Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 1 of 35

Options Appraisal

Date: 2nd December 2013

Customer: BaNES

Reference: Strategic Plan – Stage 3

Version: 1.0

SWGfL Schools Internet Services Team Paul Hancock [email protected] SWGfL Contract Manager Contact Details: T: 0845 601 3203 [email protected] T: 07899 905968

Table of Contents

1. The current service ...... 2 2. The current charges ...... 7 3. Issues to consider ...... 9 4. Options for Service Development ...... 11 5. Update and Proposal ...... 15 6. Summary ...... 18 7. Appendix ...... 19

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 2 of 35

1. The current service The current charges cover the provision of a full service – not just a connection - to the education establishments in BaNES, including: Connectivity •A wide range of connectivity types Technologies and services •Internet bandwidth and SWGfL core technical services network managed by highly qualified experts to meet •Unique proactive monitoring of IWF the increasing demands of Safety services listed resources schools: business class •Filtering, logging and monitoring solutions, with an education focus. •Managed, enterprise-class firewalls Security services and intrusion prevention systems Systems and processes •Certified to ISO27001 deal with a wide range of threats and issues, •Service Desk via phone,/email/web allowing schools to focus Support services •Change control: efficient, low cost, on running their school, simple to adjust service configuration not their internet service: safe, secure and •Managed private and public IP supported. Network services addresses, DNS and mail settings A large number of •SWGfL is an LIR; /32 IPv6 supernet partners are integrated together, providing choice •Range of services for different needs to schools and best of Optional Services •filtering, email, hosting, network & breed solutions: high data tools, video services quality and affordable.

•Fully resilient core network SWGfL underpins the Reliability •Resilient ‘second connection’ services technologies with policies, for schools principles, standards and services that drive the •Clear, comprehensive service levels value from them. Service levels •Focus on key measures (e.g. speed of resolution), not just numbers Effective supplier management, continual •Added protections for schools service improvement, and Contracts •Supply contracts that favour the understanding the needs customer, not the supplier of schools help SWGfL to take a flexible approach Service •Capability to meet future needs to service delivery. •Roadmaps for the service, developed development using customer feedback SWGfL services are properly procured through •Service aligned to ISO27001 the EU, and SWGfL now Standards •Support processes underpinned by ITIL supports more than 2,500 and FITS and driven by improvement schools, so each school benefits from being part of •Not for profit charity a large consortium. The SWGfL •Economies of scale; experience in benefits of aggregation, and knowledge of education without losing choice.

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 3 of 35

1.1 ‘Access’ technologies A range of ‘access’ technologies are deployed to connect schools to the SWGfL infrastructure at different levels of performance and cost. These include:

Type Advantages Disadvantages  Provides ‘symmetric’ bandwidth  Not scalable/no upgrade path BT Learning  High tolerance for distance means  Hub and spoke model reliant on Stream more suitable for rural school hosting hub equipment deployments  Costs more than other solutions  Widely available  Not symmetric: lower upstream ADSL  Lower cost than other solutions bandwidth than other solutions  Requires telephone line  Higher performance than ADSL  Not available everywhere and BT LearningStream  Requires telephone line FttC  Good upstream bandwidth  Lower cost than Copper and Fibre  Higher performance than ADSL  Costs more than ADSL and FttC Copper  Provides ‘symmetric’ bandwidth  Not available everywhere  Highest performance  Can cost more than other  Provides guaranteed bandwidth technologies  Provides ‘symmetric’ bandwidth  Can be affected by additional Fibre  Scalable/upgrade path install costs (referred to as ‘excess  High tolerance for distance construction charges’ or ECCs) Note that in this context we are referring to a ‘fully fibre’ solution

Each technology has different characteristics, advantages and disadvantages:

Learning Type ADSL FttC Copper Fibre Stream ADSL Max MPF Learning ADSL2+ Fibre leased Variants FttC Stream line 2+ Annex M EFM Bonded ADSL Performance 10Mb to 1Gb 2Mb Up to 20Mb Up to 40Mb Up to 20Mb (downstream) + Performance 10Mb to 1Gb 2Mb Up to 3Mb Up to 10Mb Up to 20Mb (upstream) + Symmetric Yes No No Yes Yes Uncontented Yes No No Yes Yes Quantity 17 4 1 28 33

 See section 4.2 for details Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 4 of 35

1.2 BaNES infrastructure The existing infrastructure is a ‘private network’: it has been provided for the exclusive use of education establishments in BaNES. See section 7.2 for more details.

1.2.1 Topological architecture The SWGfL infrastructure in BaNES is made up of several layers: Connects each school to the distribution layer using a range of Access layer connectivity technologies including fibre, copper (MPF), BT LearningStream, Fibre-to-the-Cabinet (FttC) and ADSL Connects each distribution ‘node’ to the next, and connects each school Distribution layer to the backhaul layer. Made up of unbundled BT exchanges, exchange interconnects, and BT LearningStream hubs Connects each school, via the distribution layer, to the core network. A Backhaul layer resilient pair of high capacity fibre circuits from the nodes at Kinsgmead and Midsomer Norton run to the SWGfL core network in London Houses high performance routing and switching equipment, security Core network technology, filtering hardware clusters, and connects to ISP services. Located in resilient suites in Telehouse North, London Connects the SWGfL infrastructure to other networks and the internet. Beyond the SWGfL peers with over 350 providers via the core network, and connects to network multiple IP transit providers

The benefits of arranging a network such as this - in layers - include:  High performance: certain layers are susceptible to congestion, and are therefore equipped with higher specification equipment and connections to manage the load  Efficient management & troubleshooting: allows for isolation of causes of network trouble  Scalability: the network can grow easily by adding additional access layer connections

Fibre (dist & backhaul) 100Mb; 1Gb+ Fibre (access) 100Mb+ Copper 10-20Mb FttC Up to 40Mb (down) ADSL Up to 20Mb (down) LearningStream 2Mb

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 5 of 35

1.2.2 Geographical architecture The existing infrastructure is built around eight major nodes:

 Peasedown St John BT LearningStream Hubs  St Keyna  Chew Magna  Combe Down Unbundled exchanges  Keynsham  Radstock Unbundled exchanges and backhaul  Kingsmead locations  Midsomer Norton

Each of these nodes is connected to one or more of the other nodes, forming a distribution ‘ring’. A key benefit associated with ring networks is a level of inherent resilience: traffic is able to pass in both directions – clockwise and anti-clockwise – so a ring is able to tolerate a degree of failure without compromising the service to all users.

Each node – as well as connecting to other distribution nodes – also connects a number of schools to the distribution layer. LearningStream Hubs connect LearningStream spokes, while unbundled exchanges connect schools using Copper and Fibre access technologies:

Node LearningStream Copper Fibre Peasedown St John 9 St Keyna 8 Chew Magna 2 3 Combe Down 4 3 Keynsham 4 3 Radstock 4 2 Kingsmead 8 17 Midsomer Norton 6 5

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 6 of 35

1.3 Core Service Each connected establishment receives the SWGfL SIS Core Service:

Connectivity Network Services  A very wide range of suppliers and partners  Managed private IP, DNS etc. means we can offer more options to meet a  SWGfL is a Local Internet Registry (LIR) range of needs  We have a very large IPv4 and IPv6 supernet  SWGfL uses multiple high performance internet for allocation to sites transit links and connects directly to over 350

peers (like Google, NEN, Janet, BBC, Akamai

etc.) Essential Security  Centralised, managed, enterprise-class Cisco firewalls Essential Safety  Intrusion detection and prevention and other  All traffic passed through SWGfL core network security technologies and checked against IWF CAIC list to block  Market-leading Cisco IronPort solution for access to illegal content web/email security  Our unique online safety capability, in  Service accredited to ISO27001 as well as partnership with the south west police forces, other standards protects our users  Internationally recognised online safety services available from SWGfL Change and Service Management  ITIL and FITS-based processes

 Technical changes: engineering change,

Support and Technical Services usually free of charge

 Award-winning, UK-based, dedicated Service  Transactional changes: adding to or

Desk available via phone, email and ESI enhancing services, which can usually be

 Escalation routes to engineers with high end done through ESI

qualifications (including CCIE, MCSE, RHCE,  Strategic change: management of complex

CISSP etc.) or bespoke changes  24x7 network monitoring  15 years of experience supporting school internet and connectivity services Standards and Processes  Aligned to ISO9001 best practice  Incident management, business continuity and disaster recovery ESI  Secure, integrated, user-friendly dashboard

 Simple, quick self-registration process Service Monitoring and Reporting  Easy to use tools showing real time utilisation  Control support calls, change requests, and Optional Services statistics  Access information etc. relating to the service  Gather intelligence to support strategic  http://esi.swgfl.org.uk planning and behaviour management

1.4 Current usage and performance SWGfL has analysed the usage over the past three months. At the aggregated level (i.e. for all connected establishments in BaNES), usage is as follows:

Maximum Outbound Maximum Inbound 95th Percentile 394 Mb 78 Mb 195 Mb Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 7 of 35

2. The current charges There are 84 establishments in total connected to and served by the BaNES infrastructure. The total annual charges are broken down below:

Component Description Charges The connection from the school to the distribution layer, currently made Telecoms – access layer £ 183,267 using Fibre, Copper or LearningStream circuits The equipment and circuits that link Telecoms – distribution and the schools to the SWGfL core £ 199,897 backhaul layers network The SWGfL core network, and the Internet Transit routing of traffic to the internet and £ 45,317 back again Stands for ‘Customer Premises CPE Equipment’; in most cases, this is the £ 3,872 router installed at the school The Core Service, covering all Service support, change and service £ 124,065 activities Total £ 556,418 Average per establishment £ 6,624

A range of different establishments are connected to the BaNES infrastructure, including maintained schools, but also Academies and other establishments. This helps to spread the charges for the ‘shared’ aspects of the infrastructure across a wider user base, reducing the charges for all.

2.1 Maintained schools There are 64 maintained schools connected, including 61 primary (including infant and junior) schools, and three secondary schools. The breakdown of charges is:

Component Charges Telecoms – access layer £ 139,277 Telecoms – distribution and backhaul layers £ 136,487 Internet Transit £ 24,580 CPE £ 2,054 Service £ 96,864 Total £ 399,263 Average per establishment £ 6,238

2.2 Academy schools There are twelve Academies connected, including three primary (including infant and junior) schools, and nine secondary schools. The breakdown of charges is: Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 8 of 35

Component Charges Telecoms – access layer £ 29,366 Telecoms – distribution and backhaul layers £ 53,184 Internet Transit £ 16,317 CPE £ 1,681 Service £ 19,457 Total £ 120,005 Average per establishment £ 10,000

2.3 Others There are eight other establishments connected, including one library, five children’s centres (using ADSL) and two independent schools (on Fibre circuits). The breakdown of charges is:

Component Charges Telecoms – access layer £ 14,624 Telecoms – distribution and backhaul layers £ 10,225 Internet Transit £ 4,420 CPE £ 137 Service £ 7,744 Total £ 37,150 Average per establishment £ 4,644

2.4 Breakdown by technology Each of the connectivity technologies carries a different cost. Fibre, for example, is more expensive than other technologies, but offers considerably higher performance:

Technology Quantity Total Charges Ave. Charge Fibre 33 £ 282,699 £ 8,567 Copper 28 £ 133,348 £ 4,762 FttC 1 £ 2,814 £ 2,814 ADSL 5 £ 6,293 £ 1,259 BT LearningStream 17 £ 131,263 £ 6,909 Total 84 £ 556,418 £ 6,624

2.5 Breakdown by establishment type The general distribution of technologies by establishment type also has an impact on charges:

Technology Quantity Total Charges Ave. Charge Primary 65 £ 382,728 £ 5,888 Secondary 14 £ 160,524 £ 11,466 Other 5 £ 13,166 £ 2,633 Total 84 £ 556,418 £ 6,624 Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 9 of 35

3. Issues to consider 3.1 Scope of service It is important for the SWGfL service to deliver good value for money. Indeed, this is a fundamental principle of SWGfL. The SWGfL service is purpose-built for schools, including many important and unique benefits. You can review these at www.swgfl.org.uk/compare.

Whilst the amount of bandwidth and the price of the solution are of major importance, so too are other aspects of the provision, including:  Clarity around the actual circuits that will be provided, and the anticipated actual performance (rather than the theoretical performance, and clearly explaining any contention, difference between downstream and upstream performance, quality factors (like latency and packet loss) and usage limits)  Expert advice and guidance to select the most appropriate technologies, and plans and processes to support and manage future growth  An explanation of the ‘service’ included with the connection, if any (including support, change management, safety, security etc.)  Safety features, including IWF for illegal images (and our unique online safety capability, in partnership with the south west police forces, protects our users), as well as non-technical e- safety services (expert advice, incident management etc.)  Security features, including the quality of firewalls (and how well they are managed) and security accreditations in place  A robust, resilient and high performing core network within which a range of services can be provisioned and delivered to customers in a highly cost-effective manner  Support services, designed to resolve problems and/or implement changes as quickly as possible  Service levels that clearly define the minimum acceptable standards for key measurable criteria, not just in relation to availability but also issue resolution and change management timeliness  Clear contracts, designed with the schools interest in mind, not the supplier, and providing enhanced protections when compared to the supplier’s standard terms of business  Standards, including ISO27001 and ITIL, to shape the services provided and give assurances that the quality of the services is high It may be possible to purchase a connection or a number of connections for a lower amount than SWGfL charges, however if the aspects above are not included, it will probably cost schools more to find other ways of meeting the needs, and in some cases the quality of the service will be lower.

3.2 Other suppliers There are a number of alternative suppliers in the marketplace now. As the education connectivity marketplace becomes increasingly fragmented, many see an opportunity for incremental customer growth.

3.2.1 Service provided However, most solutions offered are based on commercially available network assets, without the same enhancements made by SWGfL to increase performance and quality. Additionally, Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 10 of 35

the service offered by most suppliers does not include the breadth and depth of service provided by SWGfL.

3.2.2 Cost of change Even if an alternative supplier could be found that made the same technological enhancements that SWGfL does, and provided the same service, there would likely be a significant cost associated with the migration from the existing SWGfL service.

This could include:  technological issues, such as settings and configurations that would need to be replicated  replacement of software and/or hardware that requires change or upgrade due to incompatibility or unavailability  training and familiarisation with new protocols and systems

3.2.3 Procurement SWGfL is a Contracting Authority under the UK public sector procurement regulations (Public Contracts Regulations 2006, as amended), and has consequently undertaken a compliant procurement process via the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU).

This allows schools and LAs to purchase services through SWGfL without the need for any further procurement activity to be undertaken. However, if an alternative supplier was used, schools would have to undertake a procurement process themselves which would require expertise and time, and would cost money. It is also important to bear in mind that SWGfL is ‘supplier neutral’: SWGfL selects the best telecoms supplier from a wide range, and is not fixed to one or a small number.

For more information on procurement advice to schools and the need to use OJEU procedures for certain procurements, go here.

3.3 Benefits of a collaborative approach The present approach taken within BaNES – that of a collaborative, centralised approach, is becoming less common across the region. As covered in section 4.1, for some LAs continued involvement in the provision of these types of services to schools is becoming more difficult, with fewer staff and a different strategic focus.

This often leads to a lack of direction and guidance for schools. The previous functional and technical guidance upon which previous infrastructures were built is no longer current, but the principles that supported the guidance remain valid.

Maintaining the centralised, collaborative approach provides a mechanism to innovate and resolve issues that would persist if approached on an individual, site-by-site basis: across the LA area it is possible to consider the infrastructure requirements as a whole, and, for example, plan investments to address specific issues; 84 establishments each being approached as a stand- alone entity would not have this opportunity, and establishments who were poorly served by commercially-based infrastructure would have limited options.

More generally, de-delegation of funding does mean that options like this exist today, and will continue to exist in the future; a decision to approach internet services at the individual establishment level would be difficult to change back to a centralised, collaborative model. Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 11 of 35

4. Options for Service Development 4.1 Background Information The telecommunications industry within the UK, and indeed within Europe, is undergoing considerable change. The economic climate is forcing consideration of new ways of working; of reducing costs; and for business, of increasing sales and/or approaching new markets.

Telecommunications is now an essential component of business infrastructure (alongside transport, for example), and the telecoms industry is responding. In the UK, BT is said to be committing £2.5bn to upgrading the infrastructure to support higher connection speeds in more areas. New technologies are emerging to meet these targets; the bulk of BT’s deployment to date is based on ‘Fibre-to-the-Cabinet’ (FttC), which is considerably faster than ADSL.

This programme has government support: the current parliament aims to have “the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015”, and although funding has been made available to assist with this, the expectation is clearly that for the majority of the country the telecommunications industry will respond and will invest in the infrastructural enhancements needed to deliver against the goal.

At the same time, national initiatives provide an alternative requirement. BDUK is a program designed to provide public sector intervention in those geographical areas where the business case for investment in telecommunications does not provide the necessary returns for the private sector. The program is driven by the plans to have the leading network in Europe by 2015, and is centred on the production of strategic plans by LAs (usually driven by Economic Development teams) through which funding (a total of £830m from the initial funding allocation) can be acquired and used to prime a procurement activity. A consortium (Fujitsu, Cisco, Virgin Media and TalkTalk) has emerged, largely as a result of BDUK funding being available, to compete with BT (though is yet to successfully complete a procurement).

The Public Services Network (PSN) programme, in a different way, seeks to reduce the cost of infrastructure and service provision within the public sector through the principles of efficient procurement, de-duplication, and fitness for purpose; but within specified parameters (including manageability, security, performance etc). Labelled as ‘the foundation of the Government ICT Strategy’, PSN sets standards against which suppliers must become accredited in order to supply PSN services.

Within the education sector, the now withdrawn Harnessing Technology Grant was a capital grant (though most Local Authorities found a way of using the grant to cover revenue costs as well) provided by central government to LAs, and overseen by Becta.

This has resulted in significant changes in this sector, in a relatively small period of time. Some LAs have withdrawn from hands-on involvement in the provision of SWGfL services to schools. Many schools now need to pay the ‘true cost’ of their connectivity and service and, in some cases, this can be a four or five-fold increase when compared with their previous subsidised charges. Whilst these subsidised charges were always ‘synthetic’, many issues result from the incorrect but understandable perception at school level that the cost is increasing.

This presents a great opportunity to improve the services to schools: new technologies provide the potential for performance to be increased and for charges to be reduced. It also presents a considerable risk: the new technologies are not yet ubiquitous, and if not designed correctly can provide poorer performance than is expected. Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 12 of 35

4.2 New Technologies Technologies and approaches are available – either now or in the near future – that allow for the cost of the infrastructure to be reduced and the performance to be increased. These were not available three years ago when the existing network infrastructure was implemented: solutions like FttC are relatively new to the market, and ADSL, whilst available before, was not of sufficient speed or quality to be used widely in schools.

These technologies are built on ‘commercially-based’ network infrastructure, as opposed to private infrastructure. This means that telecoms operators – like BT – are deploying and upgrading the infrastructure for commercial purposes. ADSL and FttC are similar in many ways. Both use telephone cabling for the local connection, however with FttC the connection from the green street cabinet to the telephone exchange is made with fibre, which increases the potential speed.

Other providers

1. 2. 3.

SWGfL

However, although these technologies appear to be deployed in a simple way, there are some significant differences between SWGfL and other suppliers:

Consistent: Different: These parts are generally the same, as These parts are generally not the same: they’re usually already there, and are 1. Most suppliers will ‘break out’ of the national network – based on national networks from major either directly to the internet or via a core network – infrastructure providers (e.g. BT). using a contended connection. SWGfL has no operational contention 2. Suppliers with core networks often do not have the same level of resilience, performance of service that SWGfL provides 3. Onward connections to the internet can also be contended, further reducing performance Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 13 of 35

A range of Fibre and Copper solutions can be deployed in a similar way: using networks that have been built for the commercial purposes of the telecoms provider, SWGfL can reduce the cost of providing the circuit, and add the high performance interconnects and core network, and the service wrap.

This creates a less complex network infrastructure than the existing topological architecture, as the ‘distribution’ and ‘backhaul’ is no longer a specific part of the architecture: the telecoms suppliers assume responsibility for that.

Fibre (access) 100Mb+ Copper 10-20Mb FttC Up to 40Mb (down) ADSL Up to 20Mb (down)

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 14 of 35

4.3 Ways Forward At the previous meeting three ways forward were discussed:

4.3.1 Option 1 - retain existing provision The infrastructure would be retained ‘as-is’, and commercial renegotiation with existing suppliers used to attempt to reduce the charges.

It should be noted that this does not provide a vehicle to replace the legacy ‘BT LearningStream’ solutions in place at a number of schools, which is a comparatively expensive and poorly performing solution.

4.3.2 Option 2 - replace legacy technology The BT LearningStream solution is decommissioned and each establishment provided with a new connection using commercially-based network infrastructure. 14 sites move to ADSL, and three move to Copper solutions.

Most sites would be expected to receive equal or improved downstream bandwidth, while two sites (Farrington Gurney Primary School and Marksbury Primary School), would be expected to receive poorer downstream bandwidth.

The rest of the infrastructure would be retained ‘as-is’, and the model in option 1 used to reduce the charges. The sites who may receive poorer bandwidth could be addressed through targeted investment of capital funds or savings realised from the changes made. This would be a cost-effective way of achieving a suitable solution for each establishment in the BaNES area.

4.3.3 Option 3 – replace private network An extension to option 2, with Option 3 the private network is decommissioned and each establishment provided with a new connection using commercially-based network infrastructure.

Most sites would be expected to receive equal or improved downstream bandwidth. Two sites (Farrington Gurney Primary School and Marksbury Primary School), would be expected to receive poorer downstream bandwidth. As with option 2, the sites who may receive poorer bandwidth could be addressed through targeted investment of capital funds or savings realised from the changes made.

4.4 Summary and Actions Option 1 is not suitable as the LearningStream technology would be retained, which is already causing performance bottlenecks for some schools. However, the opportunity for commercial negotiation within option 1 (and option 2) to reduce charges and save time on the project is worthy of further analysis.

Option 3 is a more significant project, requiring a change to all connectivity solutions currently deployed, but also is known to be capable of achieving considerable reductions in charges and increases in performance.

It was agreed that SWGfL would commence with further analysis of both options 1 and 3 and provide details of the findings to the Schools Forum. In each case, a small number of specific schools require attention as ‘standard’ solutions are not sufficient to meet their needs.

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 15 of 35

5. Update and Proposal Since the last meeting SWGfL has proceeded with three main streams of activity:

1. Commercial Negotiation: As per options 1 and 2, discuss the possible savings that could be obtained through commercial negotiation with the existing supply chain (primarily KCOM);

2. Network Redesign: As per option 3, design a new collection of network solutions using commercially available telecoms services to replace the existing private network;

3. Design Finalisation: Work through the design, agreeing the optimal solution subject to any parameters Schools Forum wish to apply; and

4. Project Initiation: Initiate the project, and agree an engagement cycle for schools and stakeholders.

5.1 Commercial Negotiation SWGfL has requested that KCOM provide commercial information for continuance of the private network for 12 and 36 month periods.

We have ascertained that it would be possible to achieve savings through renegotiation with KCOM, but that would mean that some schools would remain on the solution they have today rather than being connected to higher performing, lower cost solutions (such as FttC).

Alternatively, it would also be possible to integrate these solutions into the existing infrastructure, but that would reduce the savings that can be made. On this basis, commercial negotiation will not be pursued further.

5.2 Network Redesign SWGfL has completed two design exercises using the following methodologies:

Design 1 focussed on finding the most significant cost savings, while design 2 sought the best solution (within a set of cost parameters) for each school. Each design then sought to establish for each school: a) Existing bandwidth b) Target bandwidth based on users (by provisioning an amount of bandwidth per learner, at 100% concurrency) c) Target bandwidth based on existing bandwidth (by seeking to match or improve upon existing bandwidth provision) d) Target bandwidth based on type (by using generalised targets of 100Mb for secondary schools and 10Mb for others) e) Establish weighted bandwidth target prioritising value from ‘b’, then value from ‘c’, and finally value from ‘d’.

Design 1 therefore intended to establish a solution for each school that provides the most commercially advantageous provision – measured by reduction in charges - and in the majority of cases also meets target bandwidth. Design 2 sought to establish a solution for each school that delivers the target bandwidth (in the most commercially advantageous way, where multiple options are available) – measured by alignment to target bandwidth. Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 16 of 35

For the majority of schools suitable ‘standard’ solutions can be used to achieve good increases in performance, reductions in charges, or both. For a small number of schools, alternative technology solutions have been proposed to provide the required level of performance where ‘standard’ solutions are insufficient.

SWGfL has previously provided high level comparisons to demonstrate the improvements that can be achieved with each of the designs. Based on this, it has been agreed that Design 2 represents the best mix of performance and cost effectiveness.

5.2.1 Solution Type Changes to the provision include the removal of the legacy BT LearningStream infrastructure, but also changes to the rest of the infrastructure:

Existing Solution Design 2 Fibre Solutions 33 20 Copper Solutions 28 21 FttC Solutions 1 25 ADSL Solutions 4 17 LearningStream Solutions 17 0 Total 83 83

Design 2 deploys FttC solutions wherever possible. FttC represents a major improvement to bandwidth provision at an extremely attractive cost, and when deployed by SWGfL the benefits of the Core Service (see section 0) and SWGfL infrastructure (see section 4.2) continue to be provided. Design 2 also reduces quantity of ‘leased line’ fibre provided, largely by removing Primary School sites to FttC from fibre where available. Design 2 also prefers copper (EFM) solutions as opposed to ADSL solutions under design 1. A key benefit of copper solutions when compared to ADSL is the symmetric nature of the bandwidth: EFM provides the same upstream bandwidth as downstream.

Whilst most schools currently have a greater need for downstream bandwidth than upstream, the balance is changing. ‘Off-premise’ services (such as hosted and cloud-provisioned ICT systems), and increased requirements for access to ‘on-premise’ systems from outside school, as well as remote data backup processes, drive a growing need for upstream bandwidth.

5.2.2 Compare current solution to Network Redesign LearningStream replacement is split between copper and ADSL solutions, and 14 existing copper services are replaced with new copper services.

Current Solution Proposed Learning ADSL FttC Copper Fibre Solution Stream Fibre 20 Copper 6 14 1 FttC 1 13 11 ADSL 11 4 1 1

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 17 of 35

5.2.3 Performance Changes to the provision across BaNES also result in overall improvements in performance:

Existing Solution Design 2 Total downstream bandwidth 1,254 Mb 2,649 Mb (predicted) Increase vs current bandwidth 1,395 Mb Number of sites above current 69 bandwidth Number of sites equal to 14 current bandwidth Increase vs target bandwidth 1,324 Mb Number of sites above target 78 bandwidth Number of sites equal to 5 target bandwidth

5.2.4 Savings As expected, the Network Redesign is also expected to deliver significant savings:

Existing Solution (£) Design 2 (£) Setup Charges 0 162,100 Annual Charges 556,418 393,054 TCO (36m) 1,669,254 1,341,262

Annual Reduction 163,364 Annual Reduction (%) 29%

TCO Reduction 327,992 TCO Reduction (%) 20%

5.3 Design Finalisation SWGfL and BaNES have reviewed the designs and made a number of changes to the solution to be deployed on the basis of local requirements. These changes have increased the deployment of fibre and ADSL2+ ‘Annex M’ solutions.

This has increased the charges, but has also provided a consequential improvement in the solution. Additionally, SWGfL has based many of the solutions on 12 month terms (rather than 36 month), which does increase the setup charges, but provides flexibility to make further changes to solutions if required.

5.4 Project Initiation The project is in the initiation phase: SWGfL and partners have allocated resources to the project and have commenced the project design. Following approval by School Forum, the project will continue into detailed design and roll-out. Engagement with schools and stakeholders will be planned and undertaken, and timescales will be established and communicated. Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 18 of 35

6. Summary 6.1 Commercial Negotiation It is possible to achieve savings through commercial negotiation, but these will not match the savings possible through network redesign, and/or would mean that some schools will remain connected to their existing solution rather than higher performing, lower cost solutions.

6.2 Network Redesign In both designs one major difference with SWGfL is that all circuits – regardless of type – are routed back to the SWGfL core network, where a number of important safety and security solutions are deployed and where we can also establish ‘school-to-school’ links to enable establishments to collaborate effectively over the network, rather than having to use the internet.

This also helps to reduce the ‘cost of change’: existing security configurations (such as firewall rule-sets) and network/technical services (such as IP and DNS settings) will remain unchanged.

The two designs produced can provide considerable financial and performance improvements when compared to the existing provision:

Existing Solution Design 2 Total downstream bandwidth 1,254 Mb 2,649 Mb (predicted) Setup Charges (£) 0 162,100 Annual Charges (£) 556,418 393,054 TCO (36m) (£) 1,669,254 1,341,262

Annual Reduction 163,364 Annual Reduction (%) 29%

TCO Reduction 327,992 TCO Reduction (%) 20%

6.3 Proposal Given that the designs provide scope for significant enhancement, it is proposed that Schools Forum agree the proposed design and instruct SWGfL to continue with the project.

6.3.1 Next Steps 1. SWGfL and BaNES agree an engagement cycle for schools and stakeholders. Each site will be sent an update, outlining the intentions, suggested solution and likely timescales; 2. Each school confirms suitability of the proposed solution; 3. Order raised (by BaNES or by schools); 4. Deployment process – SWGfL engages telecoms providers and deploys new services; and 5. Demobilisation process – in parallel, SWGfL decommissions the existing network according to agreed parameters. Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 19 of 35

7. Appendix 7.1 Appendix A: Access technologies 7.1.1 Fibre Fibre is the highest performing connectivity technology. It provides guaranteed bandwidth (i.e. 10Mb is 10Mb, not ‘up to’ 10Mb); it provides ‘symmetric’ bandwidth (i.e. the upstream performance is the same as the downstream performance); it is scalable and provides an upgrade path for future growth (for example, 10Mb may be delivered on a 100Mb fibre, allowing for bandwidth increases to take place without having to replace the fibre itself); and it has a high tolerance for distance (as the data is transmitted as pulses of light, rather than electricity, which do not deteriorate with distance).

However, it can be more expensive than the other technologies, and can be affected by additional installation charges that are usually unknown until a site survey is performed.

Note that in this context we are referring to a fully fibre solution (i.e. the fibre runs all the way to the termination point in the school), rather than other technologies that are part fibre.

7.1.2 Copper Copper is usually lower cost than fibre, and is also symmetric, but cannot support the higher range of bandwidths that fibre can. Copper solutions are delivered by connecting special equipment in the telephone exchange to ‘unbundled’ copper pairs from each school.

From the exchange to the core network, fibre is used, but the solutions are described as ‘Copper’ as the termination in the school is made with copper ‘pairs’. The actual technology used is called ‘Ethernet in the First Mile’ (EFM).

7.1.3 FttC FttC stands for ‘fibre to the cabinet’, referring to the BT green cabinets in the streets. BT (and other operators) are rolling out a range of technologies to deliver higher speeds to homes and businesses around the country.

The bulk of BT’s deployment to date is based on FttC, which you may also hear referred to as ‘Infinity’ or ‘Superfast Broadband’. The BT green cabinets are upgraded to house larger, more powerful equipment, and whilst the connection to your premises (from the green cabinet) still uses the existing telephone lines, the connection from the cabinet to the exchange (using this enhanced kit) uses a fibre optic cable, meaning a faster connection.

SWGfL enhances ‘normal’ FttC by using a high performance backbone. See section 4.2 for details.

7.1.4 BT LearningStream LearningStream is an older technology (released by BT in 2001) that uses a ‘hub’ established in a school to connect other schools using ‘spokes’. The benefit of LearningStream is that it can be used over longer distances than the copper technologies available at the time. However, it is limited to only 2Mb symmetric bandwidth, and is comparatively expensive.

7.1.5 ADSL ADSL stands for ‘asymmetric digital subscriber line’: it’s based on traditional broadband technology, like you might have at home, although SWGfL improves the performance by connecting the ADSL service to a high performance backbone. See section 4.2 for details. Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 20 of 35

7.2 Appendix B: Bonded Solutions SWGfL is now able to offer a range of ‘bonded’ ADSL and FttC technology solutions for deployment in situations where a single circuit does not deliver the required performance.

The components that make up the solution  The suppliers. Often referred to as ‘telcos’ (short for telecoms companies).  The circuits. These are the phone lines that the ADSL solutions run on. In this example, we have one (on the left) that’s slightly faster than the other. This can happen when newer lines are installed alongside older lines, or when shorter cable routes are taken for one than for the other.  The router. This is the equipment at the school end that the circuits are plugged into.  The school network. The PCs, laptops, and applications used within the school.

When 2+2 equals….not 4! Many solutions that are called ‘bonded’ are in fact ‘load balanced’. This means that, while a single router may be located in the school, each of the ‘circuits’ behaves as a single line, so an individual application, or user, would only be able to use the bandwidth provided by one of the circuits.

Imagine you needed to take 20 children on a field trip, but your mini-bus can only fit 10. This is the equivalent of a second mini-bus that can also fit 10 children: whilst you could transport 20 children, you couldn’t transport them at the same time.

What’s more, some technologies deployed at school level (like cache appliances and some filtering appliances) could essentially stop the second line from being used at all.

The old approach The way many suppliers provide a bonded ADSL solution uses something called ‘MLPPP’. It’s been around for a while, and whilst it can work there are some major disadvantages.

Firstly, not all ‘telcos’ support it. We know that within the south west there are many locations where MLPPP wouldn’t work, as the telcos available don’t support it.

What’s more, in situations where the lines to be bonded operate at different speeds (more common than you’d think!), you can lose the benefit of the faster line (as the data is fragmented across both lines, and all the fragments need to

arrive before anything can be returned to the user). Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 21 of 35

‘Per packet’ load sharing Data sent across a network is broken down into small chunks called ‘packets’. This type of solution sends the packets into a special system where they’re ‘glued together’.

However, the packets often arrive in a different order than they were sent in. This can be a big problem for technologies like voice over IP and video, which require the packets to remain in sequence.

Imagine the page of a book with a thousand words. The words make sense in a particular sequence, but if they’re all rearranged they’d make no sense at all.

This type of solution also increases the load on firewall, caching and filtering systems, as they have to reorder the data too.

So, how has SWGfL done it? We’ve done a lot of testing with different methods of bonding ADSL, including those explained above. This has taken some time, but this is how we know the design of our solution is better, and is right for schools.

We’ve designed our solution to operate at the ‘transport layer’, which means it’s more successful in more places, and performs better than other techniques for bonding which work at lower layers.

Works at the ‘transport layer’ for more reliable  deployment and improved performance Works with all our telcos, not just the ones that  support certain technologies Not dependent or based upon a single system, so the inherent resilience of the SWGfL core network still  works Not dependent on low level network protocols, and can work with ADSL or other technologies in the  future A truly bonded solution that combines the performance of multiple lines (not a load balanced  solution) You’ll get the full, combined capability of the lines that are bonded (not set by the speed of the  slowest)

Works as a bonded solution with caching or filtering  appliances at the school end, as well as without Supports all application types, not just ‘TCP based’  applications

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 22 of 35

7.3 Appendix C: the private network The existing solutions are provided via a private network – an infrastructure established specifically for this purpose. As a ‘shared service’, the costs for certain parts are covered by all the schools that use it.

This model works very well when all schools are going to use the solution; when this level of ‘buy-in’ can be established at the outset; and when meeting the needs of all schools can be co-ordinated centrally.

However, it doesn’t work as well when the quantity of schools that are going to use each type of solution isn’t known (because this is the major variable in setting the charge); when the level of ‘buy-in’ is dependent – quite rightly – on the charge (because the charge couldn’t be established without the level of ‘buy-in’); and when each school will essentially be its own ‘project’ (because the shared services need to be co-ordinated centrally).

The BaNES infrastructure is currently a private network, meaning it has been established for the exclusive use of the public sector in the region. This provides for a number of significant benefits, including:

 Traffic management – publically available communications services, such as ISP and connectivity provided directly by telecoms companies like BT, Virgin Media, TalkTalk etc, often suffer from unseen control of usage and traffic. This helps companies to deliver a broadly equitable product across a range of users (including domestic, small business etc), but can have detrimental effects on user experience. The SWGfL service, being private, does not need to manage this range of users

 Quality of Service – in the technical sense, SWGfL can implement policies that guarantee bandwidth for certain purposes (e.g. voice), but also manage all aspects of the connectivity service (in addition to bandwidth, other factors including jitter, packet loss, round trip delay time and latency, and contention) are important in delivering high quality connectivity that support use of high-bandwidth services and prepare users for adoption of newer technologies.

However, a private network also means that there are fixed costs (the distribution and backhaul layers) that, if not shared between a sufficient number of subscribers/users, can lead to uncompetitive charges.

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 23 of 35

7.4 Appendix D - Solution Selection Site ID Option ID Site Name Solution CPE Term Circuit Downstream Solution (months) Capacity Performance Design (Mbps) 11046 11046_01 St Andrew's C of E Primary ADSL2+ AM - 1314 TD-8817 + 36 20 17 No operational School Cisco 881 contention 11351 11351_01 Bishop Sutton Primary 10 / 100 Cisco 1921 36 100 10 'education' or School (TTB) 'standard' option

11643 11643_01 Bathford Primary School ADSL2+ AM - 1314 TD-8817 + 36 20 8 No operational Cisco 881 contention 11693 11693_01 Bathwick St Mary CE FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational Primary School 1314 contention 11699 11699_01 Batheaston CE Primary ADSL2+ AM - 1314 TD-8817 + 36 20 17 No operational School Cisco 881 contention 11774 11774_01 Bathampton Primary 10 / 100 Cisco 1921 36 100 10 'education' or School (TTB) 'standard' option

13721 13721_01 Castle Primary School EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 13 'education' or 'standard' option

14342 14342_01 Clutton Primary School EFM (2 Pair) Cisco 881 36 10 6 'education' or 'standard' option

14615 14615_01 Combe Down Primary EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 14 'education' or School 'standard' option

14710 14710_01 Chew Magna County EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 12 'education' or Primary School 'standard' option

14720 14720_01 Chandag Infant School EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 13 'education' or 'standard' option

14721 14721_01 Chandag Junior School EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 13 'education' or 'standard' option

14762 14762_01 Cameley (VC) Primary EFM (2 Pair) Cisco 881 36 10 8 'education' or School 'standard' option Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 24 of 35

Site ID Option ID Site Name Solution CPE Term Circuit Downstream Solution (months) Capacity Performance Design (Mbps) 14824 14824_01 Camerton CE Primary ADSL2+ - TD-8817 + 36 20 3 No operational School 1314 Cisco 881 contention 16468 16468_01 Oldfield Park Infant School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 16511 16511_01 East Harptree Primary Bonded ADSL Max (x2) - VPN 300 36 14 10 No operational School 1314 50Mb contention 17014 17014_01 Fosse Way School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 17016 17016_01 St Martin's Garden Primary EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 14 'education' or School 'standard' option

17375 17375_01 Freshford CE (VC) Primary ADSL2+ - TD-8817 + 36 20 8 No operational School 1314 Cisco 881 contention 17542 17542_01 Farmborough (VC) Bonded ADSL2+ (x2) - VPN 300 36 34 9 No operational Primary School 1314 50Mb contention 17623 17623_01 Farrington Gurney CE EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 6 'education' or Primary School 'standard' option

20818 20818_01 St Julian's CE Primary 10 / 100 Cisco 1921 36 100 10 'education' or School (TTB) 'standard' option

20954 20954_01 St John's Catholic Primary FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational School 1314 contention 20955 20955_01 St John's CE Primary FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational School 1314 contention 20967 20967_01 St John's CE (VC) Primary EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 14 'education' or School 'standard' option

21582 21582_01 St Keyna Primary School EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 14 'education' or 'standard' option

22360 22360_01 High Littleton Primary Bonded ADSL2+ (x2) - VPN 300 36 34 10 No operational School 1314 50Mb contention 22643 22643_01 Longvernal Primary School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 25 of 35

Site ID Option ID Site Name Solution CPE Term Circuit Downstream Solution (months) Capacity Performance Design (Mbps) 23618 23618_01 Midsomer Norton Primary EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 15 'education' or School 'standard' option

24391 24391_01 St Mary's RC (VA) Primary FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational School 1314 contention 24393 24393_01 St Mary's CE Primary EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 14 'education' or School 'standard' option

24394 24394_01 St Mary's CE Primary FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational School 1314 contention 24719 24719_01 Marksbury CE (VC) Bonded ADSL Max (x3) - VPN 300 36 20 4 No operational Primary School 1314 50Mb contention 25076 25076_01 Moorlands Infant School No solution provided N/A - CPE 0 not required 25079 25079_01 Moorlands Juniors School 10 / 100 Cisco 1921 36 100 10 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

25201 25201_01 Newbridge Primary School 20 / 100 Cisco 1921 36 100 20 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

26262 26262_01 Peasedown St John FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational Primary School 1314 contention 26606 26606_01 St Philip's CE Primary EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 14 'education' or School 'standard' option

26773 26773_01 Paulton Infant School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 26775 26775_01 Paulton Junior School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 26887 26887_01 Pensford Primary School Bonded ADSL Max (x2) - VPN 300 36 14 14 No operational 1314 50Mb contention 28525 28525_01 St Saviour's Infant School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 28527 28527_01 St Saviour's Junior School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 26 of 35

Site ID Option ID Site Name Solution CPE Term Circuit Downstream Solution (months) Capacity Performance Design (Mbps) 28671 28671_01 Shoscombe CE Primary FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 14 No operational School 1314 contention 28926 28926_01 St Stephen's CE (VA) FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational Primary School 1314 contention 29155 29155_01 South Down Infant School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 29157 29157_01 South Down Junior School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 29174 29174_01 Oldfield Park Junior School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 29377 29377_01 Stanton Drew County ADSL2+ - TD-8817 + 36 20 5 No operational Primary School 1314 Cisco 881 contention 29644 29644_01 Saltford Primary School EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 15 'education' or 'standard' option

29747 29747_01 Swainswick CE Primary EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 9 'education' or School 'standard' option

30761 30761_01 St Michael's Junior School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 30767 30767_01 Twerton-on-Avon Infant FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational School 1314 contention 30961 30961_01 Ubley Primary School Bonded ADSL Max (x2) - VPN 300 36 14 6 No operational 1314 50Mb contention 31291 31291_01 Westfield County Primary FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational School 1314 contention 31491 31491_01 Weston All Saints Primary FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational School 1314 contention 31736 31736_01 Widcombe CE Junior FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational School 1314 contention 31739 31739_01 Widcombe Infant School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention 31758 31758_01 Whitchurch Primary ADSL2+ AM - 1314 TD-8817 + 36 20 17 No operational School Cisco 881 contention 32249 32249_01 Welton Primary School FttC (40) - Cisco 881 36 40 36 No operational 1314 contention Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 27 of 35

Site ID Option ID Site Name Solution CPE Term Circuit Downstream Solution (months) Capacity Performance Design (Mbps) 32452 32452_01 The Link EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 10 'education' or School 'standard' option

33265 33265_01 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

33584 33584_01 Broadlands School 50 / 100 Cisco 2901 36 100 50 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

33720 33720_01 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

33885 33885_01 Bath Community No solution provided N/A - CPE 0 Academy not required 34905 34905_01 St Gregory's Catholic 50 / 100 Cisco 2901 36 100 50 'education' or Comprehensive School (TTB) 'standard' option

35027 35027_01 Hayesfield School 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or Technology College (TTB) 'standard' option

36340 36340_01 St Mark's CE School 50 / 100 Cisco 2901 36 100 50 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

36574 36574_01 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

36627 36627_01 Oldfield 50 / 100 Cisco 2901 36 100 50 'education' or School (TTB) 'standard' option

37131 37131_01 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

37563 37563_01 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 28 of 35

Site ID Option ID Site Name Solution CPE Term Circuit Downstream Solution (months) Capacity Performance Design (Mbps) 38163 38163_01 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

38325 38325_01 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or Academy (TTB) 'standard' option

39004 39004_01 Downside School 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

39642 39642_01 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

51833 51833_01 Kingswood Preparatory No solution provided N/A - CPE 0 School not required 52570 52570_01 CHEW STOKE CHURCH EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 10 'education' or SCHOOL-A Primary 'standard' option Academy 76777 76777_01 Hospital Education and ADSL Max - 1314 TD-8817 + 36 8 4 No operational Reintegration Service Cisco 881 contention 435785 435785_01 Monkton Combe Pre-Prep No solution provided N/A - CPE 0 School not required 438305 438305_01 Lewis House 100 / 100 Cisco 2911 36 100 100 'education' or (TTB) 'standard' option

548439 548439_01 The Academy of Trinity EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 14 'education' or 'standard' option

548440 548440_01 St Nicholas C of E VC EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 15 'education' or Primary School 'standard' option

566322 566322_01 Playing for Success No solution provided N/A - CPE 0 not required Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 29 of 35

Site ID Option ID Site Name Solution CPE Term Circuit Downstream Solution (months) Capacity Performance Design (Mbps) 678695 678695_01 Threeways School EFM (4 Pair) Cisco 881 36 20 14 'education' or 'standard' option

680917 680917_01 Bath and North East ADSL2+ AM - 1314 TD-8817 + 36 20 7.5 No operational Council Cisco 881 contention 789960 789960_01 Parkside Children's Centre ADSL Max - 1314 TD-8817 + 36 8 7.5 No operational Cisco 881 contention 898135 898135_01 Weston Childrens Centre ADSL Max - 1314 TD-8817 + 36 8 7.5 No operational Cisco 881 contention 1813715 1813715_01 Sport Wellsway Centre No solution provided N/A - CPE 0 not required 1865221 1865221_01 School Sports Partnership No solution provided N/A - CPE 0 not required

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 30 of 35

7.5 Appendix E – Setup Charges Option ID Site Name Telecoms CPE Internet Service Total Transit 11046_01 St Andrew's C of E 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 Primary School 11351_01 Bishop Sutton Primary 1,950.00 490.74 0.00 1,270.00 3,710.74 School 11643_01 Bathford Primary 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 School 11693_01 Bathwick St Mary CE 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 Primary School 11699_01 Batheaston CE Primary 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 School 11774_01 Bathampton Primary 1,950.00 490.74 0.00 1,270.00 3,710.74 School 13721_01 Castle Primary School 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 14342_01 Clutton Primary School 1,200.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 2,794.56 14615_01 Combe Down Primary 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 School 14710_01 Chew Magna County 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 Primary School 14720_01 Chandag Infant School 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 14721_01 Chandag Junior School 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 14762_01 Cameley (VC) Primary 1,200.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 2,794.56 School 14824_01 Camerton CE Primary 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 School 16468_01 Oldfield Park Infant 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 16511_01 East Harptree Primary 170.00 1,532.50 0.00 1,019.50 2,722.00 School 17014_01 Fosse Way School 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 17016_01 St Martin's Garden 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 Primary School 17375_01 Freshford CE (VC) 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 Primary School 17542_01 Farmborough (VC) 190.00 1,532.50 0.00 1,019.50 2,742.00 Primary School 17623_01 Farrington Gurney CE 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 Primary School 20818_01 St Julian's CE Primary 1,950.00 490.74 0.00 1,270.00 3,710.74 School 20954_01 St John's Catholic 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 Primary School 20955_01 St John's CE Primary 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 20967_01 St John's CE (VC) 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 Primary School 21582_01 St Keyna Primary 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 School 22360_01 High Littleton Primary 190.00 1,532.50 0.00 1,019.50 2,742.00 School 22643_01 Longvernal Primary 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 23618_01 Midsomer Norton 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 Primary School 24391_01 St Mary's RC (VA) 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 31 of 35

Option ID Site Name Telecoms CPE Internet Service Total Transit Primary School 24393_01 St Mary's CE Primary 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 School 24394_01 St Mary's CE Primary 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 24719_01 Marksbury CE (VC) 250.00 1,532.50 0.00 1,019.50 2,802.00 Primary School 25076_01 Moorlands Infant 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 School 25079_01 Moorlands Juniors 1,950.00 490.74 0.00 1,270.00 3,710.74 School 25201_01 Newbridge Primary 1,950.00 490.74 0.00 1,270.00 3,710.74 School 26262_01 Peasedown St John 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 Primary School 26606_01 St Philip's CE Primary 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 School 26773_01 Paulton Infant School 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 26775_01 Paulton Junior School 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 26887_01 Pensford Primary 170.00 1,532.50 0.00 1,019.50 2,722.00 School 28525_01 St Saviour's Infant 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 28527_01 St Saviour's Junior 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 28671_01 Shoscombe CE Primary 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 28926_01 St Stephen's CE (VA) 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 Primary School 29155_01 South Down Infant 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 29157_01 South Down Junior 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 29174_01 Oldfield Park Junior 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 29377_01 Stanton Drew County 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 Primary School 29644_01 Saltford Primary School 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 29747_01 Swainswick CE Primary 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 School 30761_01 St Michael's Junior 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 30767_01 Twerton-on-Avon Infant 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 30961_01 Ubley Primary School 170.00 1,532.50 0.00 1,019.50 2,722.00 31291_01 Westfield County 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 Primary School 31491_01 Weston All Saints 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 Primary School 31736_01 Widcombe CE Junior 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 31739_01 Widcombe Infant 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 School 31758_01 Whitchurch Primary 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 School Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 32 of 35

Option ID Site Name Telecoms CPE Internet Service Total Transit 32249_01 Welton Primary School 0.00 324.56 0.00 404.50 729.06 32452_01 The Link School 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 33265_01 Beechen Cliff School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 33584_01 Broadlands School 0.00 814.29 0.00 1,270.00 2,084.29 33720_01 Chew Valley School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 33885_01 Bath Community 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Academy 34905_01 St Gregory's Catholic 0.00 814.29 0.00 1,270.00 2,084.29 Comprehensive School 35027_01 Hayesfield School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 Technology College 36340_01 St Mark's CE School 0.00 814.29 0.00 1,270.00 2,084.29 36574_01 Norton Hill School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 36627_01 0.00 814.29 0.00 1,270.00 2,084.29 37131_01 Ralph Allen School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 37563_01 Somervale School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 38163_01 Wellsway School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 38325_01 Writhlington School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 Academy 39004_01 Downside School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 39642_01 Kingswood School 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 51833_01 Kingswood Preparatory 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 School 52570_01 CHEW STOKE CHURCH 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 SCHOOL-A Primary Academy 76777_01 Hospital Education 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 and Reintegration Service 435785_01 Monkton Combe Pre- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Prep School 438305_01 Lewis House 0.00 1,057.75 0.00 1,270.00 2,327.75 548439_01 The Academy of Trinity 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 548440_01 St Nicholas C of E VC 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 Primary School 566322_01 Playing for Success 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 678695_01 Threeways School 1,650.00 324.56 0.00 1,270.00 3,244.56 680917_01 Bath and North East 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 Somerset Council 789960_01 Parkside Children's 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 Centre 898135_01 Weston Childrens 0.00 324.56 0.00 374.50 699.06 Centre 1813715_01 Sport Wellsway Centre 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1865221_01 School Sports 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Partnership Total 44,640.00 45,041.03 0.00 72,419.00 162,100.03

Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 33 of 35

7.6 Appendix F: Annual Recurring Charges Option ID Site Name Telecoms CPE Internet Service Total Transit 11046_01 St Andrew's C of E 1,800.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,606.63 Primary School 11351_01 Bishop Sutton Primary 10,709.34 70.80 506.50 1,877.53 13,164.17 School 11643_01 Bathford Primary School 1,800.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,606.63 11693_01 Bathwick St Mary CE 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 Primary School 11699_01 Batheaston CE Primary 1,800.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,606.63 School 11774_01 Bathampton Primary 4,129.13 70.80 506.50 1,877.53 6,583.96 School 13721_01 Castle Primary School 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 14342_01 Clutton Primary School 1,125.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,241.55 14615_01 Combe Down Primary 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 School 14710_01 Chew Magna County 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 Primary School 14720_01 Chandag Infant School 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 14721_01 Chandag Junior School 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 14762_01 Cameley (VC) Primary 1,125.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,241.55 School 14824_01 Camerton CE Primary 1,450.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,256.63 School 16468_01 Oldfield Park Infant 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 16511_01 East Harptree Primary 1,750.00 0.00 0.00 924.31 2,674.31 School 17014_01 Fosse Way School 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 17016_01 St Martin's Garden 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 Primary School 17375_01 Freshford CE (VC) 1,450.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,256.63 Primary School 17542_01 Farmborough (VC) 2,395.00 0.00 0.00 924.31 3,319.31 Primary School 17623_01 Farrington Gurney CE 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 Primary School 20818_01 St Julian's CE Primary 4,129.13 70.80 506.50 1,877.53 6,583.96 School 20954_01 St John's Catholic 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 Primary School 20955_01 St John's CE Primary 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 20967_01 St John's CE (VC) 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 Primary School 21582_01 St Keyna Primary School 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 22360_01 High Littleton Primary 2,395.00 0.00 0.00 924.31 3,319.31 School 22643_01 Longvernal Primary 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 23618_01 Midsomer Norton 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 Primary School 24391_01 St Mary's RC (VA) 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 Primary School 24393_01 St Mary's CE Primary 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 34 of 35

Option ID Site Name Telecoms CPE Internet Service Total Transit School 24394_01 St Mary's CE Primary 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 24719_01 Marksbury CE (VC) 2,295.00 0.00 0.00 924.31 3,219.31 Primary School 25076_01 Moorlands Infant 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 School 25079_01 Moorlands Juniors 4,129.13 70.80 506.50 1,877.53 6,583.96 School 25201_01 Newbridge Primary 4,433.00 70.80 988.25 1,877.53 7,369.58 School 26262_01 Peasedown St John 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 Primary School 26606_01 St Philip's CE Primary 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 School 26773_01 Paulton Infant School 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 26775_01 Paulton Junior School 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 26887_01 Pensford Primary School 1,750.00 0.00 0.00 924.31 2,674.31 28525_01 St Saviour's Infant 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 28527_01 St Saviour's Junior 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 28671_01 Shoscombe CE Primary 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 28926_01 St Stephen's CE (VA) 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 Primary School 29155_01 South Down Infant 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 29157_01 South Down Junior 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 29174_01 Oldfield Park Junior 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 29377_01 Stanton Drew County 1,450.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,256.63 Primary School 29644_01 Saltford Primary School 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 29747_01 Swainswick CE Primary 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 School 30761_01 St Michael's Junior 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 30767_01 Twerton-on-Avon Infant 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 30961_01 Ubley Primary School 1,750.00 0.00 0.00 924.31 2,674.31 31291_01 Westfield County 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 Primary School 31491_01 Weston All Saints 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 Primary School 31736_01 Widcombe CE Junior 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 31739_01 Widcombe Infant 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 School 31758_01 Whitchurch Primary 1,800.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,606.63 School 32249_01 Welton Primary School 2,175.20 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,981.83 32452_01 The Link School 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 33265_01 Beechen Cliff School 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 33584_01 Broadlands School 5,344.63 116.24 2,162.70 1,877.53 9,501.10 Version1.0 SWGfL Trust – Strategic Plan – Stage 3 Page 35 of 35

Option ID Site Name Telecoms CPE Internet Service Total Transit 33720_01 Chew Valley School 10,434.34 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 14,830.94 33885_01 Bath Community 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Academy 34905_01 St Gregory's Catholic 5,344.63 116.24 2,162.70 1,877.53 9,501.10 Comprehensive School 35027_01 Hayesfield School 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 Technology College 36340_01 St Mark's CE School 5,344.63 116.24 2,162.70 1,877.53 9,501.10 36574_01 Norton Hill School 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 36627_01 Oldfield School 5,344.63 116.24 2,162.70 1,877.53 9,501.10 37131_01 Ralph Allen School 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 37563_01 Somervale School 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 38163_01 Wellsway School 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 38325_01 Writhlington School 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 Academy 39004_01 Downside School 9,457.48 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 13,854.07 39642_01 Kingswood School 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 51833_01 Kingswood Preparatory 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 School 52570_01 CHEW STOKE CHURCH 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 SCHOOL-A Primary Academy 76777_01 Hospital Education and 900.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 1,706.63 Reintegration Service 435785_01 Monkton Combe Pre- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Prep School 438305_01 Lewis House 5,362.50 154.20 2,364.86 1,877.53 9,759.09 548439_01 The Academy of Trinity 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 548440_01 St Nicholas C of E VC 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 Primary School 566322_01 Playing for Success 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 678695_01 Threeways School 1,800.00 32.52 506.50 1,577.53 3,916.55 680917_01 Bath and North East 1,800.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 2,606.63 Somerset Council 789960_01 Parkside Children's 900.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 1,706.63 Centre 898135_01 Weston Childrens 900.00 32.52 0.00 774.11 1,706.63 Centre 1813715_01 Sport Wellsway Centre 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1865221_01 School Sports 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Partnership Total 236,277.54 4,368.80 48,315.04 104,092.55 393,053.93