Archived decisions

Contact:

Ann Begley, Assistant County Education Officer (School Branch); 01962 846518; [email protected]

Alex Munro, Education Officer (Admissions and Special Projects); 01962 846462; [email protected]

Bob Eardley, Strategic Planning Manager; 01962 846275; [email protected]

1 Summary

1.1. This report contains details of the consultation process in relation to the review of primary school provision in the Romsey area, together with background information and figures relevant to Papers 3 and 4. The consultation paper approved by the Executive Member for Education in March 2004 is attached as Appendix 1 to this report.

1.2. Members of the committee have visited all schools under review, as detailed in section 5 of this report. A map of the area is attached (A).

1.3. In addition to the consultations with governors, staff and parents, the views of local parish and town councils, the Test Valley Borough Council, the Test Valley Community Learning Partnership, Southampton City Council and the local Primary Care Trust have been sought. Details of responses are given in the separate reports.

2 Background and consultation options

2.1 On 25 March 2004, the Executive Member for Education authorised local consultations with Romsey school communities following an analysis of primary school provision in the respective areas. The analysis showed that, in the Romsey area, the low number of pupils at Romsey Infant and Romsey Junior Schools was a cause for concern. At Ampfield there was significant surplus provision.

2.2 Based on the January 2004 pupil census, Table 1 was included in the consultation document.

Table 1

(1) The number of places in accordance with the most recent capacity assessments

(2) This published admission number (PAN) was used for admissions to Year R and Year 3 in 2003

(3) Infant school participation rates reflect the number of children attending the school compared with the number of children living within the school's catchment area. Junior school participation rates reflect the percentage of children transferring from the linked infant schools. The participation rates for Cupernham Junior, Halterworth and Romsey Abbey have been corrected but forecasts are not affected.

(*) From 2005 admissions, the PAN for Cupernham Infant School has been reduced to 60 and for Cupernham Junior School to 75. These reductions are shown in Table 2.

(**) There is currently a temporary classroom on site formerly used by the nursery unit which has now moved into the main school building. It is scheduled for removal.

2.3 As a result of discussions with chairmen of governors and headteachers, it was decided that the review would focus on the seven schools listed in Table 2 and consultations were carried out at these schools. The decision to reduce the scope of the review was taken in order to make the review more manageable and lessen the uncertainty for schools. In the table, the agreed PAN for 2005 admissions has been used, thus reflecting the reduction in the capacity of the two Cupernham schools.

Table 2

	Net capacity Sept 04	NOR September 04	PAN 2005	NOR Jan 09	Surplus 09 (places)	Surplus 09 (percentage)
Ampfield CE Primary	84	23	12	4	80	95.2%
Cupernham Infant	180	154	60	137	43	23.9%
Cupernham Junior	300	290	75	198	102	34%
Halterworth Primary	413	417	60	364	49	11.9%
Romsey Infant	180	72	60	85	95	52.8%
Romsey Junior	248	170	62	106	142	57.3%
Romsey Abbey CE (Aided) Primary	210	215	30	205	5	2.4%
Totals	1,615	1,342	359	1,099	516	32%

NB -September numbers on roll have been used in the above table but the projections are based on January 2004 data for consistency with Table 1.

2.4 Opportunities have already been taken to reduce the extent of the surplus. As part of the LEA's continuing dialogue with schools in managing the provision of places, spaces at the two Cupernham schools have been redesignated as specialist teaching facilities. These redesignations have provided accommodation which is needed to support recent curriculum developments and to match available space more closely to the number of pupils. The effect of these actions is to reduce the number of surplus places in the schools listed in Table 2 compared to the table in the original consultation paper.

2.5 The extent of the surplus places still remaining at schools in the Romsey area led to consultations taking place on specific options in each of the two areas. The following options were the subject of consultation, explained in more detail in section 6 of Appendix 1:

Ampfield area

Option 1 - closure of Ampfield CE School

Romsey area

Option 2 - closure of Romsey Infant and Junior Schools and transfer of pupils to Cupernham Infant and Junior and Halterworth Schools

Option 3 - amalgamation of Romsey Infant and Junior Schools on the Romsey Junior School site to create a 210 place 4-11 1fe (1 form of entry) primary school

Option 4 - amalgamation of Cupernham Infant and Junior Schools on the Cupernham site to create a 360 place 4-11 primary school

Option 5 - retention of all the Cupernham and Romsey schools

2.6 Table 3 shows the level of real term protection currently afforded to the schools under review. This was discussed in detail during the consultation meetings:

Table 3

The number on roll figures have been rounded, with consequent slight adjustments to the figures in the final column compared to those used during the consultation period.

For ease of comparison the above table excludes retrospective adjustment in respect of the school's 2003/04 budget; it also excludes what is known as School Standards Fund or `Chancellor's money' which is allocated directly to schools in `steps' rather than on a rising per-capita basis.

3 Early Years

3.1 In agreeing that consultation should take place, the Executive Member for Education was keen to explore opportunities which might arise, as a result of potential changes to the current pattern of primary school provision, to consolidate and enhance early years provision as appropriate.

3.2 An analysis of forecast demand and provision for both early education and childcare facilities in the review area has been carried out. The results, and implications for the review, are set out in the separate reports.

4 Consultations with statutory bodies

4.1 The following councils were consulted: Ampfield, Braishfield, and Romsey Extra Parish Councils, Romsey Town Council and Test Valley Borough Council. Comments were also invited from Southampton City Council, the Eastleigh and Test Valley South Primary Care Trust and the Test Valley Community Learning Partnership.

4.2 The views of those groups which replied are referred to in the separate reports.

5 Members' visits

5.1 Members of the Education Policy Review Committee (EPRC) visited the schools on the following dates:

· 6 September 2004: Halterworth Primary School, Romsey Abbey CE Primary School(Aided) and Ampfield CE Primary Schools.

· 14 September 2004: Romsey Infant and Junior and Cupernham Infant and Junior Schools.

5.2 Issues raised by EPRC members are addressed in the separate reports.

6 Views of the local county councillors

6.1 Local county councillors have been fully informed of the consultation process and have attended meetings. A written submission will be available at the 12 October meeting from one councillor who cannot attend; another councillor intends to address the committee.

7 General issues raised during consultation

Forecast pupil numbers

7.1 Much discussion and correspondence centred upon future numbers of children in the area and schools they might attend. Forecast pupil numbers take into account all planned new housing, including type and tenure, and are based upon small area population forecasts which detail the number of 0 - 4 year-olds in an area.

7.2 New housing proposed in the Test Valley District Council's Revised Deposit Local Plan (published in January 2004) has been included in the forecasts. That plan covers the period up to 2011 and also identifies sites that may be required for development after that date. Within the area covered by this review, the plan takes account of proposed housing on the former Romsey Brewery site (114 dwellings) within the plan period, and a reserve allocation for 500 houses at Abbottswood, to the north of Romsey, to come forward only if a specific demand can be demonstrated. Other smaller sites have also been taken into account. The projections in the consultation paper (Appendix 1) include pupils expected from the Romsey Brewery site but not the proposed Abbottswood development.

SEN resourced provision

7.3 A review has been carried out of the County Council's SEN provision in the area with a view to determining whether additional resourced provision is required. Romsey Community School (secondary) has resourced provision for pupils with social communication disorders within the autistic spectrum but it is not currently the LEA's policy to match this provision in the primary sector. Depending on the Executive Member's decisions, it might be appropriate to consider with individual schools the scope for enhancing SEN provision in the area and increasing schools' accessibility for pupils with a disability.

8 Process and timescales

8.1 Details are provided for each area in the two separate supporting papers.

9 Recommendation

9.1 That the report be noted and used to inform consideration of the two complementary papers (3 and 4) dealing with schools in Romsey and Ampfield.

Section 100D - 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.

None