Meeting documents

BATH & NORTH EAST SOMERSET COUNCIL

Appendix 3

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

1. WHY ARE WE REVIEWING THIS AREA?

1.1 All primary schools in Bath & North East Somerset are to be reviewed over the four years between September 2003 and July 2007. Each school will initially be reviewed alongside its partner schools in a geographical area. At the end of each Area Review elected Councillors may decide that some changes (school closures, new schools, enlarging schools etc.) appear to be necessary and initiate a further consultation process focussing on the school(s) affected. It is equally possible that Councillors may simply acknowledge that the pattern of school provision is working effectively and that no changes are required in the short or medium-term.

1.2 The process to be followed when undertaking an Area Review has been the subject of wide and lengthy consultation. It was finally approved by the School Organisation Committee (a body independent of the Council) on 22 July 2003.

1.3 A document entitled "The School Review Process" can be found on the Council website at: www.bathnes.gov.uk/Committee_Papers/OandSEYCL/EYCL021202/10SchoolReviewProcess.htm Paper copies are available on request.

1.4 The schools named below are considered in this Review.

Combe Down CE VC Primary School, Summer Lane

Freshford CE VC Primary School, Freshford

2. INTRODUCTION

2.2 On 24 September 2004, a draft version of this document was circulated to the Headteacher of each school covered by the Review.

2.3 On 8 October 2004 a revised version containing amendments, clarifications of facts and some initial conclusions was issued to the Headteacher and Chair of Governors of each school covered by the Review, the Headteacher and Chair of Governors of the secondary schools serving Bath, senior officers of the Education Service, the Bath & Wells Diocesan Board of Education, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Clifton and Councillors representing the wards in which the schools are located. The document was also circulated to members of the Education, Youth, Culture & Leisure Overview & Scrutiny Panel in order to inform their discussions prior to the public meeting to be held on 4 November 2004.

3. School Organisation Plan

3.1 Each school has been assessed against policies, established through the School Organisation Plan, regarding school size. The School Organisation Plan states that;

3.2 At September 2004 all schools meet the criteria regarding planned admission number and size.

3.3 The School Organisation Plan agreed on July 22 2003 stated the following in relation to South & East Bath "The level of surplus places is fractionally above the desirable maximum. Almost 90% of (this) surplus exists in one school. A review prior to the commencement of the Foxhill scheme will take place and should identify options for reducing surplus to acceptable levels." In July 2004 an update of demographic information was published and this noted a deteriorating situation in terms of an increase in the percentage of unfilled places but noted that the vast majority of this surplus still existed within one school.

3.4 The School Organisation Plan agreed on 17 July 2001 stated that "the LEA's preferred option for school organisation at Key Stages 1 and 2 is all-through primary schools. This also includes the Foundation Stage in nursery and reception classes." All the schools covered by this Review are all-through primary schools, one of which operates a nursery class.

3.5 Of the four schools covered by this Review three are Church schools. Any changes in the area may result in a change in the proportion of denominational places in Bath & North East Somerset and if such changes reduced the proportion of denominational places this would require the support of the relevant Diocese, in this case the Diocese of Bath & Wells. At present, approximately 54% of primary school places in Bath & North East Somerset are in Church schools. In the South & Central Bath area the percentage is 68%.

3.6 All schools have also been assessed under the Authority's Asset Management Plan (AMP). The AMP is concerned with the Condition, Suitability and Sufficiency of schools. The Key Data sheets at the back of the document show the position at these schools in relation to the AMP headings.

4. The Context

4.1 A map showing the location of the schools is attached. An wide area map showing where pupils live is also attached. For legal reasons it is necessary to state that the maps have been reproduced from the Ordnance Survey with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright under License Number 100023334.

4.2 Population data from the Primary Care Trust shows the position at April 2003 in the wards in which these schools are located.

5 Levels of Educational Achievement

5.1 There are various measures of educational performance. Simple examination of headline results may not reveal the success (or otherwise) of a school.

5.2 Care must be taken when analysing results of small year groups and making comparisons with schools that are significantly different in size. In small schools one pupil can have a very marked effect on the percentage figures. OFSTED makes the following statement:

6. Levels of Educational and Multiple Deprivation

7 Timescales and Consultation

7.1 The Overview & Scrutiny Panel held a public meeting to hear contributions from invited stakeholders. This took place on 4 November 2004 at the Guildhall, Bath at 5.30 p.m.

7.2 The document was further considered by the Overview & Scrutiny Panel (OSP) at its meeting on 15 November 2004.

7.3 A meeting for Bath & North East Somerset Councillors representing the relevant wards was arranged for 12 October.

7.4 The final paper will be considered by the Council Executive which meets at 10 a.m. on 1 December 2004 at the Guildhall, Bath.

KEY DATA

Numbers on Roll, Forecasts & Surplus Places (Sufficiency 1)

Level of Recruitment against Standard Number

Financial Information

Outstanding Planned Maintenance (Condition)

Site and Building Areas (Sufficiency 2)

Deprivation Data

Educational Standards

Suitability

Notes

PAN means Planned Admission Number. This figure equates to the number of pupils the school must admit if demand exists. PAN has replaced Standard Number for admissions from September 2004.

Net Capacity is the physical capacity of the school and shows the number of places available. It is derived from a DfES formula.

Surplus places mean unfilled places. Not all unfilled places are surplus. The calculation of surplus places takes account only of those schools where the number of pupils is fewer than the number of places available. Shortfalls of places in schools are not counted.

The purpose of showing the average number on roll over the five years previous to 2004/05 is to ensure that an unusual variation in admissions in one year does not provide a distorted picture.

Forecast numbers for individual schools are not included. It can be seen that the total number on roll at September 2004 is 96% of that at September 1999. Forecasts indicate that by September 2007 the total number on roll will be 92% of the 1999 figure.

Population Data - South & East Bath

Source : B&NES Primary Care Trust

Data valid as at April 2003

The numbers of children in the area has fallen very slightly. There is no reason to believe that the number of unfilled places and the position regarding unfilled places will worsen significantly as a result of this fall in the birth rate.

Levels of Recruitment against Standard Number / Planned Admission Number

Notes

Levels of recruitment are shown as percentages as changes to Standard Number were implemented at several schools

over the period September 1997 to September 2002. This was often as a result of the infant class size legislation.

Standard Number (SN) has been abolished from September 2004 and replaced by Planned Admission Number (PAN)

Financial Information

Notes

CPN means Composite Pupil Number. This is the number of pupils for which a school receives funding. It is based on 5/12 of actual number on roll at January each year plus 7/12 from the estimated September number on roll.

* Schools marked with an asterisk operate an LEA nursery. Figures shown EXCLUDE funding for these Nursery classes. St Martin's Garden Primary also operates a designated special needs provision. Figures shown EXCLUDE funding for this centre.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ABOVE FIGURES HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED IN LIGHT OF ACTUAL NUMBERS ON ROLL AT SEPTEMBER 2004.

Outstanding Planned Maintenance

Notes

The figures showing the total costs of outstanding planned maintenance show only those works which are regarded as Urgent or Essential.

DfES and Property Services define Urgent as `Work that will prevent immediate closure of premises, and/or address an immediate high risk to the health and safety of occupants and/or remedy a serious breach of legislation'

Essential is defined as `Work required within two years that will prevent serious deterioration of the fabric or services and/or address a medium risk to the health and safety of occupants and/or remedy a less serious breach of legislation'

Precise details of the works required to each school are not published but have been supplied to each school as per the recommendation of the Overview & Scrutiny Panel.

Notes

An assessment of these areas forms part of the Sufficiency element of the Asset Management Plan.

Building Bulletin 82 (BB82) `Area Guidelines for Schools' is a DfES guidance document which indicates total site and building areas required. Figures take account of the size of school and the age range covered. BB82 is in the process of being revised.

A site or building which is too small will make management of the school more problematic. A site or building that is oversized will require more resources in order to maintain it. Such resources will come from the school budget and thus leave less to allocate to direct delivery of the curriculum.

Levels of Educational and Social Deprivation

Notes

These figures are taken from the Indices of Multiple Deprivation published by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in 2000 and should be treated with extreme caution. Data produced in 2004 is generally regarded as of much greater value but is not yet available in a form that can be used during the Review. The school level data is taken from information provided by the Finance Team in the Education Service. Once again this should be treated with caution.

Data regarding Odd Down ward is unavailable as the Indices 2000 relied upon data gathered prior to the establishment of the ward.

Educational Standards 2004

Pupil Locations September 2003 - Wide Area View (2004 DATA IS NOT YET AVAILABLE)

SUITABILITY ASSESSMENTS

In conjunction with sufficiency and condition assessments, suitability assessments help in the targeting of resources where they can have the greatest effect in raising standards and maximising value for money. The assessments help in identifying the educational impact of any deficiencies in accommodation, may identify a need for additional accommodation or improvements to existing accommodation.

The definitions below will assist readers in assessing the scale of the suitability problems faced by the schools within this Review.

Readers are reminded that the issues identified by the Suitability Assessments represent

the findings of work undertaken during the Autumn Term 2002-03. They reflect the position at each school on the day of the assessment. An update of the assessments will not be undertaken until the Autumn Term 2004-05.

Each school received a copy of their Assessment and Headteachers were invited to comment on the findings. The issues identified below represent the agreed suitability issues facing the school at the time of the Assessment.

Category A - Unable to teach curriculum.

This is most likely to be associated with numbers and types of teaching spaces available. There

should be enough appropriate spaces to accommodate all pupils for the whole of the curriculum

Category B - Teaching methods inhibited. Unsuitability of spaces may mean that schools' preferred teaching methods are inhibited. This may be associated with numbers and types of teaching spaces, or with the size and other aspects of spaces

Category C - Management or organisation of school affected adversely.

Unsuitability of spaces and/or the way they relate to each other may affect the organisation or management of the school

Category D - Pupil or staff morale or pupil behaviour affected adversely.

Unsuitability of spaces may affect pupil or staff morale or pupil behaviour.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Aims and Objectives

The aims of the Review are to:

Combe Down CE VC Primary School and Freshford CE VC Primary School are both almost full. Educational outcomes are above the LEA and national average across both Key Stages. A major project to remodel Freshford was completed in 2001 and significant capital investment has been made at Combe Down in order to remove temporary buildings and provide a new school hall. The total absence of a playing field for either school is a concern but, in the case of Combe Down, no prospect exists to create such a space. An allocation in the Deposit Local Plan has been made for a playing field at Freshford although there are differences of view as to whether this allocation should be maintained or replaced by another potential site. No funding exists to provide a playing field for Freshford CE Primary School.

No organisational changes are recommended at either of these schools.

St Martin's Garden Primary School exists as a result of an amalgamation of Fosseway Infant and Fosseway Junior schools which took effect in September 2000. The amalgamation arose as a result of the clear understanding of both Governing Bodies that the future could best be secured by coming together as a single school. Falling birth rates and the reduction in pupil numbers at St Martin's Garden Primary continues to exercise the Governors and the Authority. A planned reduction in capacity at this school is necessary in order to remove surplus places. The intake levels at the school have fallen markedly over the last few years. The potential to reduce the school capacity to 210 places should be examined during this Review.

Similarly, St Philip's CE VC Primary School has experienced falls in the level of intake. Examination of the potential to reduce capacity at this school to 210 places should be undertaken during this Review but it needs to be borne in mind that it is necessary to maintain some unfilled places in an area to allow flexibility and for occasional admissions outside the normal admissions timescale.

Another issue affecting this Review is the potential relocation of St John's Catholic Primary School to a site within the area. A final decision on site selection is due to be taken on 15^th December 2004.