4. Looking after the kitchen
4. Looking after the kitchen
4.1 Throughout the interviews at LEA and at school case study level, issues of kitchen
replacement and maintenance were frequently raised. This section looks specifically at
the impact of delegation and the shift of responsibility to schools on kitchen equipment
and maintenance.
4.2 Pre-delegation, most kitchens and kitchen equipment were maintained by the local
authority. Most LEAs had some monies for this work, although the budget, and the
sources of the budget, varied from LEA to LEA. Some had sums identified specifically
for repairs and maintenance (R&M) but others relied solely on monies not spent
elsewhere, particularly those saved from the non-take up of free school meals. In one
LEA, the R&M budget came totally from the profit generated from paid meals.
4.3 Despite the limitations of their budgets, many LEAs had been able to pursue a rolling
programme of refurbishment along with routine maintenance. As one Education
Finance Policy Officer explained
It’s one of those budgets that when it is managed centrally you can actually make it go further
because it’s a small amount of money per school.
4.4 Thus, at delegation some schools were in the fortunate situation of having kitchens
which had been recently updated whilst others were still awaiting modernisation. Head
teachers and Governors were not happy about these inequalities and perceived this to
be a flaw in the delegation process:
We had to update our own equipment, which I find impossible to believe, when county were
supposedly running it, but then after delegation, we have to update it. It was the same with the
building, when we took that over, they didn’t do a recce around that first, so we had to do that.
4.5 One case study primary school had heard in the spring of 2002 that they were to receive
100% funding to upgrade everything to ‘A1’ quality, under a scheme for all voluntary
aided (VA) schools4. The school was disappointed to discover when the surveyors
arrived that the scheme was unlikely to be as generous as they had first hoped.
Unfortunately things which are very close to the end of their life are not going to be replaced.
Their remit was to look at what is working on the day of the visit.
A year later, the school was still awaiting any confirmation of funding, having heard no
more from the surveyors or the LEA. Another case study school was preparing to have
its kitchen upgraded shortly under this same scheme.
4.6 A non-VA middle school head teacher believed that all schools should be assessed and
given the opportunity for funding to upgrade facilities.
It is frustrating to hear that VA schools are getting funds when other schools are not. If it’s good for
one, then it’s good for all of us.
4.7 Changes in supplier at the time of delegation led to some necessary division of spoils in
the kitchens. One LEA removed servery equipment from schools that had opted out of
the central contract. This had caused some ill feeling between the central catering
service and the schools, but the catering officer explained that the equipment belonged
4 Grants are payable under a scheme to bring VA school kitchens to an agreed standard as part of a package to
readjust the balance of responsibility.
24