Federation and Shared Services Development


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Federation and Shared Services Development

  1. 1. City College NorwichFederation & Shared Services DevelopmentSupported by AoC
  2. 2. 1. Introduction – How the project came aboutBackgroundAs far back as 2008 City College Norwich established a subcommittee of its Governing Body - thePartnership and Federations Committee, whose brief was to develop a strategy in response to a numberof changes in the education sphere but, in particular, to the introduction of Academies by the thenLabour Government.At that time City College Norwich had over 1,000 14-16 year olds from local schools studying one or twodays per week, over 4,000 full-time 16-18 year olds, and had taken the lead within a local partnership offive schools, Open Opportunity, in the development of collaborative bids to deliver the new diplomas.The bids were very successful, and the College and Open Opportunity developed into one of thecountry’s largest deliverers of the new diplomas.Secondary education in Norfolk overall had GCSE scores well below the national average and some ofits schools were in the bottom 10% nationally. Earlham High School for example was the fourth worstperforming school in the country, with a 5 A*-C score of 6%. As a failing school, Earlham was in a primeposition to be converted to an Academy under the rules as they then stood, supported by a number ofsponsors including a lead sponsor. The College took the lead in the development to convert Earlhaminto an Academy and became the lead sponsor – City Academy Norwich opened its doors in 2009 as anindependent Academy.As the Academy movement flourished, first under the Labour Government and then accelerated underthe Coalition Government, it quickly became clear that Colleges had to have a response in order toprotect the integrity of their vocational provision, to continue to improve outcomes for students and toremain competitive in the market for 16-18 year olds. City College Norwich’s response was to look intothe possibility of creating a federation comprising secondary schools, FE Colleges, primary schools, andpossibly private training providers and a University Technical College, (UTC), should the College besuccessful in bidding for one. A fundamental component of the federation was to be a shared servicescompany which would deliver all of the non-teaching related activities for all organisations within thefederation. This was in order to remove from the Academics the “heavy lifting” associated with thedelivery of services allowing them to focus on improving students’ education at all levels, giving more ofthem the opportunity to progress to Higher Education (HE) and employment.The College was then successful in obtaining funds from the Efficiency Innovation Fund (EIF), managedby the Association of Colleges (AoC) to carry out a feasibility study, the results of which led to thesuccessful bid for more substantial funding to create the federation with a shared services company at itsheart (see appendix 1).(www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment) City College Norwich 2
  3. 3. 2. The PlanThe feasibility study or business case (see link appendices 2, 3 and 4) (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment) clearly indicated that services could be delivered muchmore effectively and efficiently via a single company, bringing together College and school staff, thanhad previously been the case under the auspices of the local authority. This meant that a better servicecould be provided at less cost and that any savings made could be ploughed back into educationaldelivery in order to help improve student performance. This would be achieved via a rationalisation ofservices and staff over time with better procurement being key to any early savings.The implementation plan in the business case contains more detail on the original intentions and needsto be read in conjunction with this document. The key implications of the proposal are given below.2.1 Original Proposal To create a legally compliant federation comprising: • City College Norwich (CCN) (an existing statutory corporation) itself potentially comprising CCN Higher Education Centre (HE) (a proposed limited subsidiary company) CCN Vocational/Technical Institute (FE) (a proposed limited subsidiary company) CCN Sixth Form College (A Levels) (a proposed limited subsidiary company) • City Academy Norwich (CAN) (an existing limited company) • ayland Community High School (at the time local authority controlled but with Academy W status pending; proposed limited company from September 2011) • Norfolk University Technical College (UTC) (UTC application pending approval; proposed limited company from September 2011) • manufacturing and electrical training provider - an existing limited company A • Shared Services Company (proposed limited company) The two key elements of the plan were the creation of (1) the federation, and (2) the shared services company, and each had different emphases.2.2 Creating the FederationThe creation of the federation was seen essentially as a legal process taking up to a year and involvingthe establishment of each of the above entities as separate companies, except for City Academy Norwichwhich was already an independent company. The College was also an independent company but theproposal was to split it into three organisations (see appendix 5).(www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment) City College Norwich 3
  4. 4. 2.3 Creating the Shared Services CompanyThe creation of the shared services company would require not only a change in legal status for manyindividuals but also their actual movement from one organisation to another via TUPE transfer. It wasenvisaged to be a more sensitive matter, particularly as new academy staff would first have to be TUPEdinto the Academy from the local authority. The plan therefore was not to TUPE these staff twice in closesuccession. Please refer to section 5.3. Creating the Federation(for a more detailed breakdown of this section please see appendix 6)(www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment)Original Vision for the FederationAs the College was driving the process, it was initially envisaged that the College would be the leadorganisation, establishing a new body for governance of the federation in addition to having its owncorporation board. Over time this approach proved unpopular as it tended to be seen as a College take-over, rather than the creation of a group of equal partners in the development of the education of Norfolkpeople (see appendix 7). (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment)Structure of a Parent CompanyThis eventually led to the creation of a parent company called Transforming Education in Norfolk (TEN)but not before many months had been spent by the College’s lawyers negotiating with two Governmentdepartments (the Department for Education (DfE) and the Department for Business, Innovation andSkills (BIS)) on modifications to the Instruments and Articles of Governance, not all of which waswasted. At this point, however, the College still required the signature of two Secretaries of State toapprove any changes. Progress was slow.Then in December 2011 the Government’s newly proposed freedoms and flexibilities became lawand the requirement to get the Secretary of States’ approval was removed. Things began to moveforward slightly more quickly. The problem now was that no precedents existed for newly constitutedInstruments and Articles so the departments weren’t entirely sure exactly what they should contain, butdepartmental approval was still required.The departments were clear that consultation should take place between the College and itscommunities to confirm support for its proposals (see appendix 8) (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment). When the College asked for guidance in relation to whichparticular communities it should consult with, the departments said that it was up to the College todecide – but that they would be sure to inform us if they thought our choice inappropriate.The CollegeAround this time, following advice from KPMG, it was decided not to split the College into threeseparate entities as it would create a plethora of complications in terms of dealing with VAT (seeappendix 9) (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment) . However,the College continued with its plans to create a separate HE Centre at a new location, for delivery to its1,500 HE students, as this was thought still to be an appropriate response to the Government’s proposalsrelating to fees, loans and (HEFCE) funding. City College Norwich 4
  5. 5. The Academies – Wayland Academy came into being on 1 March 2012Sponsored by City College Norwich in full knowledge that the federation was being established, whichits head and governors viewed as an added incentive. It became the first member of Norfolk AcademiesTrust and all future Academies joining the federation will sit within this Trust. The Trust was established,along the lines of many Academy trusts, immediately prior to Wayland becoming an Academy.The UTCApplication had been successful (May 2012) and negotiations began with the Baker Dearing Trust inrelation to the opening date – eventually September 2014 was agreed upon. City Academy Norwich wasin its third year of operation as an Academy and could not sit within Norfolk Academies Trust as it wasset up under different regulations with a number of sponsors.The Parent GroupTransforming Education in Norfolk – the parent group, TEN, was established during the summer termof 2012 and naturally it was anticipated that it would be the owner of the shared services company.However this turned out to not be possible due to the regulations of the Local Government PensionScheme (LGPS). Of itself, TEN has no direct income and no reserves, and is therefore not in a position tounderwrite the pensions of all those staff to be transferred into the shared services company.Local Government Pension Scheme – impact on the parent groupThere are two ways in which a company can become a member of the LGPS, either as an admitted bodyor as a wholly owned company. To be an admitted body the shared services company would need tobe able to underwrite the pensions of its staff and, like TEN, it has no direct income and no reserves, sothis was not possible. The only alternative was to be wholly owned by a company with the resources tounderwrite LGPS pensions and the only organisation within TEN that could do that was the College.After some to-ing and fro-ing it was finally agreed that a controlling shareholding of 51% would beowned by the College and 49% by TEN. Staff pensions were now safe (see appendix 10) (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment).4. Creating the Shared Services CompanyThe key consideration when establishing a new company, apart from its name, is what sort of companydoes it need to be? The shared services company has been given the name Norfolk Educational ServicesLtd (NES) as it was envisaged that, at some point, substantial services would be sold outside thefederation so it would have a wider target market within Norfolk.The question of what type of company it should be was much more complex and the key issues were:• Mutualisation – staff involvement/ownership• Community Interest Company v Limited Company• TeckalMutualisation – the College recruited the Baxi Partnership to set out various ways of involving staff inthe ownership of the company and getting staff buy-in, most of which had their attractions. Althoughthis route was not in the end selected, for reasons given below, this is still an option going forward ifcircumstances were to change. In the end staff buy-in has not been a problem within ex- College staff City College Norwich 5
  6. 6. but there has been some resistance from ex-Academy staff who tend to see the whole process as a take-over, something which we’ve been keen to counter (see appendix 11) (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment).CIC / Ltd Co. – the main reason for opting for limited company status was flexibility althoughdiscussions were lengthy. The main function of NES is to deliver better services more cheaply andmake savings or profit - whatever it’s called; the important thing is what can be done with it. A privatelimited company can invest it and/or pay dividends to shareholders in proportions that it decides. At itssimplest, in the case of NES this simply means gift-aiding the profit (avoiding corporation tax) to TENfor re-distribution within the federation. In fact it is not quite this simple because making a profit out ofAcademies (savings) in this way is not allowed so certain charges have to be agreed instead. So movingthe money around the group is possible.In the case of a Community Interest Company, all profits have to be returned to the participatingcompany in a proportion equal to that of its original stake. As we envisaged making investmentdecisions based on the needs of individual organisations, rather than on the amount of money theyoriginally invested, this option was not chosen.Teckal – this is not something that any of the team had heard of before starting along this path but itproved to be an important consideration. Teckal is a European company which brought a case to theEuropean courts in relation to tendering for services inside and outside federations of companies. Thecourts ruled that if a company sells services outside its own federated bodies, business for which itcompetes on the open market, using the same staff as those used to deliver inside the federation, thenit must put those services delivered inside the federation out to competitive tender, i.e. it will have tocompete for the business of delivering services inside the group and of course it might not win. Oneway around this is to set up different companies with different people, one delivering services inside thefederation, the other outside. However, current advice suggests that no legal intervention will occur ifthe volume of income earned outside the group is less than 5% of the company’s total turnover. (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/materials/legal)Nevertheless it is entirely possible that there are Colleges with large volumes of commercial incomewho are already delivering services both inside and outside a group structure of sufficient volume tocause concern, so this is a point to watch. As for NES, service volumes delivered outside the federationare currently very small but with an aspiration to grow this arm of the business a company called TENCommercial Services has been created to provide the capacity for substantial delivery outside the group.Agreements and Contracts – all organisations within the federation have had to pass a motion withtheir governing bodies agreeing to join the federation. In addition they have all had to sign a ServiceAgreement with NES for the supply of services (not a service level agreement) covering a five yearperiod which sets out the legal relationship between them, in particular in relation to pension liabilitiesand penalties for withdrawing early from the agreement. This is essential as NES has no income otherthan what it receives from the member organisations on an annual basis, nor does it have reserves tocover pension deficits. It will, however, be responsible for pension liabilities for staff TUPEd into thecompany from the date of transfer. City College Norwich 6
  7. 7. 5. Norfolk Education Services’ StaffTUPE of Staff – Pension issuesIt would be easy to say that all NES staff were TUPEd from their original employer to NES on 1September 2012 - but it would not be true. Yet again pensions reared its head. We managed to resolve theissues related to the LGPS, but the teachers’ pension scheme (TPS) is of a different order. As it is fundedcentrally from the Treasury it simply is not transferable under any circumstances, which means that ifstaff TUPE transfer to a non-teaching organisation the pension cannot be taken with them.Not many staff were in this position (four to be exact - all College staff, two of whom were theChief Executive and the Managing Director, both ex-teachers) so another work around had to befound. The simplest solution was to second these staff to NES from the College for a period of fiveyears, so secondment agreements had to be drawn up in order to protect the pensions of staff in theTPS. Fortunately the transfer of the other 285 staff went more smoothly, technically, but there werecomplications.TUPE TransfersKey points to note in relation to TUPE are:-• clear in the measures letter; ensure that you state exactly what will change for staff members. Be• Communicate in advance, and often, with the relevant Unions.• Prepare staff lists well in advance, keep a central list.FE Colleges tend to have job roles within defined departmental responsibilities. It’s a moot point howoften these are updated but generally they cover roughly the right area; not so for Academies/secondaryschools. Staff in Academies and schools do have Job Descriptions of course but often they bear noresemblance to the duties carried out at all. Colleges are in the main departmental; Academies work likefamily businesses where everyone “mucks in”. This is not a criticism as it is probably the most effectiveway of working for a small single organisation, but it makes considerations relating to who to TUPE towhere quite difficult.In addition, this will impact on who should transfer to the shared services company and who shouldn’t– it depends entirely on what they do and if the paperwork is unreliable it will cause problems. The bestoption is to speak to each individual and their managers, and keep your own record of what duties theycarry out.The other important realisation is that as long as other Academies are joining the group, at some point inthe very near future restructures will have to be carried out as, although it may be the most effective andefficient way to run a single Academy, it almost certainly will not be that for a group of them.For further information relating to TUPE processes and examples of letters please see appendix 12(www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment). Please note: This guide does not replace the requirement for detailed legal advice on the transfer, and Colleges should obtain independent advice on their specific transfer. Circumstances around LGPS need to be fully checked independently for each organisation wanting to go down this route. City College Norwich 7
  8. 8. 6. IT SystemsThe biggest practical challenge in setting up a federation is IT systems. Each major software producthas had to be re-examined for suitability for federation use and federation cost. We recognised from theoutset that the Service Management and HR systems were not fit for purpose in a federation environment,so new systems were tendered and purchased quite early on in the process and continue to undergoimplementation module by module.However, negotiation with the company supplying our finance system did not go to plan so the decisionwas made to replace it with a new system. This was not our preferred option but in order to make sure wehad a system which could cope with multiple entities there was no alternative – the finance system wastendered and a product selected in the summer with a full implementation date of June 2013. Followingfurther negotiation and the commitment to provide additional resource internally, this was revised toFebruary 2013. This additional internal resource comprised at least one person working full-time on theproject.In addition, having all of these brand new systems is pointless unless all members of the federation canaccess the appropriate parts of them. As the HR, finance and student record systems data are managed byNES, we have embarked on the establishment of an integrated communications infrastructure which willgive all federation members access to their data from those systems on their desktop. This is a much morecomplicated task than it sounds and we are still encountering difficulties with it. However, access to allmajor IT systems for all federation members is scheduled to be in place by the end of April 2013.If that were not sufficient, we have also embarked on a project to build a data warehouse which willfacilitate the development of reports from multiple systems. This is seen as a pre-requisite for the effectiveand efficient use of resources across the federation. It will, for example, allow reports to be producedinstantaneously using data from the finance, HR and student records systems. Currently phase 1 of thisproject has been completed which is the incorporation of the College’s student records data for the lasttwo years. Phase 2 will pull in College HR data, and phase 3 will be a project involving the Academiesand student tracking.At the same time, investigation has led us to the conclusion that all Academies within the federation mustuse the same student record system to enable streamlining of data management and reporting, and tostandardise training and development needs. A single solution has been selected but currently only oneAcademy is using this software so we are embarking on a staff development programme in preparationfor the introduction of this software to at least one and possibly two Academies by the end of March 2013,before timetabling for 2013/14 begins.The key point here is that effective management of data within the federation is dependent on the databeing accurate, available and structured in a way that is meaningful to users. Having a number ofAcademies within the federation for example will allow accurate measurement of performance acrossa range of key indicators which will in turn enable academic leaders to examine and compare theirperformance, and learn from best practice.In terms of managing IT operations, advice was sought from a consultant and the ensuing report isattached (see appendix 13) (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment).This is a very useful report providing clear guidance on what an IT operating model could look like.However, NES has a lot of work to do before anything else can be achieved. City College Norwich 8
  9. 9. 7. So What Have We Got?We have created a fully functioning federation with, currently, seven member organisations:• Transforming Education in Norfolk (parent company)• City College Norwich• City Academy Norwich• Wayland Academy• Norfolk University Technical College (opening Sept. 2014)• Norfolk Educational Services• TEN Commercial ServicesAll non-teaching-related services are being delivered by NES, either directly or through contracted-outservices. One further secondary school has voted to join the group and a second will be putting the caseto its governing body shortly. A number of primary schools have expressed an interest but there are nofirm proposals at the moment. The private training provider did not proceed to join the group, but thelegal framework has provision for this to occur at any time in the future.The TEN Group’s Federation model provides for an educational pathway from the start of primaryeducation, through secondary, with options including the University Technical College (14-19); post-16opportunities also sit within City Academy’s Sixth Form, the College’s Sixth Form Centre, the College’svocational and technical offer including apprenticeships, adult education and HE – a ‘cradle to grave’offer for all those within the “family” should they desire it. City College Norwich 9
  10. 10. Implementation TimelineSep 11 - Nov 11 Establish programme direction, structure and resources Complete Federation Memoranda of Understanding Implement procurement strategy including determination of in-house and outsourced models Plan phased integration of services Determine service delivery model Establish account management; demand management; service planning; service management; and supplier relationship management models Establish shared services company Implement finance system upgrade Start process mapping and improvement Plan soft federation product and services portfolio Engage with UTC project team Tender HR and CAFM systems upgradesDec 11 – Feb 12 Roll-out additional services to City Academy Norwich Establish legal federation Procurement programme continues Continue process mapping, standardisation and improvement Implement HR system upgrade Market soft federation product and services portfolio Plan UTC product and service provisionMar 12 – May 12 Roll-out services to Wayland Procurement programme continues Continue process mapping, standardisation and improvement Implement CAFM system Norfolk Academies Trust created Wayland Academy up and running, TUPE complete Deliver soft federation product and services portfolio Procure UTC product and service provision Application submitted for VAT Group (three months to complete)Jun 12 – Aug 12 Implement UTC product and service provision Deliver Year 1 procurement target Continue process mapping, standardisation and improvement Deliver soft federation product and services portfolio Plan Year 2 implementation based on progress to date Shared Services company set up Pension admission status in place with Norfolk Pension Fund Bank accounts in place for all entities in the group New payroll system (Midland iTrent) launched Tender concluded for new finance system1 Sept 2012 Go live with Norfolk Educational ServicesOct 2012 Finance restructure completedOct 2012 – Feb 2013 New finance system (Open Accounts) goes live City College Norwich 10
  11. 11. 8. ExpectationsProcurement savings in year 1 are expected to reach £175k, mainly through the re-tendering of largecontracts such as insurance, catering and grounds maintenance (see appendix 15) (www.aoc.co.uk/shared-services/citycollegenorwich-federationdevelopment).Payroll savings have been made but the requirement to re-engineer the workforce to fit a new deliverymodel will need additional resource in the short term. Currently payroll savings of £100k havebeen made simply through non-replacement of vacancies and a further £75k will be made throughrestructuring in the near future. However some of this saving will need to be used over the next sixmonths.In year 2 we anticipate procurement savings of £300k, including savings on cleaning of £50k andMultifunctional Devices (printing, photocopying and paper) of £45k. At present cleaning is carried outby a number of different companies across the federation. By bringing them together under one supplier,economies of scale will drive efficiencies and result in lower costs.The Federation is committed to reducing its reliance on paper by 5% (££s) by restructuring the use ofmachines and sourcing paper from alternative suppliers.As the Federation continues to grow, staff restructures will continue and although there are and will beredundancy and pension strain costs, there will be further savings on staff.We are also targeting minimum savings of 5% per annum on other cost efficiencies.9. Culture ChangeOf all of the issues that arise from the formation of a Federation and the associated operationalrequirements relating to the delivery of services, culture change is the most difficult to manage.Undoubtedly new things will be asked of some member organisations and they will question why thesethings are necessary. It is, therefore, very important to ensure that communication is very clear and thatsufficient time is given for acclimatisation to any such new approaches. Some areas of potential difficultyare discussed below.9.1 Change ManagementWorking Practices – the biggest single shock to those from a College background when working withcolleagues in the secondary sector is the absence of performance management. Immediately, the mostpopular service provided is HR advice and, in particular, dealing with staffing issues as the levelof support now provided far outstrips that previously provided by the local authority. Apart fromsupport for individual staffing issues, which may have existed for years and not been dealt with, theconcept of managing staff on a day-to-day basis is also absent. There are cases where staff refuse to dowhat is asked of them which is clearly unacceptable within a new shared services company such asNorfolk Educational Services, but is something which has gone unchallenged in the past. Instilling aculture of proper line management responsibility does cause friction in some but other staff respondto it well, which might be seen as remarkable considering they are quite possibly in the same seat in City College Norwich 11
  12. 12. the same office of the same building they have worked in for years, close to staff who have not beenTUPE transferred into a new company and who are still working in the way they always have. It is veryimportant therefore to start the idea of developing and building high performing teams early on in theprocess.It is soon evident, however, that secondary Academies and FE Colleges are very different beasts.Colleges do appear to be much more straightforward in terms of standard business practices – they haveHR departments with lots of policies and procedures which apply across the board. The academies,however, have always operated according to local authority policies and procedures but each appears tohave its own interpretation of them and no-one seems to check whether they are being adhered to untilsomething goes wrong. There are, for example, a number of anomalies relating to the operation of non-teaching staff contracts and ways of working:• Taking sick leave to look after children instead of leave or losing pay (also applies to teachers)• Full-time contract but work term-time only• Contracts of term-time plus five weeks but “make up” the five weeks during term-time with no record of this being keptOur advice to managers who’ve had staff TUPEd into their organisation from a different kind is to look,listen and learn for the first three months. However, anomalies like the ones above cannot be allowed togo on for too long as inequalities exist between staff doing very similar jobs. Six months is a reasonableperiod to wait before starting to make changes different from those identified in the measures letterproduced for the TUPE process, bearing in mind that newly proposed changes must not relate to theTUPE process itself.9.2 Professional ComplianceUnder local authority control Academies appear to have been sheltered from the regulatory frameworkrelating to compliance as it is applied in FE. Health Safety, Data Protection, Freedom of Informationand Risk Management are all areas with potentially serious consequences if not handled professionallyand yet they are, at best, hardly considered or, at worst, totally absent from Academies.Even internal and external audit are not concepts with which most Academies are familiar. Financialreports to governing bodies in the past were fairly simple bookkeeping exercises relating to income andexpenditure but as Academies they have responsibility for assets such as buildings, land and equipment,and suddenly they are hit with depreciation costs which can be substantial, particularly if there is a newbuilding.Academy Trusts are required to have an Audit Committee but they are not required to appoint internalauditors as long as board directors are satisfied that assurance has been provided in other ways.However it is difficult to envisage a federation involving an FE College not appointing internal auditorsin relation to learner records and funding for all members. All members will also have to undergoexternal audit of their finances and this level of scrutiny is new to Academies.The difficulty arises when charging for these compliance-related services, as Academies have nothad to pay for them in the past, don’t really understand why they have to have them now and, evenworse, they might suddenly have to start finding additional money to pay for improvements based onthe findings. City College Norwich 12
  13. 13. 10. ConclusionBenefits - the benefits of creating a shared services company within a Federation of educationalorganisations are very clear:• those organisations previously served by local authorities the quality of services provided will In almost certainly improve in the short term without operating much differently.• Savings will be made through increased buying power and more effective procurement, again particularly in the short term.• Savings will be made through economies of scale as more organisations join the federation.• Excellent staff will be found among those TUPE transferred into the company.• Job opportunities will arise for the right people.• There is an opportunity to provide services outside the federation to make a profit to be redistributed within the group.• The academic organisations can focus on providing an improved education service and students will have better outcomes.• Better and more in-depth reporting on aspects of organisational performance across all members will highlight areas of best practice and provide indicators of areas to be looked at more closely.Key Challenges – there will be many challenges relating to day to day operations but the key onesrelating to establishing an effective and efficient company are:• Culture, performance management and working practices• VAT• Pensions• Fit for purpose IT infrastructure and systems• Managing budgets and service charges• Preparations for TUPE• Legal frameworks for organisations and relationships between them• Managing initial expectations in member organisations• Commercial Transfer Agreements for Academies – delays in agreeing with local authoritiesThe challenges are tough ones but mainly shorter term and we remain convinced that they will beoutweighed by the longer term benefits. Further challenges will of course ensue and fairly quickly asthe immediate gain in quality of service, due to being a new provider, will rapidly diminish unless closeattention is paid to continuous improvement – the bar will continue to be raised. City College Norwich 13
  14. 14. List of AnnexesAnnex 1 Proposed Federation StructureAnnex 2 NES Ltd Articles of AssociationAnnex 3 Development of the Federation Public Consultation DocumentAnnex 4 TEN Group Articles of AssociationAnnex 5 CCN Instruments and Articles of GovernmentAnnex 6 CAN Memorandum of AssociationAnnex 7 Norfolk Academies Articles of AssociationAnnex 8 Norfolk UTC Articles of AssociationAnnex 9 Development of the Federation Public Consultation DocumentAnnex 10 Template Measures Letter to be Sent from New Employer to the Head of Transferring OrganisationAnnex 11 Template letter to be Sent to Appropriate Representatives of Affected EmployeesAnnex 12 Information to Staff it is Proposed to TransferAnnex 13 Example Frequently Asked QuestionsAnnex 14 Example of Brainstorm of Team Regarding Operational Issue on TransferAnnex 15 Letter Confirming Transfer to New OrganisationAnnex 16 Example of Objection Letter for Member of TPSAnnex 17 Example Secondment Letter for TPS Member Working in Organisations Unable to Offer TPSAnnex 18 Template Secondment AgreementAnnex 19 Letter to Transferred Staff re Proof of Eligilibility to Work in UK City College Norwich 14
  15. 15. List of AppendicesAppendix 1 Proposal for Collaboration and Shared Services GrantAppendix 2 Federation Shared Services Project - Business CaseAppendix 3 Federation Shared Services Programme - Resourcing OptionsAppendix 4 Shared Services Company Creation Options PaperAppendix 5 Proposed Federation StructureAppendix 6 Federation TimelineAppendix 7 CCN Instruments and Articles of GovernmentAppendix 8 Development of the Federation Public Consultation DocumentAppendix 9 KPMG Federation Structure Tax Risks and OpportunitiesAppendix 10 Advice from NPFAppendix 11 Baxipartnership Employee Ownership in a Shared Services CompanyAppendix 12 Learning Points and Transfer ChecklistAppendix 13 Possible IT Operating Model for Norfolk Educational ServicesAppendix 14 Federation Struture - TEN GroupAppendix 15 Shared Services for Procurement - Route Map City College Norwich 15
  16. 16. Association of Colleges2-5 Stedham PlaceLondonWC1A 1HUTelephone: 020 7034 9900Facsimile: 020 7034 9950Email: sharedservices@aoc.co.ukOr visit our web sitewww.aoc.co.uk