Transparency data

School rebuilding programme: methodology for prioritising schools in 2022 (for the third and fourth set of schools totalling 300)

Updated 8 February 2024

Applies to England

Introduction

The government consulted the school sector on the approach to prioritising schools for the future places in the programme between July and October 2021 and published its response in February 2022. The approach adopted for prioritising schools in 2022 was based on the feedback received in the consultation and required nominations for schools from their responsible bodies (typically local authorities, academy trusts and voluntary aided bodies), from which schools would be prioritised.

Nomination process

We launched the nomination process in February 2022, issuing detailed guidance on the types of issues that would be prioritised for the programme. Nominations were required to identify specific blocks[1] at each school for consideration. Schools could be nominated in one of two categories:

• Block nominations
  • Responsible bodies could nominate blocks for assessment by the department using data from the first condition data collection (CDC1)
  • Block nominations had to include 1,200m² or more gross internal floor area (GIFA), which could comprise of several blocks within a school, or one single block meeting or exceeding the total. Where a schools’ total GIFA was lower than 1,200m² , we would accept nominations with all buildings at the school included
• Exceptional cases
  • Responsible bodies could submit an exceptional case, with accompanying professional evidence, where blocks had issues that: presented a risk of imminent closure; were not identified in CDC data; and could only be resolved through a rebuild
  • Responsible bodies were asked to categorise the issues for each block into one of more of three categories: structural, asbestos and other (including, for example, flood risk)
  • There was no minimum GIFA requirement for the submission of exceptional cases, to ensure we could capture and assess all exceptional need that could mean the safe operation of a school was at risk. However, the guidance was clear that we aimed to select sizeable projects to ensure the best investment for the limited number of places in the programme

Nominations closed at the end of March 2022. We received nominations for 1,105 schools, with 2,888 blocks at those schools submitted for assessment. 8 of the nominations were withdrawn during the process, so assessments were completed for 1,097 nominations.

The assessment of the blocks at each school was used to identify schools for the programme.

Methodology for prioritising the third set of schools

We prioritised and announced a group of 61 schools in July 2022 (the third set of projects in the programme) to maintain the pace of delivery and continue to address some of the poorest condition buildings as soon as possible.

Existing CDC1 data was used to assess rebuilding need in the buildings nominated at each school. The CDC1 data-based methodology is outlined in the section on block nominations and is also consistent with the approach used to prioritise the second set of schools. The methodology was applied to all nominations received, including exceptional cases. The condition of buildings was then verified through site visits by independent technical advisers before schools were prioritised for the programme.

2 of the 61 schools were included because we became aware of severe and urgent need for rebuilding due to an imminent risk to pupils and staff. The department reserves the flexibility to include such schools in the programme outside of the selection process.

The 61 schools announced were removed from the assessment process, alongside the 8 withdrawn schools, ahead of assessing nominations for the fourth set of schools.

Methodology for prioritising the fourth set of schools

From the remaining 1,036 nominations, schools were included in the fourth set of projects prioritised for the programme that have buildings which (in order of priority):

• have exceptional issues or risks that mean they are already closed or likely will need to close and this can only be resolved through a rebuild (exceptional need cases)
• are in the poorest condition, identified in data collected by the department in CDC1 (condition need cases).

2 schools were also included in the fourth set of schools because we became aware of severe and urgent need for rebuilding, due to an imminent risk to pupils and staff.

Exceptional cases

Schools were prioritised where all the following criteria apply:

• issues were verified to be so severe as to risk closure or pose a significant risk to pupils and staff (or a block is already closed)
• issues were of a type not captured by CDC1 (structural issues, issues relating to asbestos, and other severe issues for example significant flood risk)
• issues can only be resolved through a rebuild
• issues affect at least 300m² GIFA

The methodology for prioritisation consisted of the following steps.

1. Nominations from responsible bodies for exceptional cases

Responsible bodies were expected to submit professional evidence from within the last 3 years demonstrating severity of need in line with the criteria above. There was no minimum GIFA requirement for submitting an exceptional case.

623 schools were nominated by responsible bodies as exceptional cases, of which 40 were prioritised for round 3 (assessed using CDC1 data) and the remaining 583 were included in this assessment process.

2. Technical assessment of exceptional need for nominated blocks

Independent technical advisers first assessed the nature of need and suitability of evidence of nominated blocks, using an assessment framework for consistency. General condition need in building elements which are assessed in CDC were not considered as exceptional need. Where there was no evidence of exceptional need in any blocks at a school, assessment ended for those schools and they progressed to step 3.

Where the evidence provided in the nomination did indicate exceptional rebuilding need in one or more categories, for any blocks at a school, a further assessment took place. This further assessment included site visits from independent technical advisers to verify the need.

3. Moderation of independent technical advisers’ assessment of severe rebuilding need

DfE reviewed and moderated all assessments made in step 2 against the same assessment framework, to ensure consistency in assessment.

4. Applying the minimum size threshold

To select sizeable projects that meet the definition of rebuilding need and ensure the best investment for the limited number of places in the programme, we set an expectation that exceptional need would cumulatively cover a minimum of 300m² of GIFA at a school, across one or more blocks.

We also considered schools with a total site GIFA smaller than 300m² if they had verified need across all of their blocks, but this did not apply to any schools.

208 schools met these criteria and were prioritised for the programme due to exceptional need.

5. Assessment of un-selected exceptional cases for general rebuilding need

Where schools nominated through the exceptional route did not meet the criteria above, they were not considered to have exceptional need.

However, due to the possibility that these schools could have significant rebuilding need outside of the exceptional categories, eligible nominations were subsequently assessed based on CDC1 data, using the methodology as set out below for block nominations.

To be eligible for this next stage, nominations had to include blocks totalling 1,200m² GIFA or greater, as recorded in CDC1 data and excluding auxiliary blocks. If a school was smaller than 1,200m² in total, according to CDC1 data, then the entire GIFA of the school had to be nominated.

Block nominations

Schools were prioritised based on having nominated buildings with the most highly concentrated and greatest condition need, as identified in data collected by the department in CDC1. Schools were prioritised from schools nominated through the block nomination process and from those which were not selected via the exceptional case process (as long as they met the condition need process eligibility criteria set out in the section above).

The CDC dataset brings together condition data covering almost all schools in the English school estate[2]. The data was collected between 2017 and 2019, with schools having the opportunity to review their information before the data was finalised. A full explanation of how CDC data was collected is available at Condition Data Collection programme: information and guidance.

The methodology for prioritisation consists of the following steps.

1. Calculation of condition need per metre squared for nominated blocks

Condition need in each nominated block was calculated using the sum of the condition need in C-, Cx- and D-graded external walls and roofs, and D-graded mechanical equipment and electrical equipment, as identified in CDC data. These building elements were used to give the most representative view of whether a block has a need for rebuilding. C ratings mean that components are ‘exhibiting major defects and/or not operating as intended’. Cx ratings mean that components are in C condition, but are now obsolete, therefore in order to resolve the need the component will need full replacement. D ratings mean components are ‘life expired and/or have serious risk of imminent failure’.

The calculated need was divided by the gross internal floor area (GIFA) to produce a value for the condition need per metre squared, for each block. More information on calculating condition need per metre squared can be found in the Condition of School Buildings Survey: key findings document.

This step was completed for every block of every nominated school (though both the block nomination and supplementary nomination route), as long as: the total area for nominated blocks was above 1,200m²; or, for schools smaller than 1,200m², all blocks were nominated.

2. Calculation of condition need per metre squared for the highest-need area of each school

For sites that met the total area for nominated blocks outlined in the preceding paragraph, nominated blocks were ordered from highest need per metre squared, to lowest. Blocks were then added in order of need until their combined GIFA met a minimum threshold of 1,200m² (or until all blocks on a site were included).

We grouped blocks in this way to create a minimum project size and avoid prioritising very small projects less suited to a centrally delivered rebuilding programme, while allowing sites with a collection of small blocks to be considered as one project. The total need in the blocks was divided by the total GIFA of the blocks, to give the condition need per metre squared for the collection of the highest-need blocks on each site.

When adding the final block, if only a portion of a block was needed to meet the threshold, we counted only that portion of the block. On some sites, a single block (or portion of a single block) was included in the calculation while on other sites several blocks were included, depending on the size of blocks that had the highest level of need on each site.

3. Verification of current condition need and prioritisation of nominated schools

Having completed steps 1 and 2, nominated schools showing the greatest need were investigated in detail to verify the condition need on each site, before taking decisions to prioritise schools for the programme. This included reviewing the information submitted by responsible bodies during the nomination process and independent technical advisers visiting school sites to verify the condition need of nominated blocks.

31 schools were prioritised due to having the highest assessed condition need from the eligible nominations.

Schools that were not prioritised for this round

Schools were not prioritised from either nomination category if any of the following were true:

• the need identified had been sufficiently resolved since the nomination that a school no longer met the criteria set out
• there were planned works to resolve the need sufficiently that a school would no longer meet the criteria set out
• following review, the need identified did not require a rebuilding, significant refurbishment or relocation project to resolve it
• following review of the nominated schools, the school was not one of the 239 projects with the greatest need
• the school had been confirmed for closure (although this did not apply to any nominated schools)

DfE reserves the right not to take forward any of the 239 provisionally successful projects if, on further assessment, they no longer meet the criteria for the programme. This would include schools at which the condition need in buildings is not as severe or widespread as was initially assessed, or where there is little or no long-term need for pupil places.

Regardless of the outcome of the School Rebuilding Programme selection process, responsible bodies continue to have a responsibility for the safety and maintenance of the buildings in their care. The department expects responsible bodies to manage their school estate strategically and maintain their estate in a safe working condition, including compliance with statutory duties to ensure the health and safety of building occupants.

The department has allocated £13.1 billion in condition funding since 2015 for improving the condition of schools across England, including £1.8 billion in 2022-23. Eligible responsible bodies either receive School Condition Allocations (SCA) to invest in improving the condition of their schools or are eligible to apply for support through the Condition Improvement Fund (CIF) / Urgent Capital Support (UCS). In addition, Devolved Formula Capital is also allocated to all eligible institutions to spend on capital projects that meet their own priorities. We encourage responsible bodies to use condition funding to address any need that is not being addressed through SRP.

Types of schools included in the methodology

School types in scope of the school rebuilding programme are:

• maintained schools, including maintained nursery schools
• foundation schools
• voluntary-aided schools
• voluntary-controlled schools
• academies (including 16-19, free schools, studio schools and university technical colleges)
• maintained and non-maintained special schools
• sixth-form colleges
• alternative provision (including pupil referral units)
• city technology colleges

---

[1] The nomination of blocks were based on Condition Data Collection (CDC1) blocks. The CDC dataset holds data by block. One building can consist of more than one block. For example, if a building was extended after originally being built, those separate parts will be categorised as separate blocks, because age, type and condition could differ.

[2] There are 22,031 schools in the CDC dataset. This is the total number of publicly funded schools and sixth-form colleges in England as of September 2019, with the exception of 46 schools not included due to having ongoing major building works at the time of the CDC visits. Any schools that have opened since September 2019 are also not included in the CDC dataset.