Skip to main contentSkip to navigationSkip to navigation
Jane Robinson, head of the  Simon Langton Girls' Grammar School in Kent
Jane Robinson, head of the Simon Langton Girls' Grammar School in Kent, has had concrete falling off walls and no electricity in parts of the school. Photograph: Frantzesco Kangaris for The Guardian
Jane Robinson, head of the Simon Langton Girls' Grammar School in Kent, has had concrete falling off walls and no electricity in parts of the school. Photograph: Frantzesco Kangaris for The Guardian

A third of headteachers say school buildings not fit for purpose

This article is more than 9 years old
Leaking roofs, rising damp … four years after Building Schools for the Future was scrapped, this is the reality for 35% of school leaders surveyed

One of the swiftest and most dramatic acts after the last election was the axing of the Building Schools for the Future programme. The building plans of more than 700 schools, which were being developed as part of a £55bn project to rebuild or refurbish every secondary school in the country, were scrapped with immediate effect causing distress and anger to many heads, teachers, parent and pupils.

Five years on, the issue of school capital funding may have faded from public view, but a new survey of more than 1,000 heads suggests that lack of investment remains a pressing priority for hundreds of primary and secondary schools. A poll by the Key, an independent organisation that provides advice and support to school leaders and governors, found that more than a third of heads felt their schools weren’t fit for purpose.

Almost six in 10 would like to improve or repair their buildings, and nearly half wanted to build extra classrooms. The research reveals the need is most acute in the south and south-west, where more than two-fifths of school leaders say their buildings are not good enough.

Jane Robinson, headteacher of the Simon Langton girls’ grammar school in Canterbury, Kent, is one of those heads. She believes that stark inequalities in the learning environments of different schools are emerging, often masked by the fact that schools like hers get good results and are popular in the local community. “We are in a 1950s building, parts of which have no electricity due to ingress of water. The problems with our concrete were so bad that I had to threaten to close the school because of a risk that some might fall on staff and pupils.

“That problem has been temporarily rectified by the local authority paying for a concrete specialist company to simply knock off the crumbling concrete and painting the exposed metal underneath.”

The windows are another problem. “We have old steel framed windows that are impossible to double glaze, leading to an unnecessary loss of heat, and they either have to be hammered open or shut. There are also serious mechanical and electricity problems – at one stage if you turned on a kettle in student services, it meant turning off the fridge.

“We had to fit a new boiler because the girls were doing lessons in hats and coats, but that has caused major leaks in our ancient pipework, which is encapsulated in asbestos. This has meant that, on two occasions recently, we have had to shut off parts of the building so that leaks can be mended safely, which led to girls’ education being disrupted.”

Robinson’s concerns are shared by others in the Key survey. Limited classroom space, overuse of temporary buildings and issues such as rising damp and leaking roofs were repeatedly mentioned, as well as a lack of other vital facilities such as pupil intervention rooms and meeting spaces.

Yet there is no obvious hope in sight for schools, beyond those in the most critical condition. The coalition government’s replacement for Building Schools for the Future, the Priority School Building Programme, has so far pledged two waves of capital investment totalling £4.4bn, but only for schools in the worst physical condition.

Rebuilding and renovating the 260 schools in the first wave is now under way, with 16 new PSBP schools open. The first, Whitmore Park primary school in Coventry, opened only in May last year, almost four years after the last election. According to the DfE the current school building projects are costing 35% less than those built under BSF.

A DfE spokesperson said: “Investing in the Priority School Building Programme is not only delivering great new schools that will help prepare thousands of young people for life in modern Britain, but it is also a key part of our long-term economic plan to secure a stronger economy, creating jobs and security for hardworking people.

“We are also making sure each school is built efficiently to get value for money for the taxpayer, while delivering excellent schools for pupils and teachers.”

As we approach the next general election, hundreds more schools, including Robinson’s, are waiting to hear if they will get into the second PSBP wave, announced in May. Robinson believes there will be something “seriously wrong with the system” if her school isn’t eligible this time round.

“We do try and renovate and make the physical environment better but schools no longer get any capital grants for adequate maintenance of buildings. You do also reach a point where you wonder if you are throwing good money after bad,” she says.

“We estimate we probably need around £4.5m spending on the school and we have to bid for that from the Department for Education.

“The parents and pupils are extremely understanding of the situation and in every other respect the school is doing very well. Being in a partnership with a local academy, which has a brand new building, does however cause many of our students to ask why they can’t have the same facilities. ”

The Key survey suggests that central government funding may be only scratching the surface of a much deeper problem. Only one in 10 of the schools surveyed was expecting to get funding from central government. The majority were resigned to finding the resources from within school budgets or from their local authorities.

Yet the axing of BSF was accompanied by an 80% reduction to the money that previously went straight to schools for small-scale repair and renovation works (schools devolved capital funding). Drastic cuts to local government capital funding have only compounded the problem.

A survey by the Local Government Association in 2010 suggested that around £15bn was needed for critical condition repairs, with a further £15bn for less essential work such as ensuring schools have suitable facilities to deliver the curriculum.

But the issue of ensuring “suitability”, which is not included in the criteria to judge eligibility for the PSBP, means some schools have to take difficult decisions. Gary Martin, head of Highfield Hall primary school in Derbyshire, says he is now has to use his staffing budget to fund vital capital projects, in effect choosing between teachers and spending on facilities needed for the curriculum.

“The needs of the primary computing curriculum mean children are being taught in classes of more than 30 so that the necessary wiring and equipment can be installed,” he says.

“If we were given the money we used to get to fund these capital projects we wouldn’t have to raid the revenue budget and we could have extra teachers and teaching assistants.

“We are constantly being told how our schools underperform and need to improve but I believe we have now got much better teachers; it is the buildings that aren’t keeping up and we are not given the resources we need to do the job properly.”

The urgent need for new school places in some areas and the costs of creating new kitchens to handle universal free school meals has only exacerbated the capital funding crisis, according to David Simmonds, Conservative chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people’s board.

“Some schools were lucky. They got the investment they needed and are up to scratch. But so much money has been poured into creating new places that a large number have just been left behind,” he says.

Simmonds believes there should be radical change to the way money is distributed. “There isn’t just a lack of funding, the funding is disjointed with lots of different streams going to different place for things like academy conversions, kitchens, as well as to the PSBP.

“We would like to see the money brought together into a single capital pot held by the local authority into which schools could bid. It is impossible to manage these sorts of capital projects across the whole country from Whitehall. We should also look at councils being able to borrow to invest in their buildings.

“What we mustn’t do is to get into a situation where schools have to close because things are so bad.”

More on this story

More on this story

  • Heat or teach? Headteachers’ warning of stark choices facing schools

  • DfE waters down plans to tackle teacher workload

  • What does data tell us about how to tackle heavy teacher workloads?

  • The future of teaching is about the relevance of issues, not just facts

  • Conservatives to cut school funding by 10% if they win general election

  • Isolation, stress and tears … the truth about being a headteacher

  • Headteachers believe pupils are ‘let down’ on mental health

Comments (…)

Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion

Most viewed

Most viewed