Contact: Ian Lawson, Strategic Planning Officer (01962 846350; [email protected])

1 Summary

1.1 This report recommends that the committee advises the Executive Member on the form of the LEA's response to consultations from Applemore Technology College on a proposed change in status from Foundation to Voluntary Aided (Church of England).

1.2 Particular attention is drawn to paragraph 7.3 of this report, and paragraph 11 of the consultation document, in view of the significance of funding as a major element of the proposal.

1.3 Correspondence received is on deposit in the Members' Room during the week prior to the Education Policy Review Committee meeting will be available for perusal in the council chamber from 12.30pm on the day of the meeting.

1.4 The issues considered in this report are pertinent to Corporate Aims 1 (Maximising life opportunities) and 4 (Building strong and safe communities) as the LEA seeks to ensure the availability of high quality learning opportunities, reduce the impact of discrimination and work in partnership with local communities. The report should also be considered in the light of the County Council's equalities policies.

2 The proposal

2.1 The governing body of Applemore Technology College and Winchester Diocesan Board of Education have commenced consultations on whether to make formal proposals that the college should change its status from Foundation to Voluntary Aided (Church of England), with effect from September 2005. A copy of the consultation paper is appended to this report (Annexe 1).

2.2 The LEA is invited to comment on these proposals whilst these consultations are taking place during the remainder of the current summer term. The following paragraphs make some comments on the proposals as set out in the consultation paper, to assist Members to consider the LEA's response.

3 Procedure

3.1 The only way that a school can change status to become a "faith" school is for the existing school to close and for promoters (usually the appropriate diocese) to propose the establishment of a "new" school with church affiliation. In the case of a foundation school the governing body can make proposals for the school to close. This is reflected in the consultation paper (paragraph 12) with the Winchester Church of England Diocese being the promoters of the "new" school.

3.2 The college governors and diocese must consult all interested parties. Some are listed in paragraph 13 of the consultation paper. In addition, the Secretary of State's guidance states that consultation should take place with the LEA, local schools and, as the proposals involves post-16 provision, the local Learning and Skills Council. It is understood that such consultation is taking place.

3.3 Following the consultation exercise, the governing body and diocese will have to decide whether to proceed with the publication of public notices. If they do proceed to publish, there will be a six week period for objections and comments, following which the proposals will be considered by the School Organisation Committee (and could be referred to the Schools Adjudicator if the SOC cannot give unanimous approval). The LEA will, therefore, have an opportunity to submit formal representations in response to the public notices and these will be considered by the SOC if the proposals are submitted for approval.

4 Admissions

4.1 As a voluntary aided school, the governing body would be the admission authority, as is the case with the current foundation status. The proposed admissions policy is given in Appendix 2 to the consultation paper. Whilst this makes provision for current categories of applicants, there is the addition of an allocation of 35% of places for children who apply on the grounds of church connections. Bearing in mind that Applemore College is not currently oversubscribed (with 121 first preference applications for admission in September 2003 against a published admission number of 155 (which includes the five places allocated to the specialist SEN provision)) it is unlikely that this proposed policy will restrict the availability of places to pupils living in the college's defined catchment area under current circumstances.

4.2 However, the change to voluntary aided status would have an impact on the availability of home to school transport. Aided schools are covered by the County Council's denominational transport policy which restrict transport entitlement to those pupils baptised into the denomination of the foundation of the school who live between three and ten miles from the school. Transport is supported either by providing season tickets to pupils or funding to the governing body to assist them with making transport provision as home to school transport to aided secondary schools is not organised by the County Council. Aided secondary schools do not act as catchment area schools in Hampshire. Where this has happened in another LEA, they have been challenged by atheist parents who consider that transport should be provided to alternative schools.

4.3 If the Applemore proposal is approved, the transport implications will be an additional expense to be met by the LEA. There may be implications for numbers on roll at other schools. It is difficult to know how many pupils would be so entitled, as that will depend on the college's success in attracting pupils from other areas, but the ten mile radius does include a significant residential population, including the whole of Totton.

5 Sixth Form

5.1 The current sixth form had 56 on roll at the start of the 2003/04 school year. The consultation paper (paragraph 7) states that it is hoped that the sixth form will "develop and enlarge" as popularity increases. This will be mainly a matter for the local Learning and Skills Council to consider, but may have implications for the LEA if students are attracted away from other providers (such as Totton College) and become entitled to assistance with transport on the grounds of church connections. Provision is currently the subject of an "Area Review" of 14-19 provision and the proposal to enlarge this sixth form has not been part of that review, and has not been supported by local colleges.

6 Staff and Property

6.1 As stated in paragraph 6 a of the consultation paper, if the proposals are approved existing staff would transfer from being employees of the existing governing body, to that of the "new" school, with protected terms and conditions of employment.

6.2 Paragraph 11 of the paper suggests that the college site would transfer from the governing body to the diocese, as trustees of the school, with the playing field likely to be transferred back to the LEA.. Although it appears that some discussions on the details of property ownership are taking place with the DfES, these have not, to date, included the LEA. As transfer of property issues are unlikely to be straightforward, the LEA will need to be a party to any discussions and an appropriate request has been made direct to the DfES.

7 Governance

7.1 Appendix 3 to the consultation paper sets out the likely changes to the constitution of the governing body if the proposal is approved. It should be noted that this shows a reduction in representation of parents from seven to six, teachers from two to one and the local community, where co-opted and partnership governors are replaced by those appointed through the diocese. The church appoints foundation governors, who form the majority of the governing body.

8 Financial implications

8.1 The change in status would not generate any additional revenue funding for the college. There may, however, be additional transport costs falling on the LEA. This will depend on the number of additional pupils qualifying for assistance, but if an assumption is made that there are an additional ten each year, this could amount to a total of £20,000 per annum. This represents a commitment of £2,000 per student over the five years of secondary education.

8.2 In relation to capital expenditure, as a voluntary aided school, the governing body will be liable to meet 10% of the cost of any capital repairs and improvements, as well as a similar commitment to any major capital works. Before approving the proposals, the School Organisation Committee is required to satisfy itself that the governing body will be able to meet this liability for at least five years. Whilst the consultation paper (paragraph 11) acknowledges this issue, there is no indication of any source of such funding. The college does not have surplus funds accumulated from its revenue budget; it has received support this year from the transitional funding brought in for schools with budget pressures, such as accumulated deficits, under the scheme agreed with the DfES.

8.3 The consultation paper (final part of paragraph 11) indicates that the governing body and diocese may decide not to proceed with the proposals unless they have assurances from the DfES concerning funding through the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme and the replacement of the college buildings as part of the national Church of England PFI partnership (Partnership for Church Schools - PFCS). Applemore did form part of the Hampshire bid for the BSF programme, in one of the two top priority groups across the County. It is not expected that the DfES response to the bids will be known until the autumn of 2004. So far as the PFCS programme is concerned, it is understood that there are a number of unresolved issues that are being discussed nationally between the Church of England and DfES and that this has delayed progress on the first wave of projects. The DfES has indicated that they will be undertaking a fundamental review of funding for voluntary aided school projects. In the light of these two external factors, it is difficult to envisage how the governing body and diocese can obtain sufficient assurances within their timescale for deciding whether to proceed with the publication of public notices. The availability of this funding is emphasised in the consultation document as being of considerable significance, and since it is in such doubt it would appear to remove a major reason for seeking this change.

9 Further comments

9.1 In order to seek clarification of a number of aspects of this proposal, a letter was sent to the college principal and diocesan director on 23 June 2004. This is reproduced as Annexe 2 to this report and includes comments which had been made by the Executive Member for Education in the past. A number of other letters, and copies of letters, have been received and these are listed in the Access to Information declaration below.

9.2 The LEA has a good relationship with Winchester Diocese. There is no reason why, through partnership between the LEA, Winchester Diocese and Applemore College the desired outcomes set out in the consultation paper could not be achieved without a change in status being necessary.

Recommendation

1 That the Policy Review Committee advises the Executive Member for Education on the form of the LEA's response to the consultations.

2 That the Executive Member should send copies of the LEA response to schools, and other interesed parties, in the area with the opportunity for further consideration to be given in the autumn in the light of any comments received.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - Background Documents

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB The list excludes:

1. Published works

2. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

TITLE (All located on Education Department file)

Letter from Hilary Chadwick, Executive Director, Learning and Skills Council for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, to Principal, Applemore College dated 18 June 2004 and reply from the principal dated 21 June 2004.

Letter from Mrs J Bulled, Chair of Hampshire Secondary Headteachers Conference to Principal, Applemore College dated 16 June 2004 and reply from the principal dated 24 June 2004.

Letter from Chris Willsher, Head Teacher of Priestlands School dated 28 June 2004.

Letter from Head Teacher and Chair of Governors, Hounsdown School dated 30 June 2004.