Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Decision Report

1. Executive Summary

1.1. The purpose of this paper is to summarise and comment upon the responses received to the publication of the Public Notice and seek approval to the proposal.

1.2. This paper seeks to report on the outcome of the publication of Public Notices, in accordance with Sections 10 (2) and 15(1) of the Education and Inspections Act 2006, for the closure of Yateley Infant School and St. Peter's CE VA Junior School with effect from 31 August 2010 and the establishment of a new one form entry voluntary controlled Church of England Primary School in the current premises of Yateley Infant School with effect from 1 September 2010.

2. Contextual information

2.1. Yateley Infant and St. Peter's CE VA junior Schools serve housing in the eastern part of Yateley. Following a decline in primary school numbers, both schools have a significant number of surplus places. This had led both governing bodies to recognise the impact on the schools' budgets and staffing levels, presenting considerable challenges in maintaining high quality curriculum delivery.

2.2. Following initial discussion with the governing bodies, the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education) agreed that consultations with parents, staff and the wider schools' communities should be undertaken on the view that a primary school would present a better opportunity to build on and improve the quality of children's education and their standards of attainment.

2.3. At the Decision Day on 12 March 2009 the Executive Member considered a report on the outcome of consultations on the proposed reorganisation. This included responses to the preferred option that the new school should have voluntary controlled status and be located in the premises currently occupied by Yateley Infant School, supplemented by temporary accommodation until capital is available for a permanent extension. A copy of that report is attached as Appendix C. In order to take forward the proposal that the new school should have voluntary controlled Church of England status, the Diocese of Winchester obtained consent from the Secretary of State to publish proposals without the need for a competition.

2.4. The report also highlighted the need to make appropriate provision for the future of the two pre-school playgroups currently located on the two school sites.

2.5. The Public Notice was published in the local newspaper, displayed at the school and in the locality on 27 March 2009 for a six week period which ended on 8 May 2009. A copy of the published notice is attached as Appendix D and a copy of the full proposal as Appendix E.

3. Responses received to the Public Notices

3.1. Two objections have been received in response to the public notice. Copies are attached at Appendix F.

3.2. There are four issues raised in the objections (the second objection also raised concerns that relate to planning, not educational, matters):

The St. Peter's site would be a better location for the new school

3.3. Concern about the use of temporary accommodation

3.4. Comments about the adequacy of the public consultation

3.5. The new school should not have Church of England status

3.6. All these issues were addressed in the March Executive Member report, (Appendix C). The following paragraphs give specific responses.

The Yateley Infant site

3.7. A comparison with the accommodation which will be available on the Yateley Infant site indicates that both options provide a similar range of spaces. This includes a full range of specialist facilities including a dedicated ICT suite.

3.8. The objector suggests that the Yateley Infant site is less secure than the St Peter's site. Any need to upgrade perimeter security will be addressed in the detailed design for the site.

3.9. The adaptation of the Yateley Infant building will include the provision of toilets suitable for children of junior school age.

Temporary accommodation

3.10. The temporary accommodation proposed in the first instance would be of good quality and would satisfy present day insulation, acoustic and ventilation standards. It is intended that the building would be located such that it would not conflict with the provision of permanent buildings which would be constructed when funding is available. Whilst there would inevitably be a degree of separation from the existing permanent building, the utilisation of the classrooms would be determined by the headteacher, and may well vary from year to year as the school's requirements evolve.

Consultation

3.11. The consultation prior to the publication of the public notices met all statutory requirements. This included a consultation letter circulated to all staff, governors and parents at the schools, and other interested parties, and a drop-in session attended by officers from the local authority and diocese. Full details are given in the 12 March 2009 Executive Member report (Appendix C ). That report took account of all comments received, including the petition referred to by the objector.

Church of England Status

3.12. The proposed Voluntary Controlled Church of England status reflects the current status of St Peter's and continues Church of England involvement in primary education in the locality, which has existed continuously since the establishment of Yateley National School in about 1865. This was the basis on which the diocese received consent to publish proposals outside the "competition" process.

4. Views of the local member

4.1. The local Member, Adrian Collett, has been consulted throughout the process. He had indicated his support for the amalgamation, but does stress the need to identify capital so that permanent accommodation can be provided at the earliest opportunity.

5. Statutory guidance for decision makers on reaching a decision on the proposal to close the existing schools and establish a new school:

5.1. The Secretary of State has issued statutory guidance for decision makers on the factors that need to be considered when decisions are made.

5.2. There are 4 key questions which must be considered before judging the relevant factors and merits of the statutory proposals. These are as follows:

· Does the published notice comply with statutory requirements?

· Has the statutory consultation been carried out prior to the publication of the notice?

· Are the proposals "related" to other published proposals?

· Is the decision maker satisfied that they have all the information needed to make a decision?

The following paragraphs respond to these questions.

5.3. The published notice has been checked and does comply with the statutory requirements.

5.4. A full consultation exercise was undertaken in line with statutory guidance; the details of which were included in the report to the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education) on 12 March 2009 (Appendix C). This meets the statutory requirements.

5.5. The relationship between the proposals to close the existing schools and establish the new school is clear form the public notice and "complete proposals".

5.6. All the information required to enable a decision to be taken is included in the "full proposal" (Appendix E).

5.7. The relevant factors (as identified in the statutory guidance) to be considered in this case are:

What are the effects on standards and school improvement?

5.8. Any proposal relating to a school closure should be based upon the fact that the closure of the school will contribute to raising local standards of provision, and will lead to improved attainment for children and young people. This is set out in section 6 of the "complete proposal" as follows:

"The amalgamation will provide an appropriate framework for improving provision for primary age children in the local area and will match the availability of places with parental demand. Diversity will be secured by adding to the range of schools available."

5.9. Bearing in mind that school budgets are mainly based on the number of pupils, an amalgamated school will be better placed to attract a headteacher and staff with a broad range and quality of expertise.

What is the need for places and what will happen to displaced pupils?

5.10. Government guidance states that there should be sufficient capacity within the area to accommodate displaced pupils, taking into account the overall supply and likely future demand for places.

5.11. Up to date figures for the demand for places were given in the March Executive Member report, as follows:

5.12. Places will be available at the new school for all pupils currently attending Yateley Infant and St. Peter's Junior Schools, who are not due to transfer to secondary school in September 2010.

What will be the impact on the community and are there any travel implications for displaced pupils?

5.13. The closure of the schools will impact on the community in terms of the loss of pupil places but sufficient places will be available at the new primary school. As the existing and proposed schools are on adjacent sites, there will be no significant impact on the journey to school.

5.14. There are Early Years providers on both existing school sites. The one on the Yateley Infant site will not be affected by these proposals. A suitable alternative site and/or buildings is being identified for the relocation of the provider on the St Peter's site.

5.15. There are no sex, race or disability discrimination issues arising from the proposal.

6. Implementation

6.1. Before approving proposals that require capital expenditure for their implementation, the decision maker should be satisfied that resources are available. In this case, the capital costs of establishing the new school will fall on the County Council. There is provision in the Children's Services capital programme 2009/10 to met the cost of the temporary accommodation proposed in the first instance. This will provide suitable accommodation for the school. In the longer term, the sale proceeds from the St Peter's Junior School site will be available for capital expenditure on permanent buildings for the primary school. Consideration is being given to the possibility that permanent accommodation could be financed using other sources including Prudential Borrowing and/or the School Balances Loan Fund. This will be addressed in the next review of the Children's Services capital programme.

7. Conclusions:

7.1. The Local Authority and Diocese of Winchester have met the statutory requirements to enable a decision to be made regarding the closure of Yateley Infant and St. Peter's Junior Schools and the establishment of a new Voluntary Controlled Church of England Primary School on the site of Yateley Infant School.

7.2. The statutory consultation has resulted in the receipt of two objections. The issues raised are addressed in section 3 of this paper.

7.3. The County Council's decision to publish notices setting out its intention to close the existing schools is primarily predicated on the low number of pupils attending the schools and the forecast continued decline. There is currently a total of 173 children on the roll of the two schools, forecast to reduce to 134 by January 2013. Amalgamation as a one form entry primary school will provide a good base to attract additional pupils from the new school's catchment area.

8. Recommendation(s)

It is recommended that:

1. Approval be given to the following proposal, published by the local authority, in accordance with Section 15 (1) of the Education and Inspections Act 2006:

To discontinue Yateley Infant School and St Peter's Church of England Aided Junior School with effect from 31 August 2010.

2. Approval be given to the following proposal, published by the Diocese of Winchester, in accordance with Section 10 (2) of the Education and Inspections Act 2006:

To establish a new voluntary controlled primary school in the current premises of Yateley Infant School with effect from 1 September 2010.

CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION:

Links to the Corporate Strategy

Other Significant Links

IMPACT ASSESSMENTS:

1. Equalities Impact Assessment:

1.1. Equalities issues have been considered and no adverse impact identified.

2. Impact on Crime and Disorder:

2.1. These proposals will have no impact on crime and disorder.

3. Climate Change:

a) How does what is being proposed impact on our carbon footprint / energy consumption?

· Opportunities will be assessed to reduce the impact in planning for the future use of the school site.

b) How does what is being proposed consider the need to adapt to climate change, and be resilient to its longer term impacts?

· No specific measures have been identified.