Meeting documents

1.1 Falling rolls in schools are a national issue which is reflected in Bath & North East Somerset. Examination of the number of unfilled and potentially surplus places in schools can ensure that funding is directed to where it is most needed, to the benefit of all pupils. Reviews of the way in which schools are organised are therefore an important element of the Council's strategic management role. Regular examination of the supply of, and demand for, school places is essential in order to ensure that education is being delivered in the most effective way.

1.2 At September 2004 the South & East Bath area has, using the Audit Commission method of calculation (see 4.4), 148 unfilled primary school places which represents 11.76% of capacity in the area.

The Council Executive is asked to agree that:

4.1 At its meeting on 9 July 2003 the Council Executive adopted a School Organisation Plan (the Plan) for the period 2003-2008. At a meeting of the full Council on 17 July the Plan also received unanimous support and the Plan was finally approved by the School Organisation Committee (a body independent of the Council) on 22 July 2003.

4.2 The Plan included a new process for undertaking reviews of schools. This process was developed through work undertaken by the EYCL OSP who consulted widely and heard from a number of key stakeholders during the process. The Plan is on the Council website at: www.bathnes.gov.uk/SchoolOrgPlan/SchoolOrgPlan2003-2008/ContentsPage.htm

4.3 The Plan stated that those areas most in need of review were those which presented the highest number of unfilled, and thus potentially surplus, places. This work was completed during the 2003/04 academic year. At its meeting on 6 July 2004 the School Organisation Committee agreed that the Authority should continue the review process and complete reviews in the remaining areas of Bath and the adjoining planning area of Bathavon.

4.4 Members are invited to note that the method used by the Department for Education & Skills for calculating the numbers of unfilled places only takes into account the number of places unfilled at schools where capacity exceeds the number of children on roll. It does not take account of the deficit of places at schools.

4.5 An initial document was prepared and distributed to key stakeholders for `fact-checking' in September 2004. Following responses a number of corrections and clarifications were made and a further document was issued in October 2004. This document contained all the agreed facts, requests for clarification and correction, the LEA response to those requests and some draft conclusions drawn up by Officers.

4.6 The EYCL OSP organised a visit to each of the schools covered by this Review. The tour took place on 2 November 2004.

4.7 The revised document referred to in 4.5 was discussed at a specially arranged public meeting of the EYCL OSP, held on 4 November 2004. The meeting heard contributions or received written statements from schools covered by this Review plus other speakers. Notes of this meeting, prepared by Democratic Services, are attached as Appendix 2.

4.8 All speakers concurred with the aims of the Review.

4.9 The Panel reached their conclusions taking into account the views expressed at the public meeting and their observations of the schools during the tour.

4.10 The Panel presented their findings at a public session on 15^th November 2004. The final report of the Panel is attached at Appendix 3.

4.11 Members are invited to note the recommendations of the Panel.

4.12 Members are invited to welcome the efforts of St Martin's Garden Primary School to reduce unfilled places by allowing other services to use classrooms that are not required and through the reduction of the planned admission number.

A risk assessment related to the issue and recommendations has been undertaken, in compliance with the Council's decision making risk management guidance.

Appendix 1

EDUCATION, YOUTH, CULTURE AND LEISURE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL

A REVIEW OF PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN THE SOUTH AND EAST BATH AREA

PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC AND TO SCHOOLS ON 15^th NOVEMBER 2004 FOLLOWED BY PRESENTATION TO THE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE ON 1ST DECEMBER 2004

Aim of review

The aims of the review across all school clusters are the removal of surplus places, improving the funding per pupil across the Local Education Authority, and thereby improving the overall quality of the education environment to achieve a better education for all pupils in Bath and North East Somerset.

General

The panel has gathered a great deal of evidence, undertaken visits, listened to contributions and studied current statistics and future trends. The underlying factor recognised by the panel is that current surplus places in the cluster are 148 (September 04 against an actual take up of 1,114). All four schools in the cluster are arranged as `all through' primary schools.

During the review the panel recognised the contributions and hard work the Headteachers, teaching staff and school staff have made to the teaching environment and educational output of the schools.

The Panel were unanimously of the opinion that no radical change to primary schools within this cluster area was necessary in the short to medium term.

However, the panel felt that due to current surplus places and a recognised reduction in the number of school-age children in the area (as well as Bath & North East Somerset as a whole) then a `Review Update' should take place within two years, so that trends in this cluster can be monitored more closely. Trends show a continual reduction in primary school age children in the coming years, but it is considered that building development in the area is likely to stem this reduction.

The Panel wished it noted that their recommendations implied no negative reflection on the quality of the education provided in the schools and recognised the schools' commitment to quality for all pupils. The Panel also noted the recent new building at Freshford Primary School. St Martins Garden and St Philips Primary Schools are in overall good condition, and major refurbishment is scheduled within the next 12 months at Combe Down.

The panel have also made comment on the possible location of St Johns RC school in this cluster.

The panel made the following specific recommendations with regard to the individual schools:

1. Freshford C of E VC Primary School

2. Combe Down C of E VC Primary School

3. St Philips C of E VC Primary School

4. St Martin's Garden Primary School (Community)

During the review the impact of the possible introduction of St Johns into this cluster was considered. The panel wish the Executive Member to be reminded of the Bath North Central recommendation related to St John's Catholic VA Primary School dated 25^th March 2004.

The Panel considered St John's Catholic Primary School. Members were particularly concerned at the condition of the buildings at the St Alphege's site. Members agreed that the school was in urgent need of replacement on a single site and that a suitable site, available for development at the earliest opportunity, should be identified. The Panel considered that the school should be limited to a maximum of 280 to 315 places.

The Panel recognised the work the previous Education Committee undertook and also current work on finding the optimum site. The Panel recommended that the Council do all in its power to expedite a much -delayed project to replace the school. Members noted that any replacement of this school would remove a high number of unfilled places and, in all likelihood, transfer it to a different cluster.

Therefore the Executive should take due cognisance of the `St John's impact' upon this cluster, any introduction of surplus places and the need to maintain the clusters mix of CE and community schools. Pupils currently on roll are 255 (up from 237) of which 71% are Roman Catholic (181), therefore there are 74 children (non-baptised Catholic) exercising choice to attend this school. It also needs to be recognised that on current timescales a new St John's would take 3 to 4 years to be built and open.

Recommendations (with regard to the issue of St John's RC primary school)

B7 The Panel wished the Executive Member to take into account the Panel's concerns that this cluster could potentially have 3 one-and-a- half form entry schools. The Panel recommended that schools should not be forced into a 1.5 form entry whilst acknowledging that mixed-age classes can be managed very successfully.

B7 The preferred size of schools is a 1 or 2 form entry, reducing the number of mixed age classes and simplifying delivery of the curriculum.

B7 The Officers and the Executive Member should be asked to explore the problem of surplus places with the Clifton Diocese in order to create an appropriate-size Catholic primary school

Councillor Andrew Furse,

Chairman EYCL Overview & Scrutiny Panel.

10/11/2004

Appendix 2

61)Education, Youth, Culture & Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Panel

A REVIEW OF PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN THE SOUTH AND EAST BATH AREA

Thursday 4^th November 2004

PRESENT -: Chair 2004-2005: Councillor Andy Furse

Councillors: Sally Davis, Dine Romero, Hilary Fraser, Shirley Steel

Councillor Steve Hedges informed the meeting that, at the meeting of the Council Executive on 3^rd November, a further potential site within Odd Down for St John's school had been added to the current list at very late notice. He was concerned that this site was near both St Philips and St Martin's Garden schools and suggested that the review be completed before the final decision was made about the siting of St John's. The Director of Education informed Councillor Hedges and the meeting that the Executive would be conducting full consultation on all of the proposed sites and that they would be considering the issue at a special meeting at a future date to be decided.

Panel - Are there other reasons why your intake is falling?

Mr Pope - We do have a reputation for dealing with some difficult children and some parents are concerned about the high level of SEN pupils in the school. Parents do compare the SATS results. The rise in house prices is also affecting the ability of young families to afford houses in the catchment area.

Mr Cross - The larger houses in the locality are now often rented out to students, so bigger families have to leave the area.

Panel - Do you intend to reduce your planned admission level of 60?

Mr Pope - Yes, we have requested that the LEA reduce it to 45.

Conclusions - The Chair thanking everyone for attending. He explained that the Panel would now consider the evidence which had been presented and make their recommendations to the Council Executive. These recommendations would be published in a report which would be presented to the public at a meeting on Monday November 15th at 4.30pm in the Brunswick Room, Guildhall.