Hard to Place Pupils Protocol Key Decision Yes / No in Forward Plan Yes / No

Agenda Item No: 7(m) Wolverhampton City Council OPEN EXECUTIVE DECISION ITEM (AMBER) Cabinet / Cabinet Panel CABINET Date 27 JULY 2005 Portfolio(s) CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE Originating Service Group(s) LIFELONG LEARNING - EDUCATION Contact Officer(s) B A KEIL Telephone Number(s) 5925 Title HARD TO PLACE PUPILS PROTOCOL KEY DECISION YES / NO IN FORWARD PLAN YES / NO Recommendation That Members of the Cabinet: (i) note the requirement to have a Hard to Place Pupils Protocol in place by September 2005; (ii) note the consultation which has already taken place; (iii) approve the Protocol for implementation in the LEA from September 2005. Schedule of Background Papers None Hard to Place Pupil Protcol – Draft [July 04 05] 1 HARD TO PLACE PUPIL PROTOCOL (DRAFT) 1.0 Background 1.1 The DfES issued the Circular, Guidance on Hard To Place Pupils (LEA/0316/2004) in November 2004 requiring two areas for action. These were: i) that the local Admissions Forum develop a protocol on the admission of hard to place pupils; ii) that work be undertaken on delegating or devolving funding to groups of schools to enable them to take responsibility for managing difficult pupils and making alternative provision where necessary. 1.2 The first of these elements has been undertaken and the draft Protocol is attached at Appendix 1 for the Cabinet's consideration. 1.3 The second required action is part of a much larger piece of work which is underway and the elements of this are detailed in Appendix 2. 1.4 As the Hard To Place Pupils Protocol is intended to relate to the placement of secondary pupils in the first instance, the deliberations and consultations have been held with secondary colleagues and teacher associations, though when this was presented to the SIP Board and Schools' Forum, primary headteachers expressed an interest in considering this as an option once it had been introduced to the secondary sector. 1.5 The Wolverhampton Secondary Heads Group at their meeting on 12 May 2005 approved this as a basis for work in progress, recognising that there will be elements which may well require amendment, at a later stage. 2.6 Discussions with officers at the DfES, leading on this development, have indicated that they are more than happy with the progress which Wolverhampton has made to date and are willing to accept that there will be an element of experimentation with the Protocol in its early stages. 3.0 Commentary on the Protocol 3.1 The introduction to the Protocol shows that Wolverhampton, given its experience with the Secondary Social Inclusion and Advisory Placement Panel (SSIAPP), is well placed to take on board such an approach. 3.2 This Protocol needs to be seen in the broader panoply of strategies, support and provision available in the City, since it was recognised early on that the LEA is not seeking to impose youngsters on schools where clearly such a placement would be to the benefit of neither. Hard to Place Pupil Protcol – Draft [July 04 05] 2 3.3 During the consultation meetings which took place with groups of headteachers outside the formal Secondary Headteachers' meeting, considerable discussion centred on the principles and it is worth expanding on some of these points. 3.4 In the main the principles have been transferred directly from the guidance document sent out by the DfES but Members of the Cabinet may be interested to note that Principle 4.1 was inserted with the support of Secondary Headteachers as one that ought to override all our thinking in dealing with young people who may have problems over accessing or collaborating in education. 3.5 Principle 4.4 is at the heart of this Protocol, in that it is intended that schools which previously would not have been expected to admit students on the basis of having their rolls full will no longer be able to do this. Principle 4.6 reinforces much of the work which has already been taken on board by SSIAPP in that through the Headteacher and Officer Panel there is a genuine interest in ensuring that schools are not placed into further difficulty because of particular requests for placement. 3.6 Principle 4.7 was the one which caused most early debate and officers of the Local Education Authority spoke to DfES officials about this matter, to be advised that as the Director of Children and Young People is the head of the admitting Authority for the LEA's own schools, the DfES would not expect to direct him or her to admit pupils. For those schools which are Foundation or Voluntary Aided, then the Director of Children and Young People has had the power to direct since 1998 and this is contained in Sections 96 and 97 of the Schools Standard and Framework Act. 3.7 Principles 4.8 and 4.9 stress the need for timeliness in the admission of young people who are without education. Finally, 4.12 deals with the question of religious affiliation. Members will see that this cannot be used to prevent the placement of hard to place pupils. 3.8 Members will be aware that such a protocol will only work if there is a genuine commitment to honest, collaborative working and this came out often in discussions with headteacher colleagues. 3.9 Although the guidance offers help on defining hard to place pupils, the reality is that these young people do not readily fall into defined categories, rather they identify themselves because mainstream schools remain concerned at their ability to meet the students' needs. 3.10 Wolverhampton has over recent years expanded its alternative provision though this is constantly under pressure. If additional provision is required then it goes without saying that there must be resources to match this and this will form part of the discussion which needs to take place beyond this Protocol. Hard to Place Pupil Protcol – Draft [July 04 05] 3 4.0 Financial Implications 4.1 Whilst there are no financial implications in approving the Protocol, clearly the movement of youngsters from one school to another, particularly where over subscription is an issue, will have financial implications for all schools concerned. 5.0 Equal Opportunities Implications 5.1 The report has implications for the Equal Opportunities Policy, since it concerns the educational entitlement of young people who might otherwise become disengaged from the education process. 6.0 Environmental Implications 6.1 The report has implications for this policy in so far as young people not engaged in education can be a source of concern to local communities and their environment. Hard to Place Pupil Protcol – Draft [July 04 05] 4 Appendix 1 Hard to place pupils Wolverhampton Secondary School Protocol 1.0 Introduction 1.1 In a letter to all LEAs in November 2004 the DfES declared the expectation that “Admission Forums will agree protocols for fairer sharing of hard-to-place pupils.” Furthermore, that “If any Forum fails to agree protocols on a voluntary basis the Secretary of State will consider whether to take out legislation requiring them to do so, with the ability to impose a protocol if agreement cannot be reached”. Clearly the introduction of a protocol is non-negotiable 1.2 The attached draft has been developed following meetings with representatives of • WSAF, Wolverhampton Schools Admissions Forum • WSHP, Wolverhampton Secondary Headteachers Partnership • SSIAPP, Secondary Social Inclusion & Advisory Placement Panel and LEA Officers in the form of an ad hoc Steering Group. 1.3 The imperative from DfES is to develop such a protocol for introduction in September 2005. Wolverhampton is well positioned for the development as it can build on the proven good practice in the Secondary Social Inclusion and Advisory Placement Panel, which relies upon the good collaborative working from all secondary schools. (The operation of SSIAPP is attached as APPENDIX A) . 1.4 Also, according to the advice “A firm voluntary agreement is needed from all parties” and “particularly where there is significant traffic of pupils across LEA borders protocols are needed with neighbouring LEAs, to set out processes and responsibilities for meeting the costs of preventative work.” This will require subsequent work sharing the protocols with neighbouring LEAs. 1.5 It is essential that all schools share a collective responsibility for all pupils in Wolverhampton and that there is a shared ownership of provision. Management of provision and access to it must go hand in hand. 1.6 The protocol will be part of an extended strategy where all schools in partnership with the LEA extend their contribution to a range of provisions and options that are appropriate to the needs of all students and have the confidence of Headteachers and Officers alike. Thus providing a continuum of provision which addresses all levels of need and is regularly reviewed. Hard to Place Pupil Protcol – Draft [July 04 05] 5 2.0 The Agreement 2.1 Context of the Wolverhampton Protocol The Steering Group met and agreed to a two-tier approach in which the Protocol (which must be in place for September 2005) is developed in parallel with a longer term Strategy Plan for Partnership Management of Extended Alternative Provision. The latter requires budgetary provision in April 2006 for implementation in September 2006. 2.2 To be approved by: Wolverhampton Secondary Headteachers Partnership Wolverhampton Schools Admissions Forum School Improvement Partnership Board Lifelong Learning Cabinet 2.3 The Protocol Covers Specifically: The movement of all pupils designated “Hard-to-place” to and between all community, voluntary aided and foundation schools and Academies serving the city but it must be seen in the context of the current overall mid-term transfer arrangements.

Load more