Background
In September 2024, the Labour government announced a plan to open 300 school-based nurseries by September 2025, with schools able to apply for up to £150,000 in funding.
To meet this deadline, schools needed to have funding confirmed by the spring term to allow time for construction planning and work over the summer holidays.
Alongside the timeline for school construction projects, there are commercial timelines that DfE must adhere to for grant applications.
These are:
- 8 weeks for settings to make their applications
- 5 weeks for DfE to assess and moderate them
Our timeline
We worked at breakneck speed.
Here's how it went:
- August 2024: Early discussions between the Central Capital Unit and Digital, Data and Tech explored options for fast-tracking delivery based on existing grant management services.
- September 2024: We kicked off, diving into understanding the application process, the needs of policy and creating our first HTML prototype
- 17 October 2024: We launched the service (yes, that quickly!)
- 19 December 2024: The application window closed. We had 642 submitted applications - more than we expected
How we worked together
We knew we had to be efficient, so we focused on four key areas: service mapping, research and design, development, and next steps.
Talking was crucial. We kept in close contact with everyone involved in the process. Without this, we might not have succeeded. It was our ability to support each other without barriers that let us finish so quickly.
Documenting our work
We wanted to keep track of our decisions and thought processes online. It was not just about recording what we did - it was about explaining why we did it.
We used a bunch of tools to help us collaborate remotely:
- Lucid for user journey maps
- SharePoint for storing documents
- Figma for design prototypes
- HTML prototyping for interactive user journeys
This way of working helped us stay on the same page and adapt quickly to feedback and design changes. But we will be honest - with the limited time we were given, we found it difficult to document everything. We are fixing that now.
Prototyping
We jumped straight into prototyping, using resources from GDS, the GOV.UK Design System, and the GOV.UK Prototype Kit
We even added some JavaScript to our prototypes to show how things like error messages would work. This gave us a clearer picture of how users might use the service.
Research and design
We worked closely with policy and commercial experts to make sure what we were designing was accurate and followed the rules. We had regular check-ins and workshops to keep everyone in the loop.
When it came to designing the journey, we focused on making it:
- easy to navigate
- accessible to everyone
- written in plain English with language familiar to users
- supportive, with helpful hints along the way
We wanted to make sure schools could complete the application confidently, even if they were not tech experts. This approach was at the core of our design philosophy.
We had existing research about School-Based Providers and their interactions with existing Early Education and Development services. This research highlighted areas where we could make significant improvements.
By focusing on these user-friendly design principles, we aimed to address the pain points we had identified and create a smoother, more intuitive experience for applicants.
Managing risk
Our accelerated timeline meant operating in a high-risk environment. We had to strike a delicate balance between thoroughness and speed in our approach to risk management.
We navigated this challenge by:
- prioritising critical security measures while accepting some level of managed risk
- developing rapid risk assessments helping us identify and address the most pressing concerns quickly
- leveraging existing security frameworks and best practices to expedite decision-making
Open communication about potential vulnerabilities and mitigation strategies was maintained throughout the project.
While a more formal risk management process would have been ideal with more time, our approach allowed us to deliver a functional and secure service within the tight deadline. This experience taught us the value of flexible risk management in fast-paced projects.
What we learned
- Document decisions as you go to save time later.
- Design in the open - it builds trust and helps solve problems together.
- Use high-fidelity prototypes to test designs.
- Stick to UCD principles, even under pressure, to deliver better outcomes.
- Collaborate closely with stakeholders to balance user needs and business goals.
By focusing on these lessons and always keeping user needs in mind, we managed to deliver a service that worked for both users and the business, even with our challenging timeline.
What we are doing next
As we move forward, our focus is on continuous improvement and expanding the impact of our work:
User research and service refinement
Further research will be conducted into how users interacted with the service. This insight will inform future iterations, helping us identify what we can improve and what successful elements we should maintain.
Comprehensive documentation
We are committed to documenting our process and experiences in our design histories. This will make our learnings and decisions accessible to everyone, hopefully providing valuable insights for future projects.
Phase 2 development
We will begin to explore what Phase 2 of the project might entail and how we can start developing it. This forward-thinking approach ensures we are ready for the next stages of service evolution.
Creating a reusable template
We want looking at how we can develop this service as a template for other application programmes to adopt. This could streamline future developments and create consistency across different services.
By focusing on these areas, we aim to build on our initial success, continuously improve our service, and share our knowledge to benefit future projects across government.