There was no evidence to demonstrate an acceptable solution for the transfer of risk of operational failure.

The school did not demonstrate that the solution it intends to provide could offer better value for money.

There was lack of clarity regarding the development path of the school's proposal to integrate its own Learning Platform with the Civica product offered by the local authority. As a result the panel were not convinced that pupils from the school (particularly post 14) would be able to access the broad curriculum opportunities offered to other schools.

There was no evidence provided by the school to indicate that it operates to Becta's Framework for ICT Technical Support (FITs) standards.

The school has not demonstrated a sound understanding of the risks and costs associated with running its own ICT procurement and has not accounted for the costs of managing the procurement including, but not limited to, legal costs, staff time and additional consultancy.

The school has not identified the costs associated with integrating their ICT solution with the building management systems nor incorporated these costs into their calculations.

There is a lack of clarity around the proposed interface arrangements and risk transfer between the LEP, the D&B contractor, the school's chosen ICT supplier and the school. If these elements are fully costed, they have an adverse effect on the Value for Money of the business case.

Whilst recognising that the school has high aspirations for the ways in which its ICT solution will promote and facilitate international collaboration, the panel felt that there was insufficient evidence to show that the school's systems would support local collaboration as effectively as if they were participating in the area-wide service.