Content

11.1

The Service Manger
introduced the report which outlined to the committee the
School-to-Pool Transport Contract and
how it forms a critical part of the Sheffield School Swim Service,
which delivers statutory curriculum swimming lessons for
primary-aged pupils across the city. The Committee were being asked
to approve the re-procurement.

 

 

11.2

RESOLVED
UNANIMOUSLY: That Education, Children and Families Policy
Committee:-
 
a)   
Approved the re-procurement of the School-to-Pool Transport Services Framework, which
provides safe and reliable transport for pupils across Sheffield to
access statutory swimming lessons during the school
day.

 

 

11.3

Reasons for
Decision

 

 

11.3.1

We are recommending that the council procures a
new school[1]to-pool
framework contract for a period of four years.

 

 

11.3.2

Why this is the preferred
option?
 
·      
The market for the contract is limited so it is hoped that a
four-year term could attract multiple external suppliers.
Increasing resilience and therefore reducing missed
lessons.
·      
It will provide the service with opportunities to run multiple
competitions throughout the life of the contract i.e., if the
service uses a new pool, the timetable
changes.
·      
It will provide the service with the right to withdraw from the
contract i.e., no longer require transport for a certain
pool.
·      
The price for transport would be cheaper per run than a school
sourcing their own private hire, meaning schools can prioritise
buying swimming to meet the needs of their
pupils.

 

 

11.3.3

Intended outcomes

·      
Attract several external suppliers to work in partnership with over
the next four years.
·      
Provide a competitive price for the school-to-pool
transport.
·      
Awareness of the school-to-pool transport costs for the next four
years.
 

 

 

11.4

Alternatives
Considered and Rejected

 

 

11.4.1

Alternative Option 1: A
consultation process took place with the council’s transport
services to investigate whether school-to-pool transport could be
delivered in house. This was rejected due to the following: The
need for high passenger capacity coaches (48 seats). Coaches would
be required during their peak times which they are unable to
accommodate.

 

 

11.4.2

Alternative Option 2:
Schools could source their own transport as private hire. However,
this would be at a higher cost per run and therefore have direct
impact on attainment, as schools would purchase less swimming
meaning children would not learn the vital skills needed to get out
of water in the event of an accident.