With the concurrence of the Chairman under Section 100(B)(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, this matter was included on the agenda to ensure a prompt response to the Schools Adjudicator's decision.

1 Summary

1.1 This report considers the implications of the Schools Adjudicator's decision to reject the County Council's proposals to close Pinewood Infant School and establish replacement provision for children with speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) at Southwood Infant School.

2 Background

2.1 In March 2003 an arson attack at Pinewood Infant School resulted in the building being largely destroyed. Temporary buildings were rapidly placed on site to enable the school to operate, and an early review of school provision in the area was undertaken to determine whether or not Pinewood Infant School should be rebuilt.

2.2 The review identified an increasing number of surplus school places in the area, the majority of which were in the infant sector. Details are contained in the report to the Education Policy Review Committee on 11 May 2004.

2.3 Given that there is accessible, alternative good quality educational provision for potentially displaced Pinewood Infant School children, on 2 July 2004 the County Council published notices proposing the closure of Pinewood Infant School. There were objections to the proposal, as a result of which the matter was duly referred to Hampshire's School Organisation Committee (SOC).

2.4 The SOC met on 15 September 2004 to consider the County Council's proposal to close Pinewood Infant School and was not able to arrive at a unanimous decision, with the LEA group voting in favour of the proposals, the Learning and Skills representative abstaining and the Schools group, the Church of England group and the Roman Catholic Church group voting against the proposals.. The proposal was, therefore, referred to the Office of the Schools Adjudicator.

2.5 The Schools Adjudicator visited the schools concerned and held a public meeting on 21 October 2004 to hear representations regarding the County Council's proposal.

3 Adjudication (see Appendix 1)

3.1 The Department for Education and Skills (DfES) has issued statutory guidance for Schools Adjudicators involved in making decisions on school closure proposals. The guidance states that the following factors must be taken into account:

· Effect on standards and contribution to school improvement;

· Views of interested parties;

· Finance (in particular, whether proposals represent cost-effective use of public funds);

· Other issues (in particular, the length and nature of journeys to alternative provision and the overall effect on the local community);

· Need for school places (in particular, the overall supply and likely demand for school places and whether there is sufficient capacity to accommodate displaced pupils in the area).

3.2 In considering the effect on standards, the Adjudicator concluded that there was no cause for concern about the general standard of education on offer at any of the three schools involved. The Adjudicator commented favourably on the area provision made for infant aged children with speech, language and communication needs, and based at Pinewood Infant School. He expressed the view that, in time, this may be replicated elsewhere but in the shorter term he considered this unlikely. It should be noted, however, that the proposal to establish new provision was at Southwood Infant School, which has high standards and a commitment to inclusion.

3.3 The Adjudicator heard the views of interested parties first hand at the public meeting which he held on 21 October 2004, and appeared to be in receipt of all the documentation relating to the proposal to close Pinewood Infant School. He commented on the passionate feelings of support for the school from governors, parents and staff, and on the widespread respect for the school and its supporters in the immediate local community.

3.4 The Schools Adjudicator's determination to reject the proposal to close Pinewood Infant School included no reference to whether this represented a cost-effective use of public funds.

3.5 With regard to the length and nature of journeys to alternative school provision, the Adjudicator stated that he "was most unhappy about this aspect of the proposals".

3.6 In considering the overall effect of the closure of Pinewood Infant School on the community (notwithstanding the County Council's commitment to retain buildings on the Pinewood Infant School site for community use, and to working in partnership with Rushmoor Borough Council to enhance community provision) the Adjudicator expressed the view that the closure of the school would mean the loss of a focal point for the community cohesion of the Pinewood Park estate population. No reference in that context was made to Guillemont Junior School, which serves the same community.

3.7 The Schools Adjudicator concluded that it was proper to review whether Pinewood Infant School should be rebuilt, and considered that the County Council's projections of the forecast pupil numbers and surplus school places justified a review, focussing on the reduction of primary school places in the area. The Adjudicator expressed sympathy with received comments that the scope of the review was too limited, and concluded that he was not confident that the proposal to close Pinewood Infant School formed part of the best strategic plan for future primary provision in the Farnborough and Cove area as a whole.

4 Scope of the review and school places for primary age children

4.1 The review undertaken in the North West Farnborough area considered whether or not Pinewood Infant School should be rebuilt. The County Council's School Organisation Plan identifies a significant number of forecast surplus places in schools in the Farnborough/Cove area. In defining the scope of the review existing natural links between schools were taken fully into account, together with the need to focus on local communities. Within the six schools included in the review, 296 (19.5%) forecast surplus places in 2009 were identified. Of these, 238 were in infant schools and 58 in junior schools.

4.2 The present number of infant age children living within Pinewood Infant School's catchment area is in the region of 160. In September 2004 there were 80 children on roll (plus up to 15 specialist resourced provision pupils). Historically, a significant number of Pinewood children attend out of catchment area schools, a pattern which is common in areas where there are several schools in close proximity. Forecast pupil numbers for the school indicate a sustained demand for around 75 infant places, which equate to three classes (one form of entry), with the maximum infant class size of 30.

4.3 In his determination report the Schools Adjudicator refers to "the ongoing primary education needs of the Pinewood estate". Providing facilities in primary rather than separate infant and junior schools is, therefore an option which could be implied by the Adjudicator's comments. Guillemont Junior School caters for all junior age children in this area and also provides for children in linked feeder schools to the south of the M3 motorway. As such, there is no requirement for additional provision for junior age children. For example, the building of a new 210 place (one form of entry) primary school would be providing 120 places for junior age children which are not needed, unless this involved changes at Guillemont. The issue the Adjudicator would see addressed, therefore, is how best to make continued provision for infant age children residing in Pinewood Infant School's catchment area.

4.4 The County Council's policies on primary provision need to be considered. The School Organisation Plan sets out the County's policy with regard to optimum school size as follows:

· Infant schools should, wherever possible, fall within the range of two forms of entry (180 places) to five forms of entry (450 places);

· Primary schools should, wherever possible, fall within the range of one form of entry (210 places) to three forms of entry (630 places).

These sizes are based on the educational need for stability and flexibility and on the need to ensure cost-effectiveness in the interests of maximising resources for children across the County.

5 Infant provision

5.1 Provision for infant age children residing within Pinewood Infant School's catchment area could be made through a variety of approaches, depending on whether the Cabinet decides to build at Pinewood, or undertake a wider review.

5.2 New replacement 90 place (one form entry) infant school (plus speech, language and communication needs provision) on the Pinewood Infant School site.

5.2.1 An infant school of this size would meet the demand for infant places from within Pinewood Infant School's catchment area, and provide for infant age children with speech, language and communication needs in this area of the county.

5.2.2 A costing exercise (Appendix 2 refers) undertaken in May 2004 by Property, Business and Regulatory Services (PBRS) gives an indicative capital cost of such provision in the region of £3.1 million, taking into account future inflation and abnormal costs associated with building a new replacement school on this constrained site. Provision for early years and other community use, which presently takes place in surplus capacity at Pinewood Infant School, has not been included in the costing exercise studies. It is possible that the buildings which survived the fire may continue to be utilised for this purpose; this would require further design work and detailed investigations. During consultations, the Leader of Rushmoor Borough Council referred to the possibility of capital funding for community provision. Development of community facilities could be taken forward in close consultation locally with Rushmoor Borough Council.

5.3 There is no need for additional primary provision in the area. A wider review could explore models of primary provision designed to meet an appropriate balance of infant and junior places in the area. If, however, Cabinet decides to retain infant places on the Pinewood site, the impact on other local schools and demand for places at Pinewood would need to be assessed once the new buildings were in place, and further review would therefore be deferred.

6 Financial implications

6.1 As stated earlier in this report, the review of primary school provision in North West Farnborough, subsequent proposals and rejection thereof, came about as a result of a fire at Pinewood Infant School. The cost of replacement provision would be met firstly by a contribution from the county council's fire reinstatement budget. This contribution is yet to be determined based on the scale of damage. Funding would then need to be identified for any resulting shortfall.

6.2 The funding for the fire reinstatement provision will fall on the Schools Budget in the form of increased insurance premiums. This is because the revenue budget is required to fund the cost of fire reinstatements, self insurance serving to manage the impact in the long term. The precise level of increase and timing of collection is yet to be determined and will depend on overall claims history relating to all fires.

7 Legal implications

7.1 No statutory proposals would be required to rebuild Pinewood Infant School. However, if the school were rebuilt as one form of entry (90 place) the LEA would be required to consult with the relevant parties on the new planned admission number of 30. This would take place in the course of its normal consultations on admission arrangements.

8 Personnel implications

8.1 These are addressed in earlier papers.

9 Impact assessment

9.1 Race and equality impact assessment has been considered in the development of this report and no adverse impact has been identified.

10 Views of the Local County Councillors

10.1 In view of the urgent nature of this report, there has only been time for informal consultation with local County Councillors.

Recommendations

1 It is recommended that:

Cabinet considers and resolves action on school provision in the Pinewood area.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background documents

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

None.