Standard Format for Committee Reports s1

PART 1 ITEM NO. (OPEN TO THE PUBLIC)

REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR CHILDREN’S SERVICES

TO THE ASSISTANT MAYOR FOR SERVICES FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE ON THE 28TH MAY 2012 AND THE ASSISTANT MAYOR FOR FINANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES ON THE 28TH MAY 2012

TITLE : CONTRACTS FOR MODULAR CLASSROOM UNITS AT PRIMARY SCHOOLS TO INCREASE PUPIL CAPACITY FROM SEPTEMBER 2012

CONCLUSIONS :

That the list of schools identified for requiring additional accommodation are approved for the provision of new modular classroom units to increase pupil capacity in time for the September 2012 term.

That approval is given to accept the Elliot tender as the most advantageous offer relating to cost, quality and programme. However in the event that Elliot are unable to deliver all classrooms to the timescales required, or that when detailed cost analysis including options are finally clarified (Ref 3.12 and 3.17 above) for each unit, and if advantageous, that approval is also granted to allow Portakabin to be engaged to complete projects for September 2012. Both suppliers have provided prices for modular classroom accommodation under competitive tendering arrangements.

That approval is granted to seek and let contracts to undertake preparatory works for services and foundations and to commission the units. These contracts will be let under the Council’s contractual standing orders in accordance with current tendering arrangements available to local authorities or with the appointed Modular classroom providers if this provides financial and programme advantages,

That the risks stated in the report are noted.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY :

The ongoing pupil place planning process has identified the need to provide additional accommodation at a number of primary schools in order to ensure adequate provision in time for the start of the September 2012 term. The fastest and most economic solution is to provide modular classroom units to accommodate the additional pupils and contracts for the works would be let under a competitive pricing process.

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS : (Available for public inspection)

ASSESSMENT OF RISK:

High Risk of inability to deliver on time if delays are encountered

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\063d0d513324ed7ac1d920fb71bd5a10.doc 1 The project is within available budgets and is programmed to commence in June 2012. It is essential that the modular classroom accommodation is ready in time for the start of the school term in September 2012.

SOURCE OF FUNDING:

The source of funding is DfE capital grant for basic need (new pupil places).

COMMENTS OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR OF CUSTOMER AND SUPPORT SERVICES (or his representative):

1. PROCUREMENT IMPLICATIONS : Head of Procurement (Sharon Robson) has been consulted. Since the ReThinking Construction Frameworks for these categories of expenditure have expired and the values of expenditure fall below current EU Public Procurement value thresholds, we will revert to Contractual Standing Orders in accordance with current tendering arrangements available to local authorities.

2. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS : Standing Orders Apply. Simon Ashworth (Management Accountant) has been consulted and has contributed to the financial aspects of the report.

3. ICT STEERING GROUP IMPLICATIONS

ICT provision within the classrooms will be required and will be procured through the existing RM managed service contract.

4. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS : Principal Solicitor (Tony Hatton) has been consulted. The contracts will be let under the Council’s construction partnering framework arrangements or where financial or programme advantages may be achieved, with the appointed Modular classroom providers. The report provides detail of the five contractors who tendered for the works, and the criteria against which appointments have been made. The process appears to have been clear, transparent, open and fair for each of the contractors involved. The City Council contractual standing order process has been adhered to under the existing framework agreements.

CONTACT OFFICER :

Sue Wilkinson – 0161 778 0277

WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S):

All Wards.

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES:

All relating to parents and children, inclusion and access to education, health, training, and sport. The Sustainable Development and Carbon Reduction Programme is also accounted for.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\063d0d513324ed7ac1d920fb71bd5a10.doc 2 1. Background

1.1 Previous reports set out the details of the shortage of pupil places across the authority and the need to increase provision. One single classroom of this type was required in 2011. This proposed phase of works for 2012 will meet the requirements to cater for the initial rise in pupil numbers and as they progress through the schools.

1.2 The fastest and most economic solution is to provide modular classroom units to accommodate the additional pupils who have been granted school places from the start of the September 2012 term.

1.3 It is essential that the extension works are undertaken in time to meet the demand for pupil places in the September 2012 intake. The completion of these works will increase schools capacities to meet the immediate needs of additional pupil places.

2. Details

2.1 Schools that have been initially identified under pupil plan planning process that require additional accommodation from September 2012 are:-

St. Lukes CE Primary School (3 classrooms -1 single and 1 double units) Mesne Lea Primary School (1 double classroom unit) St. Pauls Peel Primary School (2 single classroom units) St. Charles RC Primary School (1 classroom unit) St. Teresa’s RC Primary School (1 classroom unit)

The classroom units will be provided in either single modules or double modules to suit individual circumstances. Both alternatives will include for toilet provisions.

2.2 The contracts for groundwork and services will be procured and let separately.

3. Modular Classroom Contract

3.1 In April 2012, the following suppliers were invited to enter a competitive tendering process for the supply and installation of single and double prefabricated classroom unit blocks:

1) Portakabin 2) Sibcas 3) Portable offices 4) Elliott 5) S&J Building, Cleaning and Restoration Ltd. 6) Premier Interlink (Waco Ltd)

The ground works and services elements of the project may be coordinated through a separate groundwork contractor/contractors or if financially advantageous and will minimise risk to completion of the installations will be procured from the modular classroom provider/s appointed. These groundwork contracts are expected to be tendered and agreed during June 2012.

3.2 Each tender was formally submitted, and received by Salford City Council (Law and Administration Department) on Wednesday 25th April 2012 in accordance with the Tender instructions. Each supplier was requested to provide individual costs for a single classroom unit, a double classroom unit, specific client extras, delivery and off loading and craneage as detailed on the Form of Tender sheet (See Appendix C).

3.3 The submitted tenders were scored against items included within the Contract Sum Analysis in accordance with the scoring criteria provided within each of the tenders (See appendix A). Weighting was indicated as 60% quality, 30% cost and 10% client optional extras.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\063d0d513324ed7ac1d920fb71bd5a10.doc 3 3.4 Key criteria on which suppliers were assessed by Urban Vision on behalf of Salford City Council, were their ability to provide completed units to site by the 30th July 2012 and ability to comply with specific Employer requirements. Contractors were also asked to indicate their ability to provide up to 8 units simultaneously whether they be single, double or a mixture of the two units forms.

3.5 Of the 6 contractors approached to tender the works, only 5 returned tender submissions as follows:-

 Portable Offices  S&J Building, Cleaning and Restoration Ltd.  Premier Interlink (Waco Ltd.)  Portakabin  Elliott

Sibcas contacted Urban Vision on 17th April 2012 to explain that they would not be submitting a tender to undertake the work as they felt they would not be able to meet the required timescales or production requirements of the client at this time.

3.6 On initial return of the tenders to Urban Vision, each of the submissions seemed to be in close proximity of each other for both single and double modular units, however, further analysis revealed inconsistencies with regards to specification compliance and anomalies with regards to Contract Sum Analysis line item costs.

3.7 The form of tender instructed tenderers to submit costs for a single modular classroom unit, a double classroom unit, a list of client optional extras, delivery and off loading to site using hiab transportation and delivery to site with off loading via crane. The submissions received were as follows:-

Premier Portakabin Elliott Portable S&J Interlink Offices Building (Waco Ltd.) Supply of £84,105.00 £91,412.00 £62,767.45 £61,836.88 £82,092.00 Single modular classroom unit Supply of £144,054.00 £152,107.00 £108,806.46 £108,807.75 £142,035.60 double modular classroom unit Client £82,217.00 Single: £74,363.04 Single: No total Optional £38,209 £36,732.75 given extras Double: Double: £66,701 £76,640.00 Delivery Single: £329 per N/A Single: Not and £9,798 module £5,890 Provided offloading supplied via hiab Double: Double: £16,797 £10,548.00 Delivery Single: £945 per Included Single: Not and £1,200 day for 90T £7,690 Provided offloading crane via crane Double: Double: £1,200 £12,348.00

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\063d0d513324ed7ac1d920fb71bd5a10.doc 4 It is noted that S&J Building, Cleaning and Restoration Ltd. did not submit a signed Form of Tender, therefore automatically resulting in a non-compliant submission.

3.8 Tenderers were also requested to return all completed sections of the Contract Sum Analysis document as this was to be the main basis for comparison. The submissions that were not fully completed as requested are:

 S&J Building, Cleaning and Restoration Ltd. failed to submit part A (Quality) and part D (General Terms and Conditions)  Portable offices failed to return the whole Contract Sum Analysis Documentation.  Premier Interlink (Wako Ltd.) failed to submit part D (General terms and Conditions)

As a result of the missing information, all tenders received from the above are considered to be not fully compliant submissions.

3.9 Within the tender documentation, a list of specific Employers requirements were included for pricing by each of the tenderers. It was noted and reported by Urban Vision that in all submissions received, none of the contractors were fully compliant with the requirements. Due to the specialist nature of the companies who tendered it could not be guaranteed that any tender would be wholly compliant. Consequently Urban Vision has undertaken a checklist of items that have been included/excluded within each of the submissions received.

3.10 From analysis of the above, Portakabin appear to be the most compliant submission in terms of fulfilling employer requirements, however there are some key elements such as ply lining to internal walls, acoustic ratings and insulation which will require further clarification of detail before moving forward.

3.11 Urban Vision undertook cost exercises to examine some of the information contained within the two valid submissions to analyse the effects on overall cost outputs. An example of this can be seen in the table below where discounts have been applied to base line costs provided (assuming all units would be awarded to one supplier):

Elliott: Portakabin: Double Unit Cost £108,806.46 £152,107.00 Single Unit Cost £ 62,767.45 £ 91,142.00

Requirements as per school list: 2 double units £217,612.92 £304,214.00 5 single units £313,837.25 £455,710.00 Sub total £531,450.17 £759,924.00

Discount (based on 7 units 6.00% 2.00% – mixed) -£ 31,887.01 -£ 15,198.48 Sub total £499,563.16 £744,725.52

Delivery single Inc Inc Delivery double Inc Inc

Requirements as per school list: 2 double units Inc Inc 5 single units Inc Inc

Total Cost of Supply and £499,563.16 £744,752.52 Delivery

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\063d0d513324ed7ac1d920fb71bd5a10.doc 5 3.12 Urban Vision have advised Salford City Council that as Client, careful consideration is needed in relation to any potential optional extras that could be utilised in the project as these may affect the costs illustrated above.

3.13 It was noted by Urban Vision and advised appropriately that although requested in the tender documents that prices are to remain valid for a period of 12 month, all submissions have provided a caveat which states that offers are only valid for 90 days.

3.14 It was noted by Urban Vision that although Elliott have returned section D of the Contract Sum Analysis, accepting Salford City Council Payment Terms and Conditions, they have submitted different terms and conditions within the detail of the tender submission. This would require further clarification prior to issue of an order.

3.15 With regards to specification compliance of the two remaining tenders, Portakabin included the highest proportion of Client requests in comparison to Elliott.

3.16 Urban Vision have also advised that Portakabin products are of a potentially higher standard and it could be considered that these units will achieve a longer life expectancy in comparison to those offered by Elliott. This advice was reflected in life expectancy information offered by the suppliers.

3.17 In respect of cost, Elliot are the most competitive for both single and double units, particularly when discounts are applied (see section 2.06). It should be noted however that should the client (Salford City Council) wish to pursue optional extras further analysis should be undertaken to ensure cost effectiveness.

3.18 With regards to the above approval is sought to seek the most advantageous offer in terms of cost, quality and programme to meet individual school location requirements.

5. Groundwork Enabling Works and Commissioning Contract

4.1 It is proposed to seek prices and upon determination of the most advantageous position to let contracts for groundworks, services and commissioning either through the appointed modular classroom supplier or separately to groundwork contractors.

5.2 The advantage of this is that the specific ground works needed are determined by unit design selected and cannot be done prior to the selection of modular classroom supplier. Simultaneous management will enable procurement of this aspect along with full surveys and specifications for ground works to be completed whilst the modular classrooms are being constructed off site. Prices for these enabling works will be sought on a competitive tendering basis.

5.3 The risks to programme delays will also be reduced under these proposals.

6. Regulatory Implications and Risks

5.1 Due to the very challenging timescales involved there is a risk that groundworks associated with installation works will need to start before planning permission for the units has been secured. Every effort will be made to avoid such a situation arising but where it does, risks will be carefully managed.

5.2 Members should also be aware that the Education Act 2011 amends the requirements relating to the change of use of school playing fields under Section 77 to the School Standards and Framework Act 1998. These recent legislative changes introduce the requirement that Secretary of State consent is obtained before a local D:\Docs\2017-12-29\063d0d513324ed7ac1d920fb71bd5a10.doc 6 authority may change the use of publicly funded playing fields, even where this is connected with educational or recreational facilities. There is therefore a risk that temporary accommodation would be located on school playing fields without first securing Secretary of State consent. Again, the risks associated with such a regulatory breach will be carefully managed and remedied at the earliest opportunity.

6. Financial Implications

6.1 Funds are available having been provided to Salford City Council as a Basic Need allocation to support the provision of places in Voluntary Aided, Academy, Voluntary Controlled and Community Schools in Salford. Information of predicted numbers of children in Salford Schools were returned to DfE in August 2011 and actual pupil numbers for 2011-12 confirmed in January 2012. As a result of this information an additional allocation has been made in 2012-13 to allow Salford to provide the urgently needed accommodation for the increased number of children applying for places in our schools. A portion of this fund will be used to purchase additional classrooms and a final report for audit records to the Assistant Mayor will be made when final costs are determined.

Basic Need Funding Available 2012-13

2011-12 Balance brought forward £ 925,493

Basic Need 12-13 Allocation £3,490,425

Basic Need Extra Allocation 12-13 £1,973,401

Total £6,389,319

6.2 In 2011 it was investigated and demonstrated, for the James Brindley project, that purchase rather than rental costs are more economical for classroom units that are known to be required for seven years. This programme creates additional ‘bulge’ classes created which work through all seven years of the primary school phase.

7. Conclusions

7.1 That the list of schools identified for requiring additional accommodation are approved for the provision of new modular classroom units to increase pupil capacity in time for the September 2012 term.

7.2 That approval is given to accept the Elliot tender as the most advantageous offer relating to cost, quality and programme. However in the event that Elliot are unable to deliver all classrooms to the timescales required, or that when detailed cost analysis including options are finally clarified (Ref 3.12 and 3.17 above) for each unit, and if advantageous, that approval is also granted to allow Portakabin to be engaged to complete projects for September 2012. Both suppliers have provided prices for modular classroom accommodation under competitive tendering arrangements.

7.3 That approval is granted to seek and let contracts to undertake preparatory works for services and foundations and to commission the units. These contracts will be let under the Council’s contractual standing orders in accordance with current tendering arrangements available to local authorities or with the appointed Modular classroom providers if this provides financial and programme advantages,

7.4 That the risks stated above are noted.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\063d0d513324ed7ac1d920fb71bd5a10.doc 7