ITEM NUMBER: 2.0

OPEN REPORT

REPORT TO: Executive Councillor

DATE OF MEETING: 31/03/10

SUBJECT: Toftstead Primary School, Amber Hill

DECISION REFERENCE: 01705

KEY DECISION? Yes

SUMMARY:

This proposal is being made in the context of very low current and projected pupil numbers in the area, which will lead to an irreversible deficit budget, as well as serious concern over the quality of education the school is able to offer its pupils. Falling rolls have meant that the school has been unable to sustain the number of pupils necessary to generate a budget sufficient to maintain the standard of education all children deserve. The school, supported by the Local Authority school improvement partner (CfBT), have explored options to maintain the viability of the school including federation. The Governing Body has written to request that the Local Authority (LA), the decision maker, begins the process of consultation on the closure of Toftstead Primary School.

If the Executive Councillor gives approval to the publication of a Statutory Notice there will follow a six week Representation period giving a further opportunity for people and organisations to express their views and ensure that they are taken into account when the final decision is taken by the Executive Councillor in June 2010.

ACTION (S) REQUIRED:

Following the completion of the consultation period, the first stage of the statutory process, the Executive Councillor is recommended to consider taking the next step of publishing a Statutory Notice confirming the proposal to close Toftstead Primary School on 31 August 2010.

Page 1 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

That the Statutory Notice is not published, the consultation process is stopped and the Council retains Toftstead Primary school as it currently is and does not consult on closure. This would mean that the village would retain its school as a community focus and the pupils would continue to make use of the existing facilities.

However, this would have the following disadvantages:

· The school is not financially viable in the short or long term. Schools are not legally allowed to set a deficit budget without a business plan showing how the situation will be reversed.

· There will remain an unacceptable level of surplus places – currently 76% surplus capacity (80 surplus places) which may rise even further in September. The DCSF and the Audit Commission highlight any school with more than 25% and 30 surplus places as a cause for concern.

· There are concerns over the impact on the quality of the education and development of the children with such small year group numbers which may lead to one class covering all year groups in an attempt to reduce costs.

· Federation options have already been pursued to enable the school to continue and provide the chance to turn round the school, but these have not proved to be a successful solution.

· This option does not accord with the wishes of the Governing Body.

· It will be difficult to provide a wide and diverse curriculum and will limit the range of opportunities available for pupils.

REASONS FOR SELECTING THE OPTION RECOMMENDED:

· To comply with the wishes of the Governing Body.

· A changing rural population age profile in recent years has resulted in a continuing trend towards lower numbers of primary age pupils in small rural communities. There are no longer sufficient pupil numbers in the area for a viable school to remain educationally, socially and financially sustainable.

· It is projected that the school will enter a deficit budget in the financial year commencing April 2010 leading to a significant five figure deficit the following year with an increasing overspend in subsequent years. It will not be possible to generate the budget sufficient to maintain the standard of education all children deserve.

· To reduce any detrimental effect on educational standards that can potentially occur at schools with very low numbers on roll. To keep the school open would mean children continuing to attend a very small school and consequently placing

Page 2 greater demands on a smaller number of staff to adequately deliver the curriculum.

· To enable pupils to receive a more rounded education in a larger school offering greater social interaction.

· To reduce the incidence of teaching several year groups in one class and in groups that involve teaching across more than one Key Stage. To keep the school open, the low numbers on roll would require a school organisation based on teaching all year groups within one class and this is generally not regarded as providing a good education or supported by parents or the LA.

· To reduce surplus capacity but still provide sufficient places to meet local needs and parental preference. This decrease in surplus capacity contributes to ensuring the provision of sustainable schools across the county allowing future investment to be used more effectively to support schools in raising standards.

· To enhance the future sustainability of the remaining primary schools in the locality. To keep the school open may threaten the sustainability of other schools in the locality. Ensuring sustainability is vital in that it has an impact on recruiting and retaining staff of a high calibre and also attracting future investment.

· To ensure resources are used effectively and for the benefit of the children in the local area. Much improved value for money is delivered by larger schools whereas small schools currently take a disproportionate amount of finance.

· To enable the process to continue to the next stage and allow a further opportunity for people and organisations to express their views about the proposals and ensure that they will be taken into account by the Executive Councillor.

· To enable the statutory and legal processes to proceed in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) as determined by The Education Act 2002 and as explained more fully in paragraph 3, Consultation, later in this report.

1. BACKGROUND

Amber Hill is situated in an area of social deprivation caused by the isolated location of many pupils' homes. Children enter school attaining standards below those normally expected, especially in communication, language and literacy. Pupil mobility, both in and out of the school, is high and the number of pupils with special educational needs is above average for a school of this size

Despite small cohorts, standards in KS2 SATs in 2009 were exceptionally low and well below floor targets as in 2008. Teacher assessment denotes improved attainment but this is not reflected in the SAT’s and the children’s independent work.

Page 3 In the Ofsted inspection in November 2006 it was judged to be a satisfactory school because, while standards in KS2 were low, the progress of children was satisfactory. The quality of pastoral care and support was judged to be good because the school successfully nurtured each individual pupil and established a caring 'family' atmosphere.

The headteacher has worked hard to secure the viability of this school by embracing collaboration with others and trying to forge links which could improve the quality and range of the curriculum and contribute to staff development. It was hoped a more formal link could be created with New York Primary and Frithville Primary schools but the governing bodies of these schools eventually decided to create a hard governance federation without Toftstead Primary.

A senior advisor from the School Improvement Service has worked with the headteacher over the last few years to find a partner school which would be willing to consider federated status. A number of local primary schools have been approached and a secondary school but unfortunately it has not been possible to find another school willing to federate.

Information regarding the latest Ofsted reports for Toftstead Primary School and surrounding schools is provided in the table below.

Current and projected pupil numbers remain very low in the area which will lead to an irreversible deficit budget as well as serious concerns over the quality of education the school is able to offer its pupils. Falling rolls have meant that the school has been unable to sustain the number of pupils necessary to generate a budget sufficient to maintain the standard of education all children deserve.

Page 4

The following map and tables show the neighbouring schools in the area with their latest and projected numbers on roll and capacity.

Page 5

Toftstead Primary School, Amber Hill and surrounding schools – Number on Roll as at 08/03/10 08/03/2010 Pupils On Roll

2010 Rec- School Name PAN* eptiony1 y2 y3 y4 y5 y6Total C apac it y Su r p l us P l aces Su r p l us C apac it Amber Hill Toftstead Primary School 15 5 6 4 1 2 4 3 25 105 80 76% Billinghay CE Primary School 30 20 22 18 18 20 21 24 143 210 67 32% Boston West Primary School 40 40 39 40 34 40 41 37 271 280 9 3% Coningsby St Michael's CE Primary School 40 39 36 37 40 36 40 40 268 280 12 4% Frithville Primary School 10 11 6 8 6 8 10 9 58 70 12 17% Gipsey Bridge Primary School 10 15 11 12 10 13 14 9 84 70 0 0% Heckington St Andrew's CE Primary School 30 30 27 25 28 26 32 27 195 210 15 7% Kirton Primary School 60 60 59 60 58 51 58 64 410 420 10 2% New York Primary School 10 6 6 6 5 5 11 3 42 70 28 40% Swineshead St Mary's CE Primary School 36 32 34 30 33 31 26 36 222 252 30 12% Tattershall Holy Trinity CE Primary School 16 16 16 15 15 16 16 15 109 112 3 3% Tattershall Primary School 20 20 16 15 14 9 15 20 109 140 31 22% Area Total 317 294 278 270 262 257 288 287 1936 2219 297 13% *Published Admission Number (Number Of Places In Each Year Group)

Toftstead Primary School, Amber Hill and surrounding schools – Projections

2010 PAN School P l a c e s O f r d I n t a k e 1 0 / 11 P r o j e c t d N O R 1 0 / 11 P r o j e c t d S u r p l s 1 0 / 11 P r o j e c t d S u r p l s % 1 0 / 11 P r o j e c t d I n t a k e 1 / 12 P r o j e c t d N O R 1 / 12 P r o j e c t d S u r p l s 1 / 12 P r o j e c t d S u r p l s % 1 / 12 P r o j e c t d I n t a k e 1 2 / 13 P r o j e c t d N O R 1 2 / 13 P r o j e c t d S u r p l s 1 2 / 13 P r o j e c t d S u r p l s % 1 2 / 13 Amber Hill Toftstead Primary School 15 2 24 81 77% 3 23 82 78% 3 24 81 77% Billinghay CE Primary School 30 18 137 73 35% 21 137 73 35% 15 132 78 37% Boston West Primary School** 40 58 292 8 3% 40 291 9 3% 40 291 9 3% Coningsby St Michael's CE Primary** 40 50 278 12 4% 40 278 12 4% 40 282 8 3% Frithville Primary School 10 4 53 17 24% 6 49 21 30% 5 46 24 34% Gipsey Bridge Primary School 10 10 85 0 0% 10 81 0 0% 8 76 0 0% Heckington St Andrew's CE Primary Scho30ol 24 192 18 9% 25 185 25 12% 29 188 22 10% Kirton Primary School 60 51 397 23 5% 56 395 25 6% 60 404 16 4% New York Primary School 10 5 44 26 37% 8 41 29 41% 7 43 27 39% Swineshead St Mary's CE Primary School36 29 215 37 15% 33 222 30 12% 35 226 26 10% Tattershall Holy Trinity CE Primary School16 16 110 2 2% 16 110 2 2% 16 110 2 2% Tattershall Primary School 20 21 110 30 21% 20 115 25 18% 17 123 17 12% Area Total 317 288 1937 327 15% 278 1927 333 15% 275 1945 310 14%

*Projections based purely on existing pupil numbers and potential intakes from current birth data and historic intakes from natural catchments (not including pupil yield from housing developments, migratory trends or changes in parental preference) **Boston West (60) and Coningsby (50) will be taking above PAN this year due to demand in their local communities.

With 25 pupils now on roll (including 3 year 6 pupils) and only 2 pupils offered places to start in Reception in September 2010, the number of pupils likely to be on roll at Toftstead Primary School in the next academic year is expected to be 24.

The Governing Body wrote to request that the LA (the decision maker) begin the process of consultation on the closure of Toftstead Primary School. Prior to the Governing Body making this difficult decision to propose closure, the school, supported by the LA school improvement partner (CfBT), have explored and executed options in which to maintain the viability of the school including federation and collaboration with other schools. In January 2010 the Executive Councillor gave her approval to commence the consultation process and there followed a 5 week period of consultation. The purpose of this report is to inform the Executive Councillor of the results from the consultation and to recommend that the proposal goes to the next stage of the process ie the publication of a Statutory Notice.

Page 6 The disadvantages of this proposal are the closure of an existing school and the consequent impact on the community together with the fact that an educational site will no longer provide services for local children. Also, some children may have to travel further potentially increasing transport costs although this effect is expected to be minimal in the long term. A significant proportion of local children already choose to travel to alternative schools.

There would be the inevitable disruption for pupils, parents and staff but this would be short term. This proposal would address the issues surrounding a declining primary school population in an area where there are other appropriate schools. The Council believes that this proposal provides the best solution to addressing and meeting the long term educational and social needs of the children in the area and the advantages, as detailed earlier in this report in the “Reasons for selecting the option recommended”, far outweigh the disadvantages.

2. CONCLUSION

This report is specifically regarding the publication of a Statutory Notice on the proposal to discontinue Toftstead Primary School with effect from 31 August 2010 for which a decision is required from the Executive Councillor. The factors to consider in making this decision are within this report and all responses received during consultation must be considered. The Council is supporting the Governing Body in this proposal as it considers it to be in the best interests of local children and educational provision in the area. It reinforces the priorities in the Children and Young People’s Plan and supports the Council’s aim of ensuring that as many children as possible can reach their full potential.

3. CONSULTATION

The Governing Body wrote on 28 January 2010 to request that the LA, the decision maker, begin the process of consultation on the closure of Toftstead Primary School. Following this request the Executive Councillor gave her approval in January 2010 to commence the consultation process. The statutory guidelines for this process are detailed in the guide “Closing a Maintained Mainstream School” (Appendix 1) published by the DCSF. Under these guidelines the LA must ensure that sufficient time and information are provided for people to understand and form a view on the proposal and make a response. The consultation document must set out the problem that is being addressed and invite comment on one or more solutions. The LA must take all reasonable steps to draw the consultation to the attention of all those who might be interested and take into account their views. The Education Act 2002 states the requirement for current pupils to be consulted and this was further extended by subsequent legislation to also include all pre-school children over the age of 3. The Education & Inspections Act 2006 specifically includes as interested parties the registered parents of registered pupils at the school and also the appropriate District and Parish Councils for the area. A letter, together with a consultation document, (copies attached as Appendix 2) was sent out to interested parties (Appendix 3) on 4 February 2010 to commence a five week period of consultation. The list of interested parties was compiled according to statutory guidelines incorporating as wide a range of consultees as practicable and included the Parish Clerks of all relevant Parish Councils and the Chief Executive of the District Council as well as individual councillors as appropriate.

A public meeting was also held on 10 February 2010 attended by representatives of the LA together with parents/carers and other interested parties. All attendees were given the opportunity to ask questions and notes were taken which were published on the website

Page 7 www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/provisionplanning and are also attached here as Appendix 4. Copies of the letter commencing consultation and the consultation document were also published on this website. There was the opportunity to provide a response to the consultation by letter, email or by returning the response form (Appendix 5) attached to the consultation document by 11 March 2010.

The Headteacher has consulted with the current pupils at the school by explaining how the proposed closure may affect them. In order that the children will have every opportunity to understand the implications of this proposal it has been discussed both in school assembly and in smaller informal groups. The children have been supported by the staff of the school and the majority of the feedback throughout the consultation period has been that the children enjoy their time at the school and do not want it to close. Letters and drawings produced by the pupils of the school as part of this consultation process are attached as Appendix 6.

All written responses received during consultation have been provided to the Executive Councillor for consideration and are also summarised in this report (Appendix 7). In total there were 24 valid responses with 4 supporting the proposal and 20 against. In addition a petition against the proposal was submitted with in excess of 100 signatures. 1 response was received from Amber Hill Parish Council, being against the proposal, and all other responses were received from individuals. 9 responses were received from parent/carers with 1 in favour of the proposal and 8 responses against which actually represented 7 households. A parent sent in a copy of a report (Appendix 8) issued by the Commission for Rural Communities as evidence regarding Child Well-Being and that more children are moving into rural districts than are leaving. However, the report has been prepared to analyse data relating to these issues on a national scale. It does not go into detail within districts at a more local level. 7 responses were received from Governors of the school with 4 in favour and 3 against and 3 responses were received from staff members of the school all against the proposal. A further 4 responses were received from local residents representing 3 households which were all against the proposal.

The main reasons quoted by those against the proposal were as follows:- (a) the impact on the community as the school is the only amenity in the village and therefore the hub of the community. (b) the loss of the school as a venue for meetings, polling station, parish council use etc. (c) disruption to the current pupils’ education. (d) concern over the extra travelling time for local children. (e) parental preference for a small rural school with small class sizes.

Those in favour of the proposal support it because of:- (a) the falling numbers on roll. (b) concerns over limited social interaction of the children. (c) difficulties of offering a diverse curriculum and after school activities. (d) low standards.

Suggestions made as to how the school might overcome these difficulties and remain viable include the following:- (a) Reduce staffing costs by either combining classes to employ less teachers or federate with another school under 1 Headteacher. (b) Close Solutions 4 building nearby and use the old school building at Toftstead. (c) Rent part of the buildings to earn income.

Page 8 (d) Move children from oversubscribed schools to Toftstead Primary School. (e) Subsidise and encourage affordable housing to attract more families to the area (f) Allow more time for the new Parents and Friends group to promote the school and organise fundraising activities.

If the Executive Councillor decides to proceed to the next stage, it would begin with the publication of a Statutory Notice which would include the Complete Proposal. This would initiate a 6 week Representation Period, giving a further opportunity for people and organisations to express their views and ensure that they are taken into account when the final decision is taken by the Executive Councillor in June 2010. The LA, as decision maker, must be able to show that all relevant issues raised are taken into consideration in the decision making process. Points raised can be considered unpersuasive but must not be ignored altogether.

(a) Legal Comments

The Council has power to publish proposals for the closure of the schools under section 15 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. Under section 16 of the same act the Council is obliged, prior to publishing any such proposals, to consult such persons as appear to them to be appropriate and in so doing to have regard to any guidance from time to time from the Secretary of State. As Toftstead Primary School is classed as a rural primary school there are specific consultation requirements that must be dealt with. Statutory Guidance is set out in the publication “Closing a Maintained Mainstream School - A Guide for Local Authorities and Governing Bodies”. (Appendix 1)

The Council has a statutory duty under s176 of the Education Act 2002 to consult pupils on any proposed changes to local school organisation that may affect them.

The Executive Councillor must consider the results of the consultation in determining whether to proceed to the publication of a Statutory Notice.

The decision is consistent with the policy framework and within the remit of the Executive Councillor.

(b) Resources Comments

There are no significant or immediate financial implications arising from the recommendation in this report. However, there could be significant financial implications if no action is taken and the school is unable to deliver a good quality education from the reducing budget caused by falling numbers on roll.

(c) Scrutiny Comments

This matter has not been referred to scrutiny.

(d) Executive Councillor Comments

Not applicable.

(e) Local Member Comments

Page 9 As interested parties in the consultation process local members have been provided with full details of the proposal and the opportunity to comment although no responses were received during the consultation stage. If the LA proceeds to Statutory Notice local members will have a further opportunity to make their views known in the Representation period.

(f) Policy Proofing Actions Required

An approved Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) has been completed for this report.

4. APPENDICES

These are listed below and attached at the back of the report.

APPENDIX 1 DCSF Guide “Closing a Maintained Mainstream School” APPENDIX 2 Consultation document and letter to parents/carers and interested parties APPENDIX 3 List of interested parties consulted

APPENDIX 4 Questions and answers from public consultation

APPENDIX 5 Response form

APPENDIX 6 Responses from current pupils

APPENDIX 7 Summary of responses to consultation

APPENDIX 8 Commission for Rural Communities Report

5. BACKGROUND PAPERS

No background papers as defined in the Local Government Act 1972 were relied upon in the writing of this report.

This report was written by Paul Holmes, who can be contacted on 01522 553366 and [email protected]

Page 10