Children's Services Management Team Sponsor : Pam Robinson, Deputy Director, Children & Families Branch; Telephone: 01962 847991; e-mail: [email protected]

Contact: Eric Smith, Education Officer SEN; Telephone: 01962 846245; e-mail: [email protected]

1 Summary

1.1 On 15 December 2005, the Executive Member with special responsibility for Education authorised consultations on key issues relating to the County Council's provision for deaf and hearing impaired (HI) children. A report on the outcomes of those consultations was made to the Executive Member for Children's Services on 12 October 2006. This report is attached (Annexe 1, Appendix 1). The full report with appendices is available at: www.hants.gov.uk/decisions/decisions-index/index-docs-6498. The report had also been considered by the Policy Review Committee for Children's Services.

1.2 Taking account of the report and representations made by the Policy Review Committee, the Executive Member for Children's Services approved the Communication Policy which will form the basis for the County Council's strategic development of services and provision for deaf and hearing impaired children, and agreed that the Children's Services Department should continue to develop support services for pre-school children and their families, in line with the Communication Policy.

1.3 The Executive Member agreed that resourced provision for deaf and HI children should be developed according to the following criteria:

· provision which will be able to offer both auditory/oral and signed modes of communication;

· viability of numbers to maintain security of staffing and, wherever possible, of pupil peer group;

· geographical spread and accessibility;

· continuity between primary and secondary linked schools;

· provision of outreach to children and young people in other schools and settings.

The Executive Member also decided that further consultation should take place on the proposal to consolidate resourced provision into three school pyramids; in the north, south and west of the County, in accordance with the criteria above; and that information regarding this proposal be widely disseminated. The outcome of these consultations was to be reported to the Executive Member, together with detailed proposals, if appropriate, for the re-alignment of resourced provision in line with the proposed model.

Consultations

1.4 The review of education provision for deaf and HI children applied to the whole County. The consolidation of resourced provision is intended to ensure that children living in all parts of Hampshire who meet the County Council's criteria, both now and in the future, may be able to attend a resourced mainstream school. It will also support the intention to have provision which offers both auditory/oral and signed modes of communication. A consultation document was issued on 7 November 2006 (Annexe 1). This document outlined reasons for consolidating resourced provision, based on the five criteria (para. 1.3 above). It included the options for the location of resourced provision, which had been included in the earlier consultation (February - May 2006). Views were invited on the proposal to consolidate resourced provision into three pyramids of linked schools, in the north, south and west of the County; and on options for the future organisation of resourced provision. The document was issued to all County Councillors and MPs for Hampshire. The closing date for responses was 5 January 2007.

1.5 Consultation meetings were arranged in November in Basingstoke, Winchester and Fareham. In the light of points raised at the first of these meetings (Basingstoke) and of representations made directly to County Council officers, an addendum to the consultation document was issued on 24 November (Annexe 2), following which an additional meeting took place in Farnborough. This addendum offered additional options for the location of resourced provision in the north of the County, including the option of retaining provision in Basingstoke and closing provision in Farnborough.

Annexes

1.6 The following annexes are attached to this report:

Annexe 1: Consultation document issued on 7 November, including the report of the Director of Children's Services to the Executive Member for Children's Services on 12 October 2006.

Annexe 2: Addendum to consultation document, issued on 24 November.

Annexe 3: Summary of responses to consultation

Annexe 4: List of respondents

Annexe 5: Commentary on key issues raised

Annexe 6: Transport implications of Options

Annexe 7: Statement by Hampshire Action Team (HAT) for Basingstoke & Deane

Annexe 8: Statement by HAT for Hart & Rushmoor

2 Background

2.1 Hampshire has six primary phase (including infant and junior) and four secondary mainstream schools with resourced provision for pupils who use auditory/oral means of communication. Two primary and one secondary school provide for pupils who use sign language as their main, or as a significant, means of communication. (A list of schools and a map showing their location are attached: Annexe 1, Appendix 3).

2.2 Deaf/HI children and families may also receive the support from a number of services provided by the County Council. The Specialist Teacher Advisory (STA) Service provides support to children and advice to parents and to staff in schools and to other early years and education settings, in meeting the needs of deaf and HI children. The current caseload of the STA Service is approximately 900 children.

2.3 Sixty-nine children currently (January 2007) attend Hampshire resourced provision for deaf and HI children. This is a reduction from 79 in January 2000. Resourced provision caters for a relatively small proportion of deaf and HI children in Hampshire. Most deaf and HI children in Hampshire are effectively and successfully educated in their local mainstream school.

2.4 There has been a reduction in recent years in the number of children and young people in resourced provision who use British Sign Language (BSL) as their main mode of communication. The increased number of children receiving cochlear implants is believed to have contributed to this trend. The introduction of newborn screening and consequent early identification of hearing impairment and early intervention should enable more deaf and HI children to develop better auditory/oral skills.

2.5 For many deaf and hearing impaired pupils it is likely that no one communication mode will support their needs throughout their entire school life. Children's needs change over time and resourced provision which is able to offer a range of communication modes will enable the provision to respond quickly to changes in need without a change in placement. The number of children on the STA Service caseload who use sign has increased, as there is increasing use of sign with children prior to cochlear implant. Over time many of these pupils will move towards the auditory/oral mode. Pupils with a progressive hearing loss may take the opposite route and need to supplement their auditory/oral skills with the use of sign. A significant number of deaf and hearing impaired pupils can have additional needs which may be met by the use of sign. These additional needs can take some time to be diagnosed. Resourced provision offering mixed modes can be more flexible and adaptable in meeting individual needs, offering individual communication plans for all pupils.

3 Summary of responses

3.1 Comments were invited using a proforma. Responses are summarised in Annexe 3. A list of schools and others who completed the proforma or provided responses is also attached (Annexe 4). Parents' responses include some from parents of children with severe/profound hearing impairment who meet the County Council's criteria for placement in resourced schools but have chosen not to use resourced provision (or are still at pre-school) as well as parents of both deaf and hearing children attending resourced schools. "Others" comprise mainly professionals, voluntary and statutory organisations, councillors and MPs.

3.2 In the attached summary of responses, no attempt has been given to "weight" individual views or comments. Parents' responses may be from individual parents or from both parents of the same child; schools' responses include individual staff and governors, as well as "corporate" responses on behalf of the staff or governors; other responses may be on behalf of an organisation/service or individual.

3.3 The consultation which took place from November 2006 to January 2007 was an extension of the earlier (February - May 2006) consultation. Recommendations in this report have therefore taken account of views expressed during both consultation periods and summarised in this paper and the report to Executive Member for Children's Services on 12 October 2006.

3.4 A commentary on the key issues raised during the consultation is provided in Annexe 5. Key issues are: the impact on future pupil numbers of house building (especially in the Basingstoke & Deane and Hart & Rushmoor Districts); the costs and times of children's journeys to and from school; and availability of provision which serves less favoured areas and service families. As noted in Annexe 5, para. 5, planned housing development should not increase the number of deaf/HI pupils. Although there will be a small growth in the overall pupil population in Basingstoke & Deane in 2011, the trend of declining pupil numbers in both this District and the County will continue. Potential implications for travel costs and times are set out in Annexe 5, para. 7, and Annexe 6. The County Council's Home-School Transport Entitlement Policy states that "transport arrangements will allow the child to reach school without undue stress, strain or difficulty. Shorter journey times are desirable in achieving this. As a guide, maximum journey times should be 45 minutes for primary children and 60 minutes for secondary children. Limited exceptions up to 75 minutes will apply in some situations, although individual needs will be assessed". These exceptions include transport to special schools. Additional costs and journey times are considered reasonable, in order to achieve the benefits for pupils of larger peer groups and longer-term stability in relation to recruitment and retention of specialist staff. Some concerns were also expressed at meetings about the fair application of the five key criteria (para. 1.3). All options have been reviewed against these criteria.

4 Views of Local MPs and County Councillors

4.1 Comments have been received from the following MPs:

Gerald Howarth, Michael Mates and Maria Miller.

4.2 Representations have been received from a number of County and District Councillors; these are included in the Summary of Responses (Annexe 3). Statements to the Executive Member have been made by the Hampshire Action Teams (HAT) for Basingstoke & Deane (Annexe 7) and Hart & Rushmoor (Annexe 8). Responses have also been received from Cllrs Anne Edwards, Mark Kemp-Gee and Dennis Wright.

5 The Way Forward

Criteria

5.1 In October 2006, the Executive Member for Children's Services agreed that resourced provision for deaf and HI children should be developed according to the five criteria set out in para. 1.3 above. These criteria had been included in the earlier (February 2006) consultation paper and were generally endorsed as an appropriate basis for establishing the future pattern of provision.

Provision which will be able to offer both auditory/oral and signed modes of communication

5.2 The proposal to develop `mixed mode' resourced provision has been supported through both consultation periods. This development offers the opportunity to establish, in the continuing resourced schools, provision which is personalised to individual pupils' needs as they change over time. The schools will continue to develop their ethos and practice to ensure that all children are fully included in the life of the school. Pupils in two auditory/oral provisions are already learning, and being supported through, signed communication; in one case through outreach support from a neighbouring resourced school. Three pupils attending non-resourced mainstream schools have moved from developing exclusively auditory/oral communication to also being supported with signed communication, again through outreach from resourced schools.

Continuity between primary and secondary linked schools

5.3 The principle that pupils in resourced provision should be able to remain within the same `pyramid' of linked primary and secondary schools has been substantially supported in the consultations. Some respondents have suggested that the benefits of applying this criterion to a review of existing provision have been overstated. Parents exercise their right to express a preference for the school which they wish their children to attend, and other factors may outweigh any perceived benefit from remaining within the same wider peer group. However, the right of parents to express a preference regarding the type of school or the actual school for a child does not negate the principle that the opportunity should be given to pupils to remain within a familiar peer group of both deaf/HI and hearing peers.

5.4 Many respondents have highlighted the potential benefit to children from this continuity, particularly in respect of the Children Act outcomes of being healthy, and enjoying and achieving. Maintaining a familiar peer group through successive years and Key Stages may support children socially and emotionally and thereby reduce risks of impaired mental well-being. Linked schools liaise closely in planning their curriculum to ensure continuity and effective transfer procedures. Provision for deaf/HI children should, therefore, be more easily incorporated in the schools' wider planning to meet pupils' learning and pastoral needs across all Key Stages. Offering continuity of provision in linked primary and secondary schools remains a recommendation.

Geographical spread and accessibility

5.5 Responses to the consultations have supported the principle of accessibility for children throughout the County. Some respondents have questioned the benefit, especially cost-benefit, of establishing new provision in the west of the County if that results in the closure of existing provision elsewhere; the view has been expressed that, in terms of ease of travel, it is easier for children from the Winchester area to travel to Basingstoke than vice versa. There is, however, no other resourced provision for deaf/HI children in the west of the County, including the New Forest area. Children within travelling distance of Southampton may access resourced provision in the City, subject to consultation with the City Council. Many respondents to the two consultations have supported the option of developing primary phase resourced provision in Winchester, linked with one of the existing secondary schools' provision, and this remains a recommendation. Both primary schools (Kings Worthy and South Wonston schools), which have expressed an interest in developing resourced provision, are accessible by good road links with the Basingstoke and Winchester areas and the west of the County.

Viability of numbers to maintain security of staffing and, wherever possible, of pupil peer groups

5.6 Most deaf and HI pupils are successfully educated in their local, mainstream school. These children and the school staff working with them receive the support of the Specialist Teacher Advisory Service and other support services, as necessary, from both the County Council and other agencies. Nevertheless, there appears to be overwhelming support for the maintenance of resourced provision. As noted in the consultation document issued in February 2006, as well as providing a base of outreach support, resourced provision offers:

· established teams of staff who can provide: professional support to each other and to colleagues throughout the school; cover for staff absences from skilled/experienced colleagues; continuity during times of staff turnover;

· a continuous on-site staff development programme;

· daily support from a qualified teacher of the deaf;

· whole school awareness of deaf issues and the needs of deaf and HI pupils;

· `ownership' of the provision by the whole school;

· accessible parent networks and advice;

· adapted environment;

· ICT and other resources, for curriculum support and differentiation and maintenance of radio and other aids;

· peer group of pupils with similar needs.

Resourced provisions must, therefore, be of sufficient size to ensure that the benefits of staffing, peer group support and whole school awareness are achieved and maintained.

5.7 Size of peer groups: a key issue in the recent consultation has been how to achieve an appropriate number and spread of resourced schools to achieve accessibility (avoiding excessive journey lengths and costs) and reasonable size of peer group. Many respondents have expressed the view that most existing resourced provisions remain viable in terms of peer group size. However, the number of pupils in some resourced provision remains small and the trend of recent years is for this number to reduce as pupils are increasingly supported in their local school. Consolidation of provision is required in order to ensure that the benefits listed in 5.6 are maintained.

5.8 Funding and staffing: the number of pupils in two resourced secondary schools (Aldworth Science College and The Westgate School) does not currently generate sufficient funding to maintain a full-time teacher of the deaf as well as the necessary number of support staff. This may disadvantage the recruitment and retention of suitably qualified staff, and could be a greater difficulty in provisions which need, in future, to offer staff skills across the full range of communication modes. Numbers in the primary phase provisions also require linked infant and junior schools to use their staff flexibly between the schools, in order to maintain appropriate staffing levels as pupil numbers fluctuate from year to year.

Provision of outreach to children and young people in other schools and settings

5.9 The principle of offering outreach support from specialist settings is considered to be good practice and is consistent with the County Council's Strategy for Developing the Role of Special Schools, approved in October 2006. This facility helps to ensure that effective use is made of staff's skills (especially where these are scarce, such as high levels of BSL communication). It also contributes to the financial viability and retention of staff when numbers attending resourced provision fluctuate.

Consolidation of resourced provision into three school pyramids

5.10 Most respondents to the consultation are associated with existing provisions, and have supported options which retain that provision. However, in the light of all the factors set out in the consultation documents, such as a declining trend of pupil numbers, development of mixed mode provision and concerns to ensure effective provision for children's emotional health and well-being, which may impact on the maintenance of good quality provision, there remains a strong case to consolidate provision into linked schools. The main objections to this proposal related to: housing growth and pupil numbers; travel costs and times; maintaining provision in areas of greater socio-economic deprivation and for service families. The principle of consolidating provision in three pyramids has received support although the majority of response forms received did not support this proposal. To achieve county-wide accessibility, these should serve the north, south and west of the County. This report does not recommend maintaining the resourced provision at Medstead Primary School although this was a recommendation of the previous (October 2006) report (see para. 5.15 below).

5.11 In the south, Wallisdean Infant and Junior and Neville Lovett Secondary schools have resourced provision and are linked schools. Their numbers are viable. It is proposed that these schools provide the resource in the south of the County, as recommended in the previous report, and that the provision at Woodcot Primary School be closed.

5.12 In the west, resourced provision exists in both Henry Beaufort and The Westgate schools, in Winchester. The Westgate School currently has only one pupil, in Year 10. Henry Beaufort School has seven pupils, across all age groups. Kings Worthy and South Wonston primary schools have expressed an interest in developing resourced provision for deaf/HI pupils; both are linked to Henry Beaufort School. It is proposed that the resourced provision in The Westgate School be closed and that provision be developed in a primary school linked to Henry Beaufort School, as previously recommended.

5.13 Consideration of the possible consolidation of provision in the north of the County has proved most contentious during the consultation. The closure of either the Manor/Cove schools or Park View schools/Aldworth Science College provisions will result in some pupils travelling greater distances to the next nearest provision. This will incur greater costs, but these may be considered to be reasonable costs to absorb in order to achieve the long-term security for pupils and staff of good quality provision. Consolidation into one pyramid serving the north of the County remains the recommendation.

5.14 Prior to these consultations, the County Council had committed itself to a major re-building scheme at Cove School, including re-locating the resourced provision. The costs of transport to alternative provision is likely to be greater if provision in Cove is closed than if provision in Basingstoke is closed (see Annexe 5, para. 7, and Annexe 6). Retention of provision in Cove will maintain provision accessible to pupils living in Surrey (three Surrey pupils currently attend the Manor/Cove resourced provisions), helping to sustain viable peer groups. Planned housing development is not expected to significantly affect numbers of deaf/HI children living in Basingstoke or Farnborough. On balance, therefore, there is a stronger case to retain provision in the Manor/Cove schools, and to close provisions in the Park View Infant and Junior schools and in Aldworth Science College.

5.15 The report to Executive Member for Children's Services in October 2006 considered the views which had been expressed in support of retaining provision at Medstead Primary School. It was noted that retention of provision at the school was not consistent with all the criteria for the review of resourced provision, as it does not have a linked secondary school with resourced provision and its rural location does not make it immediately accessible to a large number of pupils. The report to Executive Member in October 2006 suggested that it would be appropriate to maintain provision at Medstead "at least until existing auditory/oral provisions which will continue have developed appropriate expertise in providing the wider range of communication modes, when a further review may be appropriate". The reasons for this recommendation were finely balanced. Following the further period of consultation on the proposed consolidation of provision on the basis of the stated criteria, it is now proposed that the resourced provision at Medstead Primary School be closed. As part of the transition process for the implementation of these proposals including the establishment of new provision in Winchester, appropriate support will be offered as necessary to the school as set out in paragraph 5.16 below.

Transition arrangements

5.16 Should a decision be taken to close any provision, transition arrangements will be planned for children already attending the provision. Discussions will take place with parents and professionals who support the child to consider the prime interests of the child. Wherever possible, support will be maintained to enable pupils to remain at their current school until their normal leaving date, or at least until the end of their Key Stage, with specialist support being provided by outreach or other appropriate services (e.g. Specialist Teacher Advisers).

6 Legal implications

6.1 The Education Act 1996 requires (Section 315 (1) ) local authorities to keep under review the arrangements made by them for special educational provision.

6.2 The consultation process fulfilled the requirement of Section 315 (2) to consult all schools affected by the review.

7 Financial implications

Revenue

7.1 The integration of auditory/ oral and signed provisions will not incur additional costs. The existing arrangement (Agreed Place Number) for funding resourced provision takes account of the different costs of provision according to phase and communication mode. Reducing the number of resourced provisions should reduce the current need, in some schools, to fund APN in excess of actual pupil numbers in order not to compromise the quality of education in provisions with few pupils.

7.2 The number of pupils attending resourced provision has been declining. It is unclear whether the proposed changes will slow that trend. Provision to meet children's special educational needs is funded through either resourced provision or, for children in other mainstream schools, through the County's funding arrangement for SEN. Year by year variations in these numbers are normally accommodated through the careful management of SEN budgets. These proposals should not, by themselves, require more children to receive SEN funding than is currently provided for.

7.3 A reduction in the number of resourced schools will result in some children having a longer home-school journey. There will be a consequent additional transport cost. Wherever possible routes are shared to minimise the number of vehicle journeys and any additional transport costs may be offset by the declining total number of pupils attending resourced provision. Budget provision will be made in 2008/2009 and subsequent years to cover any additional costs.

Capital funding

7.4 The establishment of resourced provision in a primary school in Winchester will require some capital expenditure. This will be funded from the County's allocation of Schools Access Initiative (SAI) funds which has been provided by central government to enable the local authority to improve mainstream schools' accessibility. Two primary schools in Winchester have expressed interest in developing this provision. Preliminary assessment indicates that one of these should be able to make existing, surplus accommodation available as the resource base. Some adaptations will be required to achieve appropriate acoustic treatment and to ensure the necessary facilities are available to staff. If new build is required to create this provision, it is estimated that it will require an allocation of approximately £250,000 (including fees and fittings) from SAI in the appropriate financial year.

7.5 Improvements to facilities in resourced provision and to acoustic features of the schools have been undertaken over time, funded by SAI. The quality of physical accommodation and facilities in schools with continuing resourced provision will be kept under review, both by the County and by the schools themselves. Schools have a duty under the Disability Discrimination Act to maintain an Accessibility Plan showing how the school will, over time, improve their environment to increase the extent to which disabled pupils can take advantage of education and associated services.

8 Corporate aims and the five outcomes of the Children Act

8.1 Proposals in this paper support the corporate strategy in the following ways:

making Hampshire safer and more secure for all - by helping to ensure that parents are fully involved in decisions regarding provision for their children and are able to support the development of their child's communication skills;

maximising wellbeing - by securing resourced provision for the future, which nurtures social and emotional wellbeing as well as maintaining high quality education and support; and

enhancing our quality of place - through effective support services and a secure pattern of resourced provision which is accessible to children throughout the County.

8.2 The proposals also contribute to the achievement for deaf and HI children of the five outcomes as specified in the Children Act 2004; viz.

· Being healthy

· Staying safe

· Enjoying and achieving

· Making a positive contribution

· Economic wellbeing

9 Personnel implications

9.1 If changes to resourced provision are approved, then consultations would start with the relevant parties including the staff themselves and their trade union/professional association representatives as part of the implementation process and within personnel procedures.

10 Impact assessment

10.1 Race and equality impact has been considered in the development of these recommendations. The potential impact for some children of longer home-school travel will be outweighed by the availability of a wider range of communication modes and more stable sizes of peer groups.

11 Crime prevention issues

11.1 None noted.

Recommendations

That the Executive Member for Children's Services agrees the following:

1 the following statutory consultations are undertaken within the preferred strategy of consolidating resourced provision for deaf and HI children into three pyramids of schools that will offer both auditory/oral and signed modes of communication, sustainable peer groups, security of staffing and outreach support to children in other schools and settings, and which are accessible to children throughout the County (the adoption of this strategy to be subject to the outcome of the following consultations);

2 statutory consultations take place with the governing bodies, staff, parents and other interested parties on detailed proposals for the closure of resourced provision for deaf and HI children at Park View Infant, Park View Junior and Woodcot Primary schools and at Aldworth Science College and The Westgate School, with effect from August 2008;

3 headteachers and governing bodies of primary schools linked to Henry Beaufort School be invited to consider developing resourced provision, to open in September 2008 (or as soon after as possible), and statutory consultations take place, as appropriate, with the governing body, staff, parents and other interested parties on detailed proposals for the establishment of resourced provision for deaf and HI children;

4 statutory consultations take place with the governing body, staff, parents and other interested parties on the proposal to close the resourced provision for deaf and HI children at Medstead Primary School with effect from August 2008, but including a proposal that appropriate support will be offered, as necessary, to the school for a limited period as part of the transition process for the implementation of the changes proposed in recommendation 3;

5 a report of the outcome of these consultations be made to the Executive Member for Children's Services.

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.

NB: the list excludes

1. Published works

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

List documents here or type `none'.