Covered Walkway Procurement Across a Multi-Academy Trust: How to Do It Properly

Most of the school covered walkway enquiries I receive come from individual school business managers. One school, one project, one quote. That is simple and we handle it the same way every time.

What happens at trust level is more interesting and, done well, significantly more efficient. If your MAT has five schools that need covered walkways, or you are planning a programme across your estate over the next two to three years, there is a smarter way to approach it than running five separate procurement exercises.

Why MAT procurement is different

A single-school procurement goes: headteacher or SBM identifies need, gets quotes, checks with governors, approves, orders. Four to eight weeks from enquiry to signed order.

A MAT procurement needs to satisfy trust-wide governance, may involve the estates director and CFO rather than individual school leaders, may need to sit within a procurement framework, and needs to be consistent across sites. That is not harder. It is just different. And the trust gets a much better outcome when it is planned as a programme rather than a series of one-offs.

Start with the estate audit

Before going to any supplier, map the need across your schools. For each site, the question is: what gaps in covered circulation exist, how many pupils use that route, and is there a welfare, safeguarding, or condition argument for prioritising it?

The audit does not need to be complex. A shared spreadsheet with the following columns gives the estates team everything needed to prioritise:

• Site name
• Gap description (e.g. science block to main building, 18 metres)
• Approximate daily users (pupils and staff)
• Current surface condition
• Any welfare or incident record relating to this route
• Estimated budget band (£15k-£25k, £25k-£50k, etc.)

Three hours spent building this across all your schools before you go to market will shape a better procurement and a better conversation with any supplier.

Framework vs open procurement

Depending on your MAT's size and procurement policy, you may be required to use a framework agreement for capital works above a certain value. Common frameworks used for school outdoor structures include:

Pagabo and ESPO — both cover construction and infrastructure works. Walkway projects can sit within these frameworks as minor capital works.

Lot 1 Minor Works (NEC) — some larger trusts use NEC-based frameworks for works under £200,000.

Crown Commercial Service (CCS) — for trusts that have aligned their procurement policy to CCS guidelines.

If your trust's capital projects above £25,000 require three quotes as a minimum, document that process formally rather than treating it as an informal exercise. The paper trail matters if the project is later audited against your procurement policy.

For trusts with SCA funding, there is no external compliance framework imposed on how you spend it, but your trust's own governance will apply. Know what your financial delegation thresholds are before you start.

Specifying consistently across sites

One of the most valuable things a MAT can do is establish a standard specification for covered walkways across the estate. Not every site needs to be identical, but having a baseline means:

• Every walkway is structurally consistent and comparable
• Maintenance across the estate is simplified because components are interchangeable
• Future schools joining the trust know what the estate standard is
• Warranty terms are consistent

The baseline specification should cover: frame material (aluminium is the consistent recommendation for longevity and zero-maintenance), roof material (polycarbonate grade, UV warranty), standard colours (most trusts choose a colour that aligns with branding or existing school infrastructure), fixings approach, and foundation type.

Deviations from the baseline need a documented reason, not just a preference. "This school wanted a different colour" is not a good reason to break specification consistency.

Running the tender

For a multi-site programme, a properly run tender produces better pricing than site-by-site quoting. Suppliers price competitively when they can see volume. A tender document for a trust-wide programme should include:

• A site schedule listing all schools in scope, with approximate walkway dimensions for each
• The standard specification (or a minimum requirement that allows suppliers to quote to their own spec)
• The preferred programme timeline
• Governance requirements (insurance, DBS for site access, health and safety method statements)
• The evaluation criteria (price, quality, lead time, references)

A supplier who has costed ten sites at once can be more competitive per-site than one quoting the same sites individually over two years.

Phasing and funding alignment

Not every trust can fund all its walkway requirements in one financial year. The estate audit gives the basis for a phased programme. Year one addresses the highest-priority sites. Year two and three address the next tier.

If SCA funding is the route, align the capital bid submission to the trust board with your phased programme. Presenting a three-year programme with Year 1 approval sought is a stronger case than a rolling series of individual requests.

Finance leasing — now significantly easier since September 2024 when Secretary of State approval was removed — is available to trusts as well as individual schools and may allow the programme to be accelerated beyond what SCA alone would fund.

For more detail on funding routes for covered walkways, read: How Schools Fund a Covered Walkway: DfE Grants, SCA and All Your Options Explained.

We work with MAT estates teams regularly. We can provide a programme quote across multiple sites from a single site visit schedule, produce consistent specification documentation for all schools, and manage phased installations to fit your academic calendar. Call 01704 547 321 or visit our covered walkways page.