and treatment works, the production of organic/sustainable food, recycling centres, information centres. Appoint Ecologist as part of achieving BREEAM Excellent. Consider using the school grounds in developing a green corridor. Inclusion and Providing environments Consider developing Consider linking Participation which instil a long lasting apprentice schemes school redevelopment respect for human rights, and employment activities to freedoms, cultures and opportunities from curriculum. Promote creative expression. the local labour understanding of force. issues of sustainable

73

development and Climate Change. Fuel Poverty. Local Incorporate within the Maintain community Maintain community Wellbeing design opportunities for dialogue. Host dialogue. Encourage outreach activities. familiarisation tours use of school facilities Communicate the project and arrange for out of school and term objectives, timescales etc contractor to provide time. Support the with local stakeholders and community liaison development of seek comment and officer. Consider applied skills which feedback. employment from can compliment Design the school for post local labour force. classroom studies. school activities and encourage community cohesion. Global Arrange discussion groups Arrange discussion Promote pupils aware Dimension between pupils and Design groups between of global issues Team to better understand pupils and concerning e.g. diversity. Construction Team climate change, to better understand poverty resulting in a diversity. more responsible international outlook

74

Appendix 4 – List of organisations with which discussions held during soft market testing

Bouygues Skanska Construction led consortia Laing O’Rourke Carillion Bovis Lend Lease (pending) Willmott Dixon Construction contributors to Morgan Ashurst consortia ISG Jackson Equitix Integrators (and investors) Morgan Sindall New Schools Sumitomo Mitsui Investors (banks) Nord Landesbank Northgate Ramesys ICT suppliers RM Viglen BT Pearson International Education service suppliers A wide range of architectural practices interested in being part of consortia

75

Appendix 5 – Stock profile analysis

Stock profile: [the chart below] represents the age profile of the estate, which graphically illustrates the problems faced in trying to create decent, modern accommodation fit for today’s Learning environment. The amount of recent investment in the stock varies from school to school, but the following general patterns can be detected:

• Pre 1919 – Solid, buildings of character, but difficult to convert into flexible and suitably sized learning spaces, without significant cost • Inter war – Many solid buildings, but require major investment to meet current environmental standards. • 1944 – 1966 - Many solid buildings but require significant investment to meet current environmental standards and to renew end of life components, such as windows, doors and roofs. • 1967 -1976 – The majority of these buildings are constructed using the Consortium of Local Authority Special Projects (CLASP) or SEAC systems and have reached the end of their economic life. Due to the levels of investment required in their fabric and the inability to reconfigure their interiors, these buildings can serve no further purpose. • Post 1976 – Buildings that can usually be retained with lifecycle repairs and reconfiguration. Some new blocks are well designed and can be incorporated into redeveloped schools.

Stock Age

9%

25% 9%

Pre 1919 Inter War (1919-1944) 12% 1944-1966 1967-1976 Post 1976

45%

Stock Condition: standards of maintenance vary across the schools, but all schools have significant backlog maintenance issues and in most cases will require significant expenditure to get them to a condition that meets current expectations, let alone the enhanced expectations of the

76

Education Vision. Suffolk’s Asset Management Plan data base states a current maintenance backlog of £12.66 million for the wave 6 schools. This is broken down in the table below. The layout and design of many buildings is a significant barrier to maintenance, particularly when considering regulations relating to safe access for maintenance. For further information on school block plans and drawings see the control options in Appendix 6:

Backlog Maintanence p/m2

600 p/m2

500 p/m2

400 p/m2

300 p/m2

200 p/m2

100 p/m2

p/m2 ll d ill ls e e oo el w de one w r si idge ew thside y O rk Stok Chantry Denben a ldr oll P Turlst A Hea H estbourne Beacont eadH house Westbr ls W e B School

Backlog School p/m2 Maintanence Alderwood 157 58,824 Beacon Hill 385 1,002,573 Belstead house 361 1,062,252 Chantry 206 2,972,520 Deben 112 1,062,936 Heathside 183 350,742 Holywells 63 676,544 Orwell 138 1,342,897 Parkside 132 102,108 Stoke 62 626,065 Turleston 111 1,083,456 Westbourne 121 1,887,156 Westbridge 544 430,920 Total 12,658,993

Stock Suitability: the design and layout of many existing buildings also presents significant problems for the operation and running of the

77

schools, a problem that will be exacerbated as schools try to deliver the Education Vision. Supervision on several sites is particularly difficult because of the nature of the site layout, which creates many nooks and crannies that allow bullying. Lack of proper social and circulation space is also a common feature, which can contribute to behaviour and discipline problems.

Technical Advisors Gleeds has undertaken a preliminary assessment of the building stock on a block by block basis, which considered the suitability of the accommodation to deliver transformational education. The basic assessment criteria differed from the detailed suitability criteria normally applied by DCSF which is reflected in the suitability returns for each school. The results of this assessment are outlined below

This high level assessment is the starting point for the case for investment, indicating that over 93% of the building stock requires significant or more investment in order to achieve transformational standards. Appendix 5 contains the stock assessment pro-forma for each school.

Stock Suitability

5% 4%

category a category b 33% category c 58% category d

Category a = Not suitable at all (mobile accommodation, huts etc)

Category b = Suitable but only with significant investment

Category c = Suitable with minor investment

Category d = Suitable with very little investment

Other stock information:

Asbestos

78

The table below is a high level breakdown of the asbestos reports for each site.

School Area m2 Locations asbestos found

Alderwood 374 TBC Beacon Hill 2,605 11 Belstead house 2,939 38 Chantry 14,428 77 Deben 9,522 21 Heathside 1,917 45 Holywells 10,775 32 Orwell 9,701 56 Parkside 773 4 Stoke 10,158 19 Turleston 9,750 65 Westbourne 15,565 71 Westbridge 792 2

DDA compliance

Basic Access Audit for Schools 2009-09-06

School Meets or almost meets acceptable access audit standards 1 Alderwood Acceptable Beacon Hill Acceptable Belstead house Acceptable Chantry Unacceptable Deben Acceptable Heathside Acceptable Holywells Unacceptable Orwell Unacceptable Parkside Unacceptable Stoke Acceptable Thurleston Acceptable Westbourne Acceptable Westbridge Acceptable

1 Suffolk County Council Property Services survey dated 01/01/2009

79

Appendix 7 – estate analysis process

The estate option appraisal process

The Overall Process : both existing accommodation standards and future accommodation requirements were reviewed and the gap between the two identified leading to the framework for an estate solution to be developed. The key steps are outlined below:

• background Information: the pupil place requirements for each school were agreed with PfS at Strategy for Change Part 1 stage. This information has then been used to develop a BB98 driven overall area requirement for a school with that NOR – the FAM models were used to assist with defining this area. This therefore has given an indication of the sufficiency of the current school estate accommodation when compared with the planned school accommodation area

• understanding the existing estate: key data held on the AMP database was collated and reviewed in order to develop a more thorough understanding of the estate.

This information was then used to populate an “Estates Analysis Data Pro-forma” which informed decisions over whether a particular block should be refreshed, refurbished or rebuilt. In addition to the desk-top review, considerable time was also spent visiting schools to understand specific site constraints and the school’s context, seek feedback from school stakeholders on operational issues as well as sufficiency, suitability and condition and undertake a brief visual inspection.

• surveys: desktop, topographical, services and ecological surveys were undertaken on each site which, together with existing asset Management Plans, geographical surveys and the asbestos register, assisted in the process of generating the for each site

A meeting was held with the local planning authority in order to determine site specific issues for each site. This was captured in a constraints matrix for each site that will form the basis of site specific risk registers as the project moves forward.

The collation of this information enabled the design team to take into account the likely planning of the new site layout, avoiding services and geographically unsuitable parts of the site, taking into account local issues and the state of the existing building stock. Option Assessment Procedure : a high-level option appraisal for each school in wave 6 was carried out in line with national guidance using the above information. The assessment procedure developed for the schools consisted of identifying the redevelopment option that represents the best value for money. This analysis considered both an assessment against a set of qualitative criteria and the financial cost of each option;

80

and prioritising the investment need and selection of procurement method for each school. The BSF project team managed and facilitated the options generation and appraisal process in partnership with its technical and architectural advisers on behalf of the schools involved. The high level process was iterative and involved circling in and out of financial, technical and educational data. The results of this process were considered by the BSF Board. It was considered vital that headteachers and governors, as a minimum , were deeply involved in the visioning process. It was therefore a requirement that the head and either the chair of governors or a nominated governor were present at any options generation or appraisal meetings. Other members of staff, students and the wider school community were involved in the visioning process at the discretion of individual schools. The process was as follows: school visions and site options for schools were developed over the course of four workshops. The process was designed to take schools and their stakeholders through the life-cycle of identifying their vision for learning and teaching and the design principles and objectives for that vision, then developing a series of design options before settling on a final preferred option. Overall Option Assessment : The technical team developed a range of options per school as to how the education vision might be met. These options were then reviewed with the schools and narrowed down toa shortlist. Options that failed to meet the minimum requirements of the Vision were eliminated. A set of options for each site was then collated which represented the closest match between the schools visions, achieving a BB 98 space standard and the income available for the programme from the FAM and other funding sources. The option plans for each school and the list of control options are attached in appendix 6. Redevelopment options considered for each of the schools were:

• Option 1 – Do nothing; • Option 2 – Do minimum (backlog maintenance works); • Option 3 – Rebuild, refurbish and refresh existing accommodation where possible; and • Option 4 – Maximum new build solution and demolition of existing accommodation (retaining recently built estate). Evaluation Criteria : in developing its assessment procedure SCC ensured that the evaluation criteria were founded on the BSF guidance and supported by both the County Council’s ‘Vision for Learning’ and individual school visions.

Preferred Redevelopment Options : the do nothing and do minimum options for each of the schools were eliminated in an initial sift as they failed to deliver the transformational objectives. The County Council is

81

satisfied that the mix of redevelopment options supports the delivery of its educational vision and corporate objectives and can be developed and delivered within the funding envelope.

Minimising decant : some of the school sites are constrained by surrounding development, or are on constrained sites either due to size or planning restrictions. Major development work on all school sites will inevitably involve some decanting of students and staff from one area of accommodation to another to enable building work to take place unless alternative accommodation elsewhere can be found. Such a solution, while avoiding disruption of the building works, may not be feasible considering the availability of land, planning restrictions, transport difficulties and temporary infrastructure costs. Through careful design and management of the process it is possible to minimise the level of decant on occupied sites by: • constructing new buildings elsewhere on the site prior to demolitions; • the provision of temporary classrooms or classroom ‘villages’ for phased building work; • managing embedded work areas in packages to fit holiday periods; • phased building construction and handover programme. Detailed decant strategies are currently being developed with the options for the Outline Business case. The Council believes that all schools will be able to remain operational during the build phases utilising temporary accommodation. One of the fundamental criteria utilised when developing the various options for each schools was to seek to minimise disruption to students which particularly meant minimising disruption. This has been achieved in the vast majority of cases whereby very little temporary accommodation or multiple decanting is envisaged in the Control Option. Using BB98 and BB77 : The County Council recognises the design guidance that BB98 and BB77 provide. It is anticipated that all the projects within the porogramme will conform to the guidelines set out in these bulletins. The BB98 and BB77 guidance will form a continuous and important input into the development of control schemes and output specifications.

The Local Learning and Skills Council (LLSC) has provided its support for the proposed pattern of investment (see appendix 9).

82

Appendix 8 – FAM summary

Control Option Combined (Incl ICT) Pupil Numbers FAM Pupil New Build Refurbish ICT Hardware (Rounded) used Numbers Deben High School Option 2 Total Cost £0.00 0 0 Cost/m² Orwell (Felixstow High School) Option 2 Total Cost £32,345,263.54 £0.00 £2,375,100.00 £34,720,000.00 1,638 1,638 Cost/m² £2,375.18 #DIV/0! £2,549.57 Chantry High School Option 3 Total Cost £21,006,094.59 £0.00 £1,500,750.00 £22,510,000.00 1,035 1,035 Cost/m² £2,391.40 #DIV/0! £2,365.74 Holywell High School Option 4 Total Cost £30,531,948.51 £0.00 £2,228,650.00 £32,760,000.00 1,537 1,537 Cost/m² £2,374.18 #DIV/0! £2,547.43 Stoke High School Option 1 Total Cost £2,053,521.15 £10,240,823.38 £1,742,900.00 £14,040,000.00 1,202 1,202 Cost/m² £2,415.91 £1,134.21 £1,357.57 Thurleston High School (Incl Thomas Wosley Area in Control Option) Option 1 Total Cost £3,993,266.71 £2,440,125.79 £1,038,200.00 £7,470,000.00 716 614 Cost/m² £2,339.31 £984.32 £771.69 Westbourne High Option 2 Total Cost £20,086,617.20 £11,152,057.62 £2,240,250.00 £33,480,000.00 1,545 1,423 Cost/m² £2,725.83 £1,290.75 £2,091.32 Parkside High School PRU Option 1 Total Cost £0.00 £559,506.06 £46,400.00 £610,000.00 32 32 Cost/m² #DIV/0! £835.08 £910.45

83

Westbridge Pru High Option 1 Total Cost £0.00 £597,764.22 £46,400.00 £640,000.00 32 32 Cost/m² #DIV/0! £1,009.74 £1,081.08 Alderwood Pru Option 1 Total Cost £1,078,221.30 £184,067.97 £34,800.00 £1,300,000.00 24 24 Cost/m² £2,668.86 £184,067.97 £3,209.88 Beacon Hill Option 1 Total Cost £4,134,572.38 £4,163,191.07 £271,150.00 £8,570,000.00 187 187 Cost/m² £2,953.27 £1,579.36 £2,123.39 Belstead Option 1 Total Cost #DIV/0! #DIV/0! £0.00 #DIV/0! 0 43 Cost/m² #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Heathside - Primary Option 1 Total Cost #DIV/0! #DIV/0! £114,550.00 #DIV/0! 79 79 Cost/m² #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Thomas Wolsey Option 1 Total Cost Incl. in Thurleston Incl. in Thurleston 102 Cost/m²

Total #DIV/0! #DIV/0! £11,639,150.00 #DIV/0! 8,027 7,948 Costs Check Total #DIV/0! Check Total from Cost Comparison £156,100,000.00

84

Appendix 9 – LLSC letter of agreement

85

Appendix 10

Building Schools

for the Future

Communications Plan V.1

86

Purpose of plan

This plan will guide communications activities for the Building Schools for the Future programme. It makes sure any communications fit with corporate and Children and Young people’s Services (CYP) directorate communications activities and objectives.

The plan is a flexible document and will be reviewed at key points to make sure it reacts to changes in circumstance at stakeholder, local and national (where appropriate) level. It:

• determines key events, messages, objectives and timescales for messages and other forms of communication; • explains how key stakeholders will be kept in touch with news and how the right messages are communicated to the right people at the right time; and • Identifies key materials to be produced and resources required

Intended audience of the communications plan

• Suffolk County Council (SCC) Corporate Management Team (CMT) • SCC CYP Directorate Management Team (DMT) • SCC Corporate Communications team • Leader of the Council • Children, Schools and Young People’s Services Portfolio Holder • CYPS Scrutiny Committee • Other councillors as identified and where appropriate • Others groups as identified and where appropriate

Aims and objectives

Key aims of all communications

• Manage stakeholder and public expectation of how the work will be carried out and what information they can expect to see and when • Show that we listen to the views of stakeholders and the public to develop services that meet local need, • Make sure we keep everyone informed at each stage of the programme, • Increase stakeholder and public engagement in Suffolk County Council’s services, • Make sure that communicating is a two-way process, so that views can inform the programme.

High-level communications aims

• Identify opportunities to communicate information about the BSF process to relevant stakeholders • Communicate relevant information about the BSF process to stakeholders • Create awareness and understanding of the BSF process amongst CYP staff and all councillors

87

• Create awareness of the BSF process within the county council for non-CYP staff, and in partner organisations, and for local councillors and other stakeholders where appropriate • Make sure staff (who may be parents themselves) are aware of the ongoing work around BSF, and can act as advocates for the process to other members of the public, • Create awareness of the BSF process amongst members of the public, and • Ensure communication in the media does not become one-sided or misleading.

Short-term objectives

• Obtain strategic sign-up to the communications plan from the relevant stakeholder groups in SCC • Obtain sign-up to the communications plan from the CYP directorate • Identify relevant stakeholders (such as communications staff in associated organisations) to help cascade core messages about the BSF process (see Appendix 1). • Identify opportunities for regular briefings and updates regarding the BSF process • Identify channels and protocols for disseminating messages about the BSF process, and • Include communications as a standing item in lead officer/stakeholder meetings.

Long term objectives

• Raise awareness and understanding of the BSF process to all CYP staff, SCC staff, councillors, the public and other key stakeholders, including hard- to-reach groups • Engage school staff, pupils and stakeholders in the long-term change programme, and • Facilitate better communications links between organisations to promote news and developments and obtain a consistent ‘look and feel’ for BSF communications.

Stakeholders

Stakeholders will be identified for communications activities (appendix 2). This plan will then make sure that these stakeholders:

• have the most up-to-date information about the BSF process, and receive a consistent message about the work to enable them to act as advocates for the project where possible; • have equal access to information (in particular regarding vulnerable or hard- to-reach groups) • make sure the BSF process is highlighted on local and national level; and • make sure that information is cascaded to frontline staff, and ensure resources are provided as necessary by linking to key management messages.

88

Resources

Staff resources

A communications sub-group will monitor and manage communications issues and activities on a regular basis (see Appendix 3). Further resources include the following, who will be drawn upon at necessary times (this list includes members of the sub-group): Building Schools for the Future: general communications

• Cllr Patricia O’Brien • Rosalind Turner, Director for Children and Young People • Gary Nethercott, Service Director: Education • Ian Brown, Head of CYP Infrastructure and development • Lindsay Martin BSF Programme Director

Communications Unit • Communications manager for Children and Young People’s Services • Senior Communications and Consultation officer for Children and Young People’s Services • Internal communications staff

Other communications staff Children’s Information Development Manager (Early Years communications) • Connexions Communications and Marketing Manager (Youth and Connexions)

Material resources and tools

• Suffolk County Council Corporate Identity Guidelines • Resources and tools available as at appendix • Plain English guidelines • Communications budget allocation as part of the BSF programme budget • An online communications tracking chart and calendar will be used to identify and track communications activities: o Appropriate timescales of preparation activity will be included, with the responsible person for each activity o Events are to be identified where the BSF programme could be promoted, and the possible effects of promotion at each event.

Monitoring communications activities

Evaluation Evaluation of any communications activities will take place to measure effectiveness of the message. This will be done through the communications sub-group (see appendix 1). • Evaluation can take place through any of the following (and more):

89

o online polls o web hits o measuring numbers of successful press releases o number of articles published in newsletters and magazines o number of events held o numbers of visitors to those events o numbers of enquiries to CSD.

Protocols and governance

BSF Programme Board and BSF Project Officer Group

The BSF Programme Board and BSF Project Officer Group will help develop and review the core messages of this communications plan. They will make sure messages are:

• delivered from an identified source for consistency (where appropriate) • reassessed in relation to feedback received from key stakeholders and fed to the communications sub-group for distribution as appropriate.

BSF Communications Sub-group

The communications sub-group will co-ordinate all communications activities in relation to this communications plan. In particular, they will aim to tie in with SCC corporate and CYP directorate messages and channels.

• Proposals for new methods of communication will be brought to the communications sub-group in the first instance.

The sub-group will make recommendations on communications issues regarding:

• Communications priorities • Communications planning (channels and resources, monitoring methods) • Communications feedback (results of monitoring)

Draft timetable for BSF Wave 6 and School Organisation review process

Pre-engagement Meeting with DCSF/PfS 14 February 2008 Remit Meeting 21 July 2008 Stakeholder consultation June – July 2008 Draft Strategy for Change Part 1 to Cabinet 22 July 2008 Strategy for Change Part One submission 15 September 2008 Finalise School Strategies for Change September to December 2008 Public consultation September to December 2008 Decision to publish notices (Cabinet meeting) 13 January 2009

90

Statutory notice period January to February2009 Draft Strategy for Change Part 2 to Cabinet 10 March 2009 Strategy for Change Part Two submission End April 2009 Determine notices (Cabinet meeting) 7 April 2009 Second Remit Meeting April 2009 Outline Business Case submission November 2009 Outline Business Case approval December 2009 OJEU Notice Issue and Pre-Qualifying January 2010 Questionnaire (PQQ) Invitation to Participate in Dialogue (ITPD) February 2010 Invitation to Competitive Dialogue (ITCD) July 2010 Financial close/construction start March/April 2011 First remodelled/refurbished school opens September 2012/13

Key: Yellow lines represent BSF processes Green lines represent school organisation processes

Core messages

There are a number of key messages to consider for all communications relating to Building Schools for the Future:

National messages

• The Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme will see every state secondary school, including secondary special schools in Suffolk rebuilt or remodelled. • Launched by the Department for Education & Skills in February 2004, BSF is the largest and most ambitious scheme of its kind anywhere in the world. It will transform education for some 3.3 million students aged 11-19. • The scale of BSF enables local authorities to move from patch and mend spending on schools to rebuild and renewal, with a more strategic approach to funding, design, procurement and management of buildings. • BSF is not just a building programme: The programme aims to create learning environments which inspire all young people to unlock hidden talents and reach their full potential; provide teachers with 21st century work places; and provide access to facilities which can be used by all members of the local community. • Funding: Funding of at least £600 million will be available for Suffolk schools. • Sustainability: The BSF programme is committed to reducing carbon emissions from schools, with all buildings making the most of sustainable features to help protect the environment and reduce overheads. In some schools students can already monitor the amount of energy consumed, rainwater is used to flush toilets, and recycled materials are used for construction. • Design: BSF schools are helping to reduce bullying and other anti-social behaviour through the use of good quality, thoughtful design. Wider corridors and toilet blocks which are better designed together with ‘passive’ supervision of all areas by staff will help to achieve this.

91

• ICT: Technology plays a key role in helping to achieve educational transformation in BSF schools. BSF provides a high level of capital funding for ICT – equivalent to £1,675 per pupil place. • Consultation: Students, teachers, parents and members of the local community are all encouraged to have a say in the design of their school under BSF. In addition to public consultation, students will have an opportunity to take part in design workshops with architects and contractors.

Local messages

• Building Schools for the Future Programme in Suffolk is interlinked with the School Organisation Review and the Review of Special Educational Needs Provision. These three major programmes form part of the ongoing transformation that is taking place in Suffolk’s schools, including curriculum development, teaching methodologies, and new ways of learning through new technology. • BSF investment will help to transform secondary education, making it fit for the 21 st century for Suffolk communities. • BSF will deliver a ‘step change’ in performance for all young people • BSF will help the county council to deliver its vision for learning. • Ultimately, it is intended that all secondary schools in England will be rebuilt or refurbished. However, the principal aim of the programme is to transform secondary education and, thereby, to raise standards. • This is a once-in-a-life time programme of investment that will have benefits not just for Suffolk’s schools but also for their communities and for the people of Suffolk in general. In Suffolk this could amount to at least £600m of investment over a 12 year period • The Programme is intended to transform learning in all schools with secondary age pupils, including special schools and Pupil Referral Units, and is not just about the building of schools. To this end, the authority has developed, with its schools and their communities, a vision for the future of learning in Suffolk. • Suffolk is in Wave 6 of the BSF programme. The first wave of schools in the Suffolk programme are: Deben and Orwell High Schools in Felixstowe; Thurleston, Westbourne, Chantry, Stoke and Holywells High Schools in Ipswich; Thomas Wolsey, Belstead and Beacon Hill Special Schools; and Westbridge and Parkside Pupil Referral Units in Ipswich. • Prioritisation of schools to be rebuilt or refurbished was determined in 2003/04 by the DFES on the basis of criteria established relating to attainment and deprivation. This identified schools in South and West Ipswich, and Felixstowe, as being in the first wave of the Suffolk programme. • Not every school will be rebuilt. In depth work is being carried out to identify those which need to be rebuilt and those which will benefit from a mixture of new build and refurbishment.

There are some key design features that Suffolk County Council will look to achieve for all its schools through capital investment:

• facilities and buildings that are adaptable and flexible to enable different group sizes and approaches to teaching and learning, e.g. small spaces for small group discussion, mentoring and coaching

92

• specialist facilities and ICT that support schools’ specialisms and schools’ lead roles for 14-19 courses/diplomas • improved sports facilities • disabled access and improved facilities for special educational needs • provision of learning support units and improved PRU facilities • reduced areas that are ‘hard to monitor’/prone to poor behaviour/bullying • improved ICT to support children’s learning across the curriculum, enhance access to learning opportunities by pupils, parents and the wider community, support 14-19 collaborative arrangements, enable learning anytime and anywhere, sharing of data and information, tracking of students’ progress, registration, better curriculum materials, individualised learning packages and learning platforms. • better quality learning environments (furniture, light/sound levels, air quality and temperature control) and buildings in better physical condition • schools facilities developed so as to improve access to extended services and out of school/community activities, but ensuring the safety of children and staff, and enabling charges for use by the voluntary/community sector to be kept to a minimum

Methods to be used to communicate with stakeholders

There are a number of different groups who will need to be kept up to date with developments throughout the life of the BSF project. Appendix xx outlines who the different groups are and suggested ways of communicating with them.

External communications

The following methods should be considered:

District and Borough council offices Direct mail out Schools Libraries About Suffolk Local media Leaflets BSF Newsletter Suffolk Show E-bulletin Posters Letters Public meetings On line questionnaires Hard copy questionnaires Early Years providers Other methods and events as identified throughout the programme

Internal communications

It will be essential to keep colleagues up to date with development throughout the programme. The following methods should be considered:

Moving Forward CYPress

93

COLIN Schools Portal Inside SCC BSF Newsletter Payslips Other methods and events as identified throughout the programme

Website

The website should be reviewed on a regular basis and referred to in all communications as the definitive source of further information.

Communications channels

There are a number of ways we can communicate details about the Building Schools for the Future programme to stakeholders. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

Channel Examples

Face to face Conferences and corporate events

Local/national events

Team meetings

Ad-hoc meets between service users

Media TV

Radio

Press (e.g. responses to letters, newspaper articles, adverts)

Printed Newsletters/newspapers/magazines (use of exiting newsletters/magazines (Moving Forward, CYPress, Inside SCC, About tools/materials Suffolk)

Letters/payslips

Surveys

Posters/leaflets/notice boards

Digital Website (e.g. existing BSF web pages)

Intranet (e.g. news stories, links)

Email (e.g. updates of important information)

Other media as identified

94

Key stakeholders for BSF Communications

Stakeholder group Identified person

Suffolk County CYP staff and lead officers Adam Barnes/John Council staff SCC CMT and lead officers Ross (including school CYP identified groups (e.g. Safeguarding staff and governors) Board, Early Years, Connexions, Youth Offending Service) All school staff All school governors Education Stakeholder groups All SCC staff Customer Service Direct staff Suffolk County Leader of the council Adam Barnes/John Council councillors CSYPS Portfolio Holder Ross CSYPS Scrutiny Committee All Suffolk County Councillors All District and Borough Councillors (SALC) All Town and Parish Councillors MPs Key Groups BSF Programme Board Adam Barnes/John BSF Project Officer Group Ross Wave 6 Representatives Group Roman Catholic and C of E Diocese Trades Unions Opposition groups Identified locations Libraries Adam Barnes/John Children’s Centres Ross SCC offices Schools Connexions/Youth centres Early Years providers Local/national Parents, including parents of very Adam Barnes/John stakeholders young children Ross Young people CYP partnership staff (e.g. SAVO, PCTs, Young Suffolk, Police, Learning and Skills Council, etc) Suffolk District and Borough Councils Chamber of Commerce FE Colleges and UCS

Media Local daily and weekly newspapers Adam Barnes/John Local radio and TV Stations Ross Education trade and national press

95 Appendix 11 -Governance organogram

Chief Executive; Councillor County Council Approval CMB, Leadership Panel Process Team

Other Stakeholder Groups Programme Board: Chief Executive Stakeholder Advisory Board: Senior Responsible Headteachers Senior Responsible Owner Governors Owner: Council Leader Teachers Rosalind Turner Portfolio Holder Other staff Head of Schools Service Parents Head CYP Infrastructure LSC, ACCS Programme Director

PfS 4Ps Strategic Finance Strategic Property External Advisors: 4ps Legal PfS Programme Director Finance

Technical Client Design ICT Corporate Programme CYP Area Director South Management

Project Team: Programme Director; Programme Manager, Project Administrator, all Workstream Leads, Area Director South, Principal Risk Officer

96 Appendix 12 – project management organogram

Project Owner

Programme Director Programme Project Reference Coordinator B oard G roup Programme Manager

SOR Community/integr Com m un Technical Commercial Education IC T (BSF if ated services/ ications (financial and legal) regeneration needed)

Project Team/workstreams P fS 4ps Risk Management Human Audit Resources

97 Appendix 13 – project plan

98 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director

CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0014 Moderate Unlikely Medium 3 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin People 3 2 6 Insufficient capacity/expertise to deliver the project leads to delays, increased costs and/or a failure to deliver objectives and vision.

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review

4ps skills audit with team strengthening if Completed 100 3 24/06/2009 Lindsay Martin necessary

Report produced by JCAD RISK © 2001-2009 JC Applications Development 99 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director

CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Da te of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0015 Major Moderate High 3 01/10/2008 Gavin Bultitude Finance 4 3 12 Capital funding gap is 'unaffordable' to Council leads to a reduction in the programme and the full transformational outcomes not being achieved

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review

Identify additional sources of funding Proposed 25 3 26/05/2009 Gavin Bultitude

100 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Martin Clark, Education Workstream lead SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director

CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0016 Major Moderate High 6 29/01/2009 Martin Clark Partnerships 4 3 12 Lack of capacity within schools to contribute to BSF and continue with the business as usual leads to a drop in educational attainment during BSF or a failure to engage with the BSF programme

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review

Provide financial support to schools to Implemented 100 3 24/06/2009 Lindsay Martin release staff to engage in BSF process ISIS to provide support to schools Progressing 50 3 24/06/2009 Martin Clark

101 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0017 Moderate Likely High 3 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Political 3 4 12 Changes to government policy and/or legislation results in changes to the BSF programme

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review Lobbying central government Proposed 0

102 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director

CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0019 Moderate Moderate Medium 6 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Partnerships 3 3 9 Failure of schools to agree to common ICT managed service or FM within D&B contracts leads to reduced market interest from bidders and different levels of service provided to schools

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review

Work to identify current levels of spend for In Progress 75 3 24/06/2009 Lindsay Martin comparison purposes Produce output specification jointly with In Progress 50 3 24/06/2009 Lindsay Martin schools and show examples of successful managed services in other schools

103 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Martin Clark, Education Workstream lead SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0021 Major Unlikely Medium 6 29/01/2009 Lindsay Martin Partnerships 4 2 8 Insufficient engagement with schools and other stakeholders leads to a failure to maximise innovation and a failure to deliver the transformational objectives

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review Agree transformational strategy with Additional ISIS posts In Progress 50 3 24/06/2009 Martin Clark schools

104 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0022 Moderate Unlikely Medium 6 29/01/2009 Lindsay Martin Information 3 2 6 Significant decreases in pupil forecasts leads to a reduced need for school places and, particularly in the case of PFI, affordability problems

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review Review pupil forecast annually In progress

105 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0023 Minor Unlikely Low 6 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Partnerships 2 2 4 Delay of SWISS project leads to the 6th forms from involved BSF schools being transferred to the BSF project resulting in a the BSF programme to be redesigned

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review Liaison with project team In progress

106 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 03/07/2008 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director CORE OBJECTIVE: (None)

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0025 Moderate Unlikely Medium 6 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Political 3 2 6 Delay to SEN review leads to school changes not happening at the same time resulting in transition arrangements having to be made

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review Liaison with SEN review team In progress 25

107 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 04/02/2009 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director

CORE OBJECTIVE: Delivery of BSF Programme

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0028 Major Likely Very High 3 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Local Government Review 4 4 16 Due to the LGR there will be uncertainty within Partnershiop for Schools, potential bidders and local authorities that will result in delays and funding shortfalls.

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review

High Level meeting between PfS, SCC Implemented 100 3 18/06/2009 Lindsay Martin Chief Exec and Director CYP Commitment to be sought from District Implemented 100 2 18/05/2009 Lindsay Martin Councils:

108 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 04/02/2009 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director

CORE OBJECTIVE: Delivery of BSF Programme

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0029 Major Moderate High 3 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Finance 4 3 12 Due to economic inflation or capital funding gaps there will be a significant difference between estimated and actual costs resulting in additional financial burden upon the local authority.

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review

Identify additional sources of capital Proposed 0 3 24/06/2009 Gavin Bultitude funding Reduce project specification Proposed 0 3 24/06/2009 Lindsay Martin

109 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 04/02/2009 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director

CORE OBJECTIVE: Delivery of BSF Programme

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0030 Major Moderate High 3 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Reputation 4 3 12 A failure to secure Outline Business Case and 'Strategy for Change' approval will cause delay and increased costs resulting in reputational damage

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review

Maximise corporate commitment to In Progress 50 3 24/06/2009 Lindsay Martin process Enhance programme team In progress 50 3 24/06/2009 Lindsay Martin

110 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 04/02/2009 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director CORE OBJECTIVE: Delivery of BSF Programme

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Opportunity

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Ri sk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0031 Major Unlikely Medium 3 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Partnerships 4 2 8 The BSF programme will produce more effective joint agency working. This will result in more transformational and expansive outcomes benefiting both students and communities.

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review Work with all agencies, statutory and In progress 25 non-statutory

111 Appendix 14 – summary of risk register

DATE: 04/02/2009 NAME: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director SERVICE: Building Schools for the Future HEAD of SERVICE: Lindsay Martin, BSF Programme Director CORE OBJECTIVE: Delivery of BSF Programme

BUSINESS PROCESS: (None)

ASSESSMENT TYPE: Threat

Uncontrolled risk assessment Current risk assessment (Assume NO controls in place) (With controls in place)

Risk Impact Probability Risk Impact Probability Risk Review Date of Next Risk Owner (Threat to achievement of business Rating Rating Frequency Review objective)

CYBSF0032 Major Moderate High 3 02/03/2009 Lindsay Martin Political 4 3 12 Failure to secure pl anning approvals within specified times will lead to delays in programme and reputational damage.

Controls Resources Required Status % Complete Review Date of Next Control Owner Frequency Review

Early liaison with county and district In Progress 50 3 24/06/2009 Andrew Rowe planners

112