In the last year, we’ve heard many ministers talking about levelling up the UK. Stamping out geographical inequality and ensuring everyone, no matter where they’re from, has an equal chance to success and attainment has been a key message from Government whether that’s in health, the workplace or education.
Education inequality in particular is high. This year’s GCSE results show that a third of students in London achieved a Grade 7 or above – equivalent to the former A and A* grades – compared to just 22.4% in the North East of England. Although the Government has pledged to address the inequality – for example, a new schools funding formula in England ends the previous postcode lottery and an extra £4bn will be given to schools in England next year, rising to £4.7bn in 2024-2025 – much more needs to be done.
The procurement problem
The problem lies in local authority procurement for education services. They require a huge shake up to enable a level playing field for opportunities in education. Currently, the process is extremely laborious for education providers and means the right schools, good schools, and provision for young people can be ruled out by the points-based system. Cost makes up 33% of the overall scoring on some tenders and local authorities have to choose the most inexpensive option due to ever decreasing budgets. However, to run a school well it costs money, and a lot of it. Identifying the right schools for our pupils’ individual needs should not come down to the best price. There’s only one group that pays the price and that’s the pupils.
The issue with this type of procurement is especially apparent when we look at provision for those with special education needs. The procurement process for SEN children simply doesn’t work. The method forces independent schools to meet a certain standard that allows them to be on SEN frameworks and open their doors to young people with additional needs. Between local authorities there are a variety of ways in which pupils then find themselves at a school. Some local authority systems do work in favour of children as they should do. However, others negatively impact their education and threaten the overall standards of delivery across the whole authority.
David vs. Goliath
Within the existing system, it’s often those with the biggest resources, biggest budgets and best bid writers who repeatedly win SEN provision, even if this means they’re beating better suited schools. For example, across Greater Manchester’s various frameworks, there are national companies who have never been to the region and are occupying a space on a framework that could have been allocated to a local provider who knows the area, its communities and their people. Recently, during the process of recruiting providers for SEN tuition in one of the local boroughs I work within, there were three ‘winners’ in the process. Of the three, only one had a local presence – the other two were out of area national companies with head offices in the south of the country. One of the three scoring criteria was pricing and value for money, which through economies of scale the big players will win, time and time again.
Decisions are made on the wrong factors and the right criteria – specialist education knowledge and experience – is ignored which means we are at risk of losing sight of what is important: our young people’s needs.
System overhaul
Many changes can be made to the way procurement and quality assurance by local authorities is used. Pricing should not be a factor. If a school’s finance team knows how much it costs to run their provision well and get the pupil outcomes all stakeholders wish for, they shouldn’t be beaten down on price.
Identification of schools and provision should require procurement teams to meet with those who are bidding. Currently, an experienced bid writer with no experience in education could effectively write their way onto a framework.
Let’s reevaluate the process: one application or a standardised application regionally – or even nationally – which could be used by local authorities, would minimise the time and resource drain on schools and providers. Each authority has its own budgets and local needs for education, but one submission for Greater Manchester Combined Authorities, for example, would be welcomed by many.
What we need is to develop a procurement process that is designed for education and isn’t a one size fits all invitation to tender. Experienced leaders in education should always be involved in the decisions around procurement of where pupils go and where possible using conversation with all agencies working around a child. That’s how we level up. That’s how we ensure every child, especially those with SEN, get the equal opportunities they deserve.
James Lowe is a former head teacher and the director of Grolife
