Meeting documents

1.1 A consultation exercise has been undertaken to consider the possibility of amalgamating Newbridge St John's C of E VC Infant and Newbridge Junior School

2.1 Note the responses received during the consultation exercise and note the broad level of support for the amalgamation of the two schools.

2.2 Authorise the publication of Statutory Notices proposing the closure of Newbridge St John's Cof E VC Infant School and Newbridge Junior School on 31^st August 2006.

2.3 Invite the Diocese of Bath and Wells to publish Statutory Notices for the opening of a new voluntary controlled primary school on 1^st September 2006.

3.1 Should the schools be amalgamated and a new all through primary school be established there will be revenue savings of approximately £50,000.

3.2 Capital funding will also be required to undertake essential adaptations to reflect the curriculum and management needs of the 'new' primary school. A feasibility study will be undertaken in conjunction with the schools to identify essential works and costs.

3.3 The Overview & Scrutiny Panel recommended that any revenue savings arising from the review be used to finance borrowing under prudential borrowing arrangements to fund the necessary capital works. The principle of savings arising from school closures/amalgamations being used to finance prudential borrowing has recently been unanimously agreed by the Schools Forum for 2005/6 financial year. Using the the resource savings identified in 3.1for prudential borrowing would generate sufficient capital to fund essential adaptations.

3.4 The amalgamation might also involve some costs. For example, any staffing redundancies would be a one-off charge against the Authority along with any ongoing pension costs payable. There would also be one-off costs in the year of amalgamation to allow for the appointment of the new Headteacher up to one term in advance.

4.1 Following the review of primary schools in North West Bath earlier this year the Overview and Scrutiny Panel recommended that consultation should be undertaken on the potential for merger of the two schools. The Governors of both schools agreed that this was a positive move.

4.2 The Council Executive on 6th April 2005 agreed to consult on the potential amalgamation of Newbridge St John's C of E VC Infant School and Newbridge Junior School

4.3 The aims of school reviews as agreed by the Council Executive are:a) improving educational standards b) ensuring that resources(land ,buildings, money and people are used in the most effective way c)providing improved facilities for children, school staff and the wider community d) making the choice of the local school the natural and easy choice for parents/carers.

4.4 It is clear from the views expressed both at the meetings and in writing that there is broad support for the principle of amalgamation from staff, governors and parents. Written responses show that 75% of are in favour of amalgamation. A number of issues have been raised, however, which require more detailed discussion and these are set out below.

4.5 Accommodation: Both schools have identified adaptations to the present buildings that they regard as essential to ensure the accommodation meets the needs of an all-through primary school . These include staff and admin accommodation and a link between the two school buildings. It is accepted that the organisation of an all-through primary school will require some adaptations to the present accommodation although suitability data for the schools does not indicate that major changes are required. A feasibility study will be undertaken with representatives of both schools to identify options and costs and these will be a call on the Education capital programme.

4.6 Revenue Budget : Questions have been raised as to the budgetary impact of amalgamation as the budget for the new primary school would be £50,000 less than the current combined budgets of the two schools. The management of the budget for the `new' school would be a matter for the Governors. However any reduction in the budget should be offset by a reduction in the proportion of available resources used for school management such as administrative and caretaking staff and a single Headteacher. Ultimately the management of the budget for the `new' school would be a matter for the Governors and decisions on class organisation, staffing structures and administrative support would be for them to make.

4.7 Pupil Numbers/Class Organisation : Although the suggested size of the `new' primary school is 420 with a Planned Admission Number (PAN) of 60, if amalgamation were agreed, on opening in September 2006 there would be 464 pupils and in such a large school pupils may not be seen as individuals. It is true that this would be a large school, however, there is no reason to think that the present caring ethos promoted at both schools would not be continued at the `new' school particularly when it is likely that the vast majority of current staff will remain. Another concern was that with a PAN of 60 which is lower than the current admission level at either school, some parents will not be able to achieve their first preference. It is acknowledged that there is a tension between the desire, whenever possible, to meet parents first preference and one of the stated aims of school reviews as agreed by the Council Executive, of making the choice of the local school the natural and easy choice for parents/carers. An analysis of the addresses of current pupils shows that a significant number come from areas outside the immediate locality and that there are places at what would be their nearest schools. A PAN of 60 would allow a natural and gradual reduction in numbers over the coming years ensuring local need is met whilst enabling all current children to attend the `new' school. A PAN of 60 would also enable the school to organise on the basis of single age classes rather than mixed age classes which is the position currently. However it should be noted that this could also be achieved at each school without amalgamation if a PAN of 60 was agreed.

4.8 Staffing : Staff at both schools are broadly supportive of amalgamation although are understandably concerned about their position as there is the potential risk of redundancy, particularly where staff resources are duplicated such as administration and caretaking. The appointment of staff to the `new' school would be a matter for the temporary Governing Body which would need to be established and there is a legal requirement to advertise nationally for the posts of Headteacher and Deputy Headteacher. The LEA is not in a position to offer guarantees to staff but would strongly advise the temporary Governing Body to give prior consideration to existing staff at the schools, subject to the essential curricular budgetary and management needs of the new school. This would provide employment stability for staff and continuity as the new school is established. Support will of course be available from Personnel Officers to all staff should amalgamation proceed.

4.9 Educational and Curriculum Issues; At the moment the two schools are managed separately and each has its own ethos, philosophy, and approach to the curriculum. Standards are high at both schools and the staff of the two schools work collaboratively to try to ensure a smooth transition between the infant and junior phases. Staff and governors of both schools were in general agreement however, that a single effectively managed primary school would more easily achieve progression and continuity for its pupils. This is extremely important both in curricular and social terms. Effective progression and continuity between the infant and junior phases of education are widely regarded as essential in the delivery of the National Curriculum. A primary school would also provide continuity by for example enabling a Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator (SENCO) to address the needs of children from YR to Y6. In staff development terms ,staff and governors at both schools recognised that a primary school would enable staff to specialise more as there could be one co-ordinator for each subject and staff would have the opportunity to teach different age groups without the need to apply for a post at another school.

4.10 Status of the `new' school: As Newbridge St John's C of E VC Infant School is a voluntary controlled school and Newbridge Junior is a community school the category of a `new' primary school is seen to be an important issue. At the consultation meeting of the Infant School staff and governors there was a very strong feeling that the school should be a voluntary controlled Church of England school. The staff and governors of Newbridge Junior School also expressed a strong feeling that the school should be a community school. At the community meeting there was a balance of views for both options. Of the written consultation responses 47.5% of respondents were in favour of a voluntary controlled school, 42.5% favoured a community school while 10% expressed no preference.

4.11 Although at both a community school and a voluntary controlled school the LEA is responsible for admissions and staff, at a voluntary controlled school responsibility for its management is shared between the LEA and the church. A voluntary controlled church school has additional support from the local parish church as well as the Education Department of Bath & Wells Diocese. Under the provisions of the Education Acts, if the new school was to become a voluntary controlled school, the Council would be obliged to transfer the buildings and land relating to the Junior School (other than playing field) to the Diocese of Bath and Wells as Trustees for the school. However the Council's position would be protected if the school were to close at some future date. The Infant school site already rests with the Diocese having been transferred to them on the same basis when the school was originally opened.

4.12 Some consultees have expressed a concern that if the `new ` school were to be a church school then parents would not have a choice of a community school in the area. This, however, needs to be seen in context of wider geographical area where there are community and church schools. In the LEA there are areas where the vast majority of schools are community schools and areas where the vast majority are church schools. The LEA has no preference for church or community schools. Any change which reduces the proportion of church places in an area must be accepted by the relevant diocese.

4.13 The Diocese of Bath & Wells has commented as follows: For many years the Diocese of Bath & Wells has had a policy of preferring that any new schools it builds are all-through Primary Schools while at the same time supporting and being proud of the work. done in separate C of E Infant and Junior schools This preference for Primary Schools extends to giving support and encouragement for the joining together of Infant and Junior schools where this is possible and appropriate. The Diocesan Board has in the past expressed the view that the buildings and facilities of any amalgamated school would need to offer at least a similar standard of provision for pupils and staff as existed in the separate and that the amalgamation would need to result in better use of resources and enhanced facilities for all involved. The Diocesan Board of Education has not as yet had the opportunity to formally discuss the possible amalgamation of the two Newbridge schools but when it does so it is more likely to give its approval and /or to encourage the Church of England group on the Schools Organisation Committee to approve it, if the following apply: The new school is an all-through voluntary controlled Church of England school as St John's Infants School is at present and where the LEA control admissions. The governors of St John's C of E Infants school, its parents and the local Church of England community are in favour of the proposed arrangements. The governors and parents of Newbridge Junior School are also in favour.

6.1 Although there are understandably some concerns about amalgamation the consultation process has established that there is broad support for the principle of amalgamation from staff, governors and parents. The governors of both schools clearly feel that adaptations to the buildings are required to ensure a successful amalgamation and their support is conditional upon the essential works being agreed.

6.2 The coincidental resignation of both Headteachers makes this an opportune time to consider amalgamation..

6.3 An all through primary school with a planned but gradual reduction in pupil numbers may be able to cope better with the projected drop in pupil numbers which will eventually impact on both schools separately if the there is no change.

6.4 The above together with the possible educational, financial and managerial be benefits suggest that a single all through primary school would prove most effective for the future of the schools.

6.5 The establishment of a `new' voluntary controlled primary school would not adversely affect the overall balance of denominational and non denominational places in the LEA..

6.6 The amalgamation is an opportunity to provide over time a 420 place all through primary school which is in line with the LEA `s preferred model as set out in the School Organisation Plan.

7.1 The option of maintaining the status quo which would see the two schools continue in their present form has been considered. However for the reasons set out above it is considered that an amalgamation offers the best option for the schools.

7.2 The option of a community primary school was considered but rejected as the strongest views and largest number supported a voluntary controlled school.

8.1 Ward councillor, Executive councillor, Overview & Scrutiny Panel, Trades unions, Local residents, Stakeholders/Partners, Section 151 Finance Officer, Chief Executive, Monitoring Officer

8.2 A consultation document which is attached as an appendix has been issued and circulated to the staff, governors, parents and the wider community and consulltation meetings have also been held with these group. Responses to the consultation exercise will be reported to the Executive.

9.1 Not urgent.