In most schools the above might apply to cleaning and catering, breakfast clubs and ASC
Outsourcing can seem like the ideal for a very busy school with busy business/office managers who would rather not spend their time recruiting, training/induction and managing a team.
Insourcing can give the school more of a sense of control with regards management and costs.
But what is the most cost effective and what will give you value for money?
You should sit with your Head and/or SLT to discuss the following:
- what do you want to achieve from the service?
- what standards are you expecting from the service?
It is probably best to start with a simple 'pros and cons' list for each of the two options.
Pros and cons for insourcing your cleaning provision
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Greater control over the work being done | Managing the contract as additional work |
| Enables you to choose the individuals who work at your school | Recruitment processes, costs and time |
| TUPE regulations apply if moving from a contractor to in-house | Staff absence |
| Salary costs are usually cheaper than a contract cost | Cost of covering absence, be that additional insurance cover or overtime payments to staff to cover |
Pros and cons for outsourcing your cleaning provision
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Contract managed externally | Less control over the delivery of the contract |
| Staff absence should be covered by the contractor | Contract cost and fixing to a set term |
| Equipment purchased by contractor |
The above is not an exhaustive list but gives you an indication of sort of areas you should be looking at.
Applying the same technique to any service you are considering should give you a clear picture of which avenue to want to pursue.
One thing to always remember is that value for money should be your first consideration and that this doesn’t necessarily mean that the cheaper of the two options is best value. You need to consider the impact on the school, staff and pupils as well as costs. The more expensive option might have better outcomes than the cheaper one.
Jackie Keegan
