Contact: Louise Brierley, Area Director, Education and Inclusion North and East, Tel. 01252 814755, [email protected]

1 Summary

The accommodation for permanently excluded pupils in Area 1, located at the Ashwood Centre in Basingstoke, is inadequate. This paper outlines the plans to replace it with a number of settings across the town and explains how this fits with the plans to establish an Education Improvement Partnership(IEP) in Basingstoke and Deane in the 2008/09 academic year. The context for Education Inclusion Partnerships in Hampshire is provided in the attached paper `Education Inclusion Partnerships' which was presented to CSDMT on 19 April 2007.

2 Recommendations

2.1 That the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education) agrees that a full feasibility study be undertaken to establish how the services currently delivered by the Ashwood Centre can be delivered in a number of different settings in Basingstoke. The study will examine revenue, personnel and governance implications for the new arrangements as well as the capital issues.

2.2 That the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education) receives a further report in the summer term setting out the results of the study.

3. Background

3.1 The accommodation for permanently excluded pupils in Basingstoke and Deane, located at The Ashwood Centre, Basingstoke, is inadequate. The building was adapted about ten years ago from a former day centre for adults and does not provide accommodation suitable for delivering the curriculum. It would not be possible to remodel the building to provide appropriate accommodation and consequently an alternative solution is required. The buildings have been criticised by Ofsted as inappropriate for their purpose.

3.2 The Children's Services capital programme for 2007/08 includes provision of £4.25m for the provision of new accommodation for excluded pupils in this area of the county and to carry out improvements to the Basingstoke School Plus building at Pack Lane. Of this £4.25m, £0.5m is from the anticipated capital receipt from the disposal of the Ashwood site. The report, Children's Services Capital Programme 2008/09 - 2010/11, elsewhere on this agenda setting out a proposed capital programme for 2008/09, recommends that this provision is carried forward from the current year.

3.3 The proposals for replacing the Ashwood provision are radical and indicate a significant shift in thinking away from the traditional way in which the needs of pupils at risk of permanent exclusion are met.

4. Education Improvement Partnerships

4.1 The DCSF published a document in 2005 setting the context for the development of Education Improvement Partnerships. In the context of this document the Children's Services Department Management Team (CSDMT) agreed in April 2007 that work should be undertaken with a view to establishing an Education Improvement Partnership (EIP) in each of the three Children's Services areas of Hampshire.

4.2 In summary, EIPs are partnerships of schools in a geographical area that work together collaboratively in order to improve behaviour, reduce exclusions and tackle persistent absence. They also streamline and build upon existing partnerships such as 14-19 consortia. The paper considered by CSDMT in April 2007 is attached as Appendix 1.

4.3 The decision about where to locate the first EIP in the North and East area of the county was straightforward. The need to replace the Ashwood Centre with more appropriate accommodation, together with the need to ensure that Basingstoke School Plus improves sufficiently to be removed from Special Measures by December 2008, provided the necessary impetus. Linking this imperative to the availability of capital funding which would enable building work to take place made this the logical way forward.

5 Basingstoke School Plus

5.1 Basingstoke School Plus was established in 2004 to bring together the provision for BESD pupils on the Pack Lane site, and for permanently excluded pupils at the Ashwood Centre. A Management Review took place in May 2006 and the headteacher left in September 2006, with the leadership role being taken by an Acting Headteacher who remains in post. In December 2006 the provision was placed in Special Measures following an Ofsted inspection and is subject to termly monitoring by HMI. At both monitoring visits progress has been judged to be satisfactory; however HMI has highlighted concerns about the quality of accommodation at the Ashwood Centre.

5.2 There is a continuing need for the BESD provision to remain on the Pack Lane site and funding can be made available from within the overall provision of £4.25m referred to in paragraph 3.2 to bring about necessary improvements to this site. The decision regarding the most suitable accommodation for a replacement for the Ashwood Centre is best considered in the context of the Education Improvement Partnership for Basingstoke and Deane.

6. An Education Improvement Partnership for Basingstoke and Deane

6.1 A steering group of headteachers from primary, secondary and special schools, together with officers from the LA has been meeting monthly since April 2007, chaired by the Area Director. A vision statement has been produced by the headteachers and was agreed in principle with secondary headteachers on 19 November 2007. This states: `Basingstoke and Deane Headteachers and College Principals recognise the need for reform and see clearly the rationale of working collaboratively in a robust Education improvement Partnership' and `We recognise that we need to begin to move towards a position in which the education of the children in Basingstoke and Deane is the responsibility of all schools, of the Education Improvement Partnership and associated multi-agency teams.' Thinking has developed rapidly about the ways in which this collaborative approach will better meet the needs of all pupils.

6.2 The vision for the Education Improvement Partnership (EIP) has identified the need for alternative accommodation to deliver the range of provision required to:

· meet the needs of pupils at risk of exclusion and/or emotionally vulnerable;

· to develop intervention strategies; and

· to adopt a personalised approach to teaching and learning.

6.3 Facilities will be needed for pupils at Key Stages 3 and 4. It is proposed that this accommodation should consist of a number of settings which would provide

· Key Stage 3 general teaching

· An assessment and reception centre to identify pupil needs

· A key Stage 3 facility with specialist teaching spaces such as science

· A base for EIP management and to house a training and conference facility

· Development of non school based facilities for Key Stage 4 pupils such as an office base or small workshop facility.

6.4 Further work is being undertaken to finalise requirements, including discussions with headteachers to identify where such facilities could be located, potentially at schools with surplus accommodation.

7 Timeline for development

7.1 If approval is granted, work will begin immediately to establish the different aspects of the provision as quickly as possible. The timescale will obviously depend on the work to be completed, which varies from new build, through major refurbishment to the leasing of office accommodation. The intention will be to have some provision in place during the latter part of 2008 in order to begin the process of moving pupils from the Ashwood site. A further report will be provided giving precise details of all the accommodation changes for approval by the Executive Lead Member. Specialist accommodation has been offered for use by staff and pupils at the Ashwood Centre in some local schools so that pupils can have some learning experiences in laboratories or specialist technology accommodation in the meantime.

8 Personnel implications

8.1 The change of accommodation will mean that staff currently based at the Ashwood site will have a change in their place of employment. As the range of provision develops, staffing needs will be re-assessed. Any additional staffing costs will be borne within the EIS budget and the partnership arrangements through the EIP. As explained in the CSDMT report (Appendix 1) it is anticipated that working with schools in the way described will support further development.

9. Legal implications

9.1 None

10. Financial implications

10.1 The capital funding implications of the proposal to move from the Ashwood site are dealt with elsewhere in this report.

11 Impact assessment

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

12 Crime prevention issues

12.1 The development of the Education Improvement Partnership has the potential to more effectively meet the needs of pupils at risk of permanent exclusion.

13. Views of the local County Councillor

13.1 The views of the local County Councillor have not been sought.

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.

None