Special Education Needs Provision and Item 9 (Thurlow Park Ward/ Norwood Area)

Executive portfolio: Education

Authorised for submission by: 203/04-05 Phyllis Dunipace, Executive Director, Education

The Executive 11th October 2004

Executive Summary This report provides Members with an update on the accommodation issues surrounding the Michael Tippett school.

Recommendations (1) That Members instruct officers to continue to consult with the Michael Tippett school on the option of moving to the Beaufoy Institute which is the preference of the Governing Body.

(2) That Members note that the funding for the preferred option, and any other options, will need to be acquired through either BSF or other Government funding regimes.

Funding

The long-term future of the Michael Tippett school is dependent upon acquiring sufficient resources from external sources. Once the consultation has been concluded a further report will be prepared for the Executive and the School Organisation Committee with the preferred options fully costed for decision.

Consultation Date Date Comments Name Department/Organisation Sent/ Cleared/ included in Received Received report at para: Internal Phyllis Dunipace Executive Director, Education 08.09.04 Education DMT Education Department 08.09.04 M Dickens Legal Services 28.09.04 27.09.04 D Farry 08.09.04 28.09.04 Cllr A Bottrall Executive Member for Education 08.09.04 29.09.04 External

Date consultation entered in Consultation and Events Diary: N/A

Item 9 The Executive (11.10.04) 65 Special Education Needs Provision & Michael Tippett School Report History Decision type: Non-key decision Drafted on: 08.09.04 Deadline: 23.09.04 Date sent: 30.09.04 Date Published: 01.10.04 Report drafted by and John O’Keefe AD Special Projects contact for enquiries: 020 7926 9799 jo’[email protected]

1. Context

Background

Lambeth Council inherited 15 Special Schools from the Inner Education Authority on 1 April 1990. The with the Government, the LEA has been pursing a policy of greater inclusion pupils with special need within mainstream.

Currently Lambeth has 6 Special Schools:-

Elm Court School – A for moderate learning difficulties (MLD), making Community) provision for pupils who have a learning difficulty and behavioural difficulty

Lansdowne School – A secondary school for MLD, making provision for pupils who have a learning difficulty and a social and communication difficulty

The Livity School – A for Severe Learning Difficulties (SLD) making provision for pupils who have complex needs

Michael Tippett School – A secondary school for SLD making provision for pupils who have complex needs with a 16 to19 annex at The Lancaster Centre

Turney School – An all age provision for pupils with “mixed needs”, making provision for pupils who have a learning difficulty and a social and communication difficulty

Willowfield School – A secondary school for pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties (EBD)

The rolls in Lambeth Special Schools, as at January 2004, are given in Table 1 below.

Item 9 The Executive (11.10.04) 66 Special Education Needs Provision & Michael Tippett School Table 1 Age 2+ 3+ 4+ 5+ 6+ 7+ 8+ 9+ 10+ Elm Court School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Livity School 0 5 3 9 11 10 4 12 12 Michael Tippett School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turney School 0 0 3 4 10 15 6 13 13 Willowfield School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 5 6 13 21 25 10 27 31 Age 11+ 12+ 13+ 14+ 15+ 16+ 17+ 18+ Total Elm Court School 9 16 14 21 19 0 0 0 87 Lansdowne School 24 21 19 12 27 1 0 0 104 Livity School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 Michael Tippett School 8 11 11 6 9 7 5 6 63 Turney School 17 16 19 22 13 0 0 0 151 Willowfield School 9 14 12 8 5 0 0 0 48 Total 67 78 75 69 73 8 5 6 519

The number of out of borough pupils attending Lambeth Special Schools is shown in Table 2 below:

Table 2

Non- School Total Roll Resident % of Roll Resident % of Roll Elm Court School 87 15 17% 72 83% MLD Lansdowne School 104 9 9% 95 91% MLD Michael Tippett School 63 12 19% 51 81% SLD The Livity School 66 4 6% 62 94% SLD Turney School 151 58 38% 93 62% MLD Willowfield School 48 28 58% 20 42% EBD Total Roll 519 126 24% 393 76%

The number of Lambeth pupils who attend out of borough special schools is 153.

The number of Lambeth pupils who receive additional support in out of borough mainstream schools is 387.

Item 9 The Executive (11.10.04) 67 Special Education Needs Provision & Michael Tippett School Where are we now?

The current SEN strategy, resulting from the initiative commenced in 1998 and followed by extensive consultation in 1999 and the publication of “Excellence for All – A Strategy for SEN in Lambeth” was ratified by SOC. Subsequent reports have built on the SEN strategy and the Inclusion Policy and Framework of May 2004 is the latest of these.

Three areas of difficulty have been identified: • identifying funds to carry out the buildings related elements of the strategy • increasing demand for places in some areas • pupils with increasingly complex and multiple needs

Improvements in medical science and diagnosis are increasing the ability of many pupils to attend mainstream schools. Consequently inclusion is still seen as the main thrust for SEN provision in schools.

However these improvements are also resulting in an increase in the number of pupils with multiple complex needs. In some cases the nature of these needs may indicate that it is not in the pupils best interest to be in an inclusive school. In some cases the number, size and space demands of the specialist equipment needed by the pupil may present practical difficulties to inclusion.

There is a need to consider if the policy for inclusion now needs to be buttressed by a greater provision for pupils with multiple complex needs.

Currently such provision in Lambeth is in separate dedicated units such as Michael Tippet and The Livity. However in secondary SEN provision especially it is very difficult to provide in separate dedicated units the full range of specialist teaching spaces needed to be able to offer full curriculum teaching opportunities to all pupils. Consequently in some LEA’s consideration is now being given to the co-location of such units on shared sites with mainstream schools. This offers the opportunity for pupils to potentially use the main school facilities for some teaching and learning.

2. Detailed Analysis and Reason

In 2002 Education commissioned Haverstock Associates to carry out a study of the Livity and Michael Tippett Schools. [Haverstock are architects with a specialism in design for SEN] In respect of Michael Tippett they were asked to advise on the implications of increasing pupil numbers from 60 to 80 and relocating the school to either Thurlow Park School or the Beaufoy. [Two sites which had been identified at that time as being potentially available.]

Item 9 The Executive (11.10.04) 68 Special Education Needs Provision & Michael Tippett School Thurlow Park School was identified as having major difficulties and requiring major demolitions. It has since been identified as the only available potential site for a new secondary school in the south of the borough.

Two proposals were made for the Beaufoy site. In both cases they required that the whole of the site, including the existing buildings and the car park area were dedicated to the new school building. There was very restricted open space available for the pupils. There was no room for future development in response to changing demands and responses to SEN provision.

Since carrying out the study Haverstocks have been commissioned by the DfES to review the guidance on standards of provision for SEN schools. The results are yet to be published but we understand that it is likely to recommend a substantial increase in the space standards for SEN schools. It is likely that the Beaufoy site design proposal will need to be revisited in the light of these new space standards. As a consequence of the revised space standards officers have reviewed alternative options for the Michael Tippett school.

Options for Michael Tippett:

1. Stay on current site offering places to 60no 11-16 year olds, and continue with separate 16-19 provision. The existing school was designed to accommodate 60 pupils. There is a gross floor area per child of 25.7sq m. Current floor area provision would be need to be in the region of 31 sq m. This suggests that the school should be able to accommodate about 50pupils. At January 2004 there were 45no 11 to 15 year olds on roll at the existing school.

The Michael Tippett school has already moved its 16 to 19 year old pupils to the Lancaster Centre. This Centre forms part of the site for the proposed new secondary school in the south of the borough. If Lambeth should be included in the next wave of Building Schools for the Future [BSF], due to be announced this autumn, then the site would probably be required in 2006. Consequently alternative premises will need to be identified for the 16-19 provision. Currently discussions are ongoing to utilize space in the new Lilian Baylis school site.

2. Co-locate to a secondary school site. Within the BSF proposal made to the DfES in 2003 it was proposed to include our secondary SEN provision for radical rebuild/refurbishment. This would provide the opportunity and the funding to re-build Michael Tippett. A secondary school could be identified where it would be possible to construct on the same campus a new independent secondary SEN provision thereby achieving co-location and the possibility of sharing some of the specialist teaching spaces so that full curriculum could be offered to pupils.

Item 9 The Executive (11.10.04) 69 Special Education Needs Provision & Michael Tippett School Currently we are have no alternative sites for co-location, either on the sites of existing secondary school or those likely to open in the near future (the largest of the new sites Elm Court designated for co-location for the Elm Court school. Consequently short-term measures would still need to be taken to relieve the current pressures on the Michael Tippett School. A possible route would be to implement option 1 above as a short-term [5years] measure.

3. Re-locate as separate provision. This option presents challenges in providing a full curriculum offering to pupils and would have higher per pupil costs than co-location, but there are no alternatives to separate provision. There are a few council-owned sites available and suitable for a replacement school:

Norwood Park School – currently accommodating Crown Lane School until it moves back into its new school in October 2004, this site is due to be sold as part of the Primary School Development Strategy.

Strand Centre – currently earmarked as a potential decant facility to enable the BSF proposals to be carried out.

Lilian Baylis old school site – Grade 2 listed and currently not agreed by the Secretary of State for disposal. An element of the disposal proceeds is required to contribute to the cost of the new Lilian Baylis school. However, it might be possible to use part of the site for a replacement Michael Tippett.

Woodfield Centre – currently occupied by Park School and earmarked for the potential relocation of the Streatham Early Years Centre (allowing disposal of the latter) and primary provision.

Beaufoy – a replacement facility could be constructed on the Beaufoy site. Initial feasibility studies indicate that this would be tight. Additional accommodation such as housing could be constructed in the air space above the new school.

Consideration of the above options and the constraints lead to the conclusion that the move of the Michael Tippett to the Beaufoy, which is favored by the Governing Body, should be pursued.

3. Financial implications

3.1 Financial implications have not yet been assessed since this report is purely to advise members about the various options on which it is intended to consult the Michael Tippett school.

3.2 It should be pointed out that the allocation of capital receipts is part of the Capital Strategy and dependant upon Executive decision. The financial implications of the preferred option(s) will be fully costed and brought to the Executive in a future report.

Item 9 The Executive (11.10.04) 70 Special Education Needs Provision & Michael Tippett School 4. Legal implications

4.1 The statutory framework relating to proposals for the establishment, alteration or discontinuance of a community or foundation special school is set out in Section 31 of, and Schedule 6 to, the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 and in the Education (Maintained Special Schools) () Regulations 1999.

4.2 In summary, where an LEA proposes to establish, make a prescribed alteration to, or discontinue, a community, or foundation, special school, it is required to consult appropriate persons, having regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State, and publish its proposals in the manner, and containing information, prescribed. The same obligation falls on the governing body of a foundation special school proposing to make a prescribed alteration to, or discontinue it. The LEA or governing body are required to send a copy of the proposals, together with prescribed information, to the relevant School Organisation Committee (SOC) and to other prescribed bodies or persons.

4.3 The application of this statutory regime to any specific proposals will be addressed as part of the detailed legal implications to be set out in the future report to the Executive and SOC referred to above.

5. Consultation feedback

5.1 N/A

6. Other implications

6.1 CPA recovery plan.

6.2 Risk management – An extended period of consultation and failure to agree a future for the school would not enable the school to be removed from special measures.

6.3 Equalities – The satisfactory resolution of this issue will positively impact the children at the school.

6.4 Crime and Disorder implications – None.

6.5 Environmental implications – None.

6.6 Staffing and Accommodation implications – None.

Item 9 The Executive (11.10.04) 71 Special Education Needs Provision & Michael Tippett School 6.7 Impact on Front Line services – N/A.

6.8 Area Implications - The resolution of the issue will positively impact on the school and the parents and pupils of the school.

6.9 Any Other implications – anything else that seems appropriate.

7. Timetable for Implementation and Success Criteria

7.1 The conclusion of the consultation with the school should result in an agreed site that meets the needs of the pupils and the school.

8. Appendices - none.

9. List of background documents

SEN Review.

______

Item 9 The Executive (11.10.04) 72 Special Education Needs Provision & Michael Tippett School