EARLY HELP and SCHOOLS
REPORT OF THE SECONDARY PLACE PLANNING GROUP ON THE NEED FOR EXTRA YEAR 7 ADMISSION PLACES BETWEEN 2015-2019
November 2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
There is a need to consider providing additional secondary places across the Borough from September 2015 onwards. The Local Authority has set up a Stakeholder Working Group to consider this and to formulate proposals for public consultation. This Report follows the end of that consultation and puts forward proposals to meet the increased demand for extra Year 7 Secondary School places in the period to September 2019
The number of children wanting Year 7 places in the Borough’s secondary schools will rise from 2,263 this school year to an estimated 2,819 by September 2019. The level of demand varies across the Borough, and in some areas growth will continue beyond 2020. The focus of the report covers the period to September 2019. The report puts forward a number of proposals to make sure that there are enough places to meet the minimum demand as well as enough extra places to allow for parental preference and future within year movements. The view of the Working Group is that extra places can be provided by expansion on current school sites.
Where applicable, the implementation of proposals is subject to the support of own admission authority schools, their Trusts and Diocesan Authorities.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 1
REPORT OF THE SECONDARY PLACE PLANNING GROUP ON THE NEED FOR EXTRA YEAR 7 ADMISSION PLACES BETWEEN 2015-2019
INTRODUCTION and BACKGROUND
1. This report sets out details of the need for additional secondary school places in the period 2015-2019. Based on current projections additional Year 7 places will be needed in each Township in that period. The Local Authority has a statutory duty to secure sufficient school places in its area, and is the strategic commissioner for the provision of additional places that might be required.
2. In order to plan effectively to meet the expected increase in demand, in December 2013 Rochdale Local Authority set up a Stakeholder Group comprising representatives of Secondary Headteachers, College Principals, Elected Members, school governors, Primary Headteachers and Diocesan Authorities to look at the supply and demand for additional secondary school places.
3. The remit of the Group, therefore, was to look at the strategy for meeting the need for extra pupil places across the Borough over the next five years (2015 onwards), to consult on such revised proposals and report to the Executive Member Children Schools & Families on the outcomes of that consultation by Autumn 2014. The membership of the Group comprised:
• Executive member for Children Schools and Families, plus 3 elected Members nominated by the respective Group Leaders; • Assistant Director- Early Help and Schools; • 4 Secondary Headteachers nominated through the Pioneer Trust; • 1 person nominated by the Manchester Diocese (Church of England); • 1 person nominated by the Salford Diocese (Roman Catholic Church); • 1 Primary Headteacher (nominated by Rochdale Association of Primary Headteachers); • Principal Hopwood Hall College; • Principal Rochdale Sixth Form College • 1 School Governor nominated through the Independent Governor Forum
4. The purpose of this report is to present final proposals for the Cabinet of Rochdale Borough Council to consider. This follows as to how many additional places ought to be provided, and where and when they should be provided.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 2
SECONDARY SCHOOL PLACE DEMAND- BOROUGH OVERVIEW
5. The current provision of secondary places in the Borough is through 12 secondary schools. The location of these schools is shown on the map at Appendix One . The current numbers of children in these schools is shown as Appendix Two . The number of places available in each school, and the type of school is set out in Appendix Three . Details of how the Local Authority develops pupil number projections is set out at Appendix Four . The pupil number projections take account of past patterns of demand, and for secondary places goes up to September 2024.
EXPECTED DEMAND FOR YEAR 7 SECONDARY PLACES 2015-2019 6. From September 2014 the number of Year 7 pupils for admission to secondary schools will begin to increase across the Borough. Overall there is enough space in the secondary sector to accommodate the growth in intakes until 2017, after then more places will need to be available. The following graph shows the overall position to 2019.
School year 2013/14 2014/15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Year 7 Places 2550 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 Expected Pupils 2263 2382 2560 2533 2614 2769 2819 Extra Places Needed Enough places overall -4 -159 -209
FUTURE DEMAND FOR PLACES 2020-2024 7. The pattern and extent of growth in demand is not evenly distributed across the townships and it is important to keep in mind the growth trend to September 2024. The following graph shows the overall long term demand which indicates that there will be high level of demand for extra places until 2024.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 3
2013/14 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 BOROUGH 2011/12 2012/13 2017/18 2018/19 Year 6 Pupils 2468 2420 2392 2447 2622 2614 2693 2847 2892 2902 2942 2963 2982 2967 Year 7 Expected Pupils 2382 2560 2533 2614 2769 2819 2828 2805 2857 2866 2839 Year 7 Places 2570 2550 2550 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 Extra Places Needed enough places overall -4 -159 -209 -218 -215 -247 -256 -229
8. The above graph shows the overall net effect of movement in and out of the Borough between Year 6 and Year7. Each year this averages about 6%, so that in place planning terms the Local Authority does not expect to provide enough places for all children currently in Year 6 classes across the Borough. However, to take account of potential change to this trend, and allowance for parental preference and within year movement, the projections allow a margin of 3% for growth. Further background information on the movement of children across the borough boundary is set out in Appendix Four .
SECONDARY SCHOOL PLACE DEMAND- HEYWOOD TOWNSHIP
9. There are two secondary schools in Heywood Township, both substantially re-modelled and re-built under the Building Schools for the Future Programme. Siddal Moor is a Community School with 210 Year 7 places, and a total capacity of 1050 places. Holy Family Roman Catholic/Church of England College is a joint faith Voluntary Aided School with 120 Year 7 Places, a total capacity of 600 places.
EXPECTED DEMAND FOR YEAR 7 PLACES- HEYWOOD TOWNSHIP 2015-2019 10. In recent years there has been an increase in the number of children born in the Township, and this increase in numbers will move through to the secondary sector. At
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 4
primary school level additional places were provided on a short term basis at Woodland Community Primary (CP) School and Harwood Park CP School. An additional 15 Reception class places have been provided at Hopwood CP School on a long term basis.
11. The pie chart below shows the Heywood Year 6 pupil destinations for school year 2013- 2014. It shows the proportion of pupils progressing to the township’s secondary schools, and those choosing to attend schools outside the Township and the Borough. This trend is looked at each year and is the basis for projecting future demand for places.
12. Overall there are enough secondary places in the township to 2018. However, from 2017 there may not be a sufficient margin to allow for parental preference, growth and within- year movement, and so the provision of additional Year 7 places needs to be considered for the period 2017-2019, as shown by the following graph:
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 5
School year 2013/14 2014/15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Year 7 Places 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 Expected Pupils 277 277 303 306 323 324 339 Extra Places Needed Enough places overall 7 6 -9
FUTURE DEMAND FOR PLACES IN HEYWOOD TOWNSHIP 2020-2024 13. The expected demand for Year 7 places between 2020 and 2024 in Heywood is shown below. There will be a need to monitor changes in demand to ensure there are sufficient places overall, with a margin for flexibility.
2013/14 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2011/12 2012/13 2017/18 2018/19 Year 6 Pupils 354 361 304 302 330 334 353 354 370 354 338 371 356 351 Year 7 Expected Pupils 315 307 277 277 303 306 323 324 339 323 310 340 325 321 Year 7 Places 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 Extra Places Needed enough places overall 7 6 -9 7 20 -10 5 9
SUMMARY AND PROPOSALS TO MEET THE ADDITIONAL DEMAND IN HEYWOOD TOWNSHIP 14. Whilst there are just enough places up to 2018, there may not be enough places to allow for parental preference, within-year growth or demand changes. Both Holy Family RC/CE College and Siddal Moor Sports College have indicated a willingness to accommodate more pupils. The proposal for consultation was that up to an extra 30 Year 7 places (One Form of Entry) are to be considered in the township, from 2017 onwards, to be provided at either Holy Family or Siddal Moor.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 6
15. The outline proposal as it affects each Heywood Township Secondary school is as follows: Holy Family RC/CE College (Voluntary Aided) Net Capacity: 600 Admit an extra 30 children in year 7 in each of September from 2017/18 onwards. Published Admission This would probably require the provision of additional teaching Number: 120 space, for which a feasibility study will be needed. Views were sought on whether this accommodation should be considered as Current NOR- 589 permanent or temporary. As a Voluntary Aided School, the Governing Body is responsible for admissions, and would need to formally agree to taking additional children. Siddal Moor Sports College (Community) Net Capacity: 1050 Admit an extra 30 children in year 7 in each of September from 2017/18 onwards. Published Admission The extent of additional accommodation required will need to Number: 210 take account of overall number on roll in the school at the time of the required additional places. If the provision of additional Current NOR- 951 teaching space is required, a feasibility study will be needed. Views were sought on whether this accommodation should be considered as permanent or temporary.
Summary of Consultation Outcomes 16. The full consultation responses are set out in Appendix Eight. The consultation asked whether enough places were being planned for the Township. Overall 53% of responses felt that not enough extra places were being proposed. The consultation also sought views on where any extra places ought to be provided. 74% supported the provision of additional places at Holy Family RC/CE College.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXTRA PLACES IN HEYWOOD TOWNSHIP 17. Taking account of the views expressed through the consultation, together with the information in this report and appendices, the recommendation is that 30 additional places be provided in Heywood Township for 3 years from September 2017. These places should be provided at Holy Family RC/CE College, subject to agreement with the Diocesan Authorities and the Governing Body. For all proposals the view of the Group was that additional capacity should not be added to schools until current places are filled.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 7
SECONDARY SCHOOL PLACE DEMAND- MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP
18. There are three secondary schools in Middleton Township, two of these were substantially re-modelled and re-built under the Building Schools for the Future Programme, and St.Anne’s Academy is a new build school. Middleton Technology School is a Community School with 270 Year 7 places, and a total capacity of 1350 places. Cardinal Langley Roman Catholic High School with 180 Year 7 places and a total capacity of 900 places. The school has a Sixth Form. St.Anne’s Academy has 150 Year 7 places, and 30 of those places designated Foundation Places for children in families who are regular worshippers in the Anglican or other Christian churches. The school has a Sixth Form.
EXPECTED DEMAND FOR YEAR 7 PLACES- MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP 2015-2019 19. In recent years there has been a very significant increase in the number of children born in the Township and moving into the Township. This is reflected in the high level of additional secondary school places that will need to be provided from 2020 onwards. A large number of extra primary school places have been provided in the Township to meet the increase in birth-led demand and inward movement.
20. The pie chart below shows the Middleton Year 6 pupil destinations for school year 2013- 2014. It shows the proportion of pupils progressing to the township’s secondary schools, and those choosing to attend schools outside the Township and the Borough. This trend is looked at each year and is the basis for projecting future demand for places. The township not only retains 9 out of 10 Year 6 children, it also draws pupils from Heywood and Rochdale Townships as well as from outside the Borough.
21. Overall there are enough places in the township to 2016, because 60 extra Year 7 places became available after the closure of the Sixth Form at Middleton Technology School. However, from 2017 there will not be sufficient places to meet demand and to provide a margin to allow for parental preference, growth and within-year movement. On the basis of current projections an extra 60 Year 7 places need to be considered for the period 2017-2019.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 8
School year 2013/14 2014/15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Year 7 Places 540 600 600 600 600 600 600 Expected Pupils 510 503 568 552 596 639 629 Extra Places Needed Enough places overall 4 -39 -29
FUTURE DEMAND FOR PLACES IN MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP 2020-2024 22. The growth in demand for Year 7 places is expected to continue through to 2024 and beyond. The level of this growth needs to be taken into account in forming proposals to meet demand growth up to 2019, since it is clear that further places will be needed for the period 2020-2024.
2011/ 2012/ 2013/ 2014/ 2015/ 2016/ 2017/ 2018/ 2019/ 2020/ 2021/ 2022/ 2023/ 2024/ 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Year 6 Pupils 471 450 485 471 532 518 559 599 590 607 695 699 712 691
Year 7 Expected Pupils 472 472 510 502 568 552 596 639 629 647 721 725 739 716
Year 7 Places 540 540 540 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600
Extra Places Needed enough places overall 4 -39 -29 -47 -121 -125 -139 -116
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 9
Summary and Proposals to meet the additional demand in Middleton Township 23. An additional 60 Year 7 places need to be considered in Middleton between 2016 at the earliest, and certainly for 2017. Taking account of the 60 additional places at Middleton Technology School, it is not proposed that the school is asked to take more children. The two other schools in the township have both indicated a willingness to accommodate an extra 30 Year 7 children. The proposal therefore was that an extra 60 Year 7 places (two forms of entry) are provided in the township, 30 places at each of Cardinal Langley RC High School, and St.Anne’s Academy.
24. The outline proposal as it affects each Middleton Township secondary school is as follows: Cardinal Langley RC High School (Voluntary Aided) Net Capacity: 1060 (inc. Admit 30 children in Year 7 in each from September 2016/17, taking account of Sixth Form) the current numbers of children in Roman Catholic primary schools in the Published Admission township. Number: 180 This will require the provision of additional teaching space, for which a feasibility Current NOR- 919 plus study will be needed. This accommodation should be considered as permanent. 152 Sixth Form As a Voluntary Aided School, the Governing Body is responsible for admissions, and would need to formally agree to taking additional children. St Anne’s Academy High school (Academy) Net Capacity: 750 Admit 30 children in Year 7 in each from September 2017/18 (inc. Sixth Form) This will require the provision of additional teaching space, for which a feasibility Published Admission study will be needed. This accommodation should be considered as permanent. Number: 150 As an Academy School, the Academy Trust and Governing Body are responsible for Current NOR- 570 buildings and admissions, and would need to formally agree to taking additional children.
Summary of Consultation Outcomes 25. The full consultation responses are set out in Appendix Eight . The consultation asked whether enough places were being planned for the Township. Overall 59% of responses felt that enough extra places were being proposed. The consultation also sought views on where any extra places ought to be provided. There was broad support for putting extra places at each of Cardinal Langley RC and St.Anne’s Academy.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXTRA PLACES IN MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP 26. Taking account of the views expressed through the consultation, together with the information in this report and appendices, the recommendation is that 60 additional places be provided in Middleton Township as follows: * 30 additional places from September 2016 onwards at Cardinal Langley RC; * 30 additional places from September 2017 onwards at St.Anne’s Academy; * additional capacity should not be added to schools until current places are filled; and * In both cases this is subject to agreement with the Diocesan Authorities, Academy Trust and Governing Bodies as appropriate.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 10
SECONDARY SCHOOL PLACE DEMAND- PENNINES and ROCHDALE TOWNSHIPS
Pennines Township- current provision 27. There are two secondary schools in Pennines Township both of which are academies and have been re-built and/or re-modelled under the Building Schools for the Future programme. Wardle Academy and Hollingworth Academy each have 240 Year 7 places, and a total capacity of 1200 places.
28. In recent years additional primary school places have been provided in across the Township in the Littleborough, Dearnley, Newhey and Milnrow areas. In some areas these are permanent additions to the places available.
29. The pie chart below shows the Pennines Township Year 6 pupil destinations for school year 2013-2014. It shows the proportion of pupils progressing to the township’s secondary schools, and those choosing to attend schools outside the Township and the Borough. This trend is looked at each year and is the basis for projecting future demand for places. The township not only retains more than 9 out of 10 Year 6 children, it also draws pupils from Heywood and Rochdale Townships as well as from outside the Borough. Most significantly it draws 10% of Rochdale Township Year 6 children.
Rochdale Township- current provision 30. There are five secondary schools in Rochdale Township, all of which have been rebuilt or remodelled under the Building Schools for the Future Programme, or in the case of Oulder Hill Community School and Language College, under the Schools PFI (Private Finance Initiative) Project. St.Cuthbert’s Roman Catholic Business and Enterprise College is a Voluntary Aided school and has 240 Year 7 places with a total capacity of 1200 places. Kingsway Park High School is a Foundation School with a majority Trust and has 240 Year 7 places with a total capacity of 1200 places. Matthew Moss High School is a Community School with 180 Year 7 places and a total capacity of 900 places. Oulder Hill
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 11
Community School & Language College is a Community School with 300 Year 7 places, a total capacity of 1500 places. Falinge Park High School and Performing Arts College is a Community School with 240 Year 7 places with a total capacity of 1200 places.
31. A significant number of extra primary school places were added to schools in the south and east of the township in particular, most of which were on a short term basis.
32. The pie chart below shows the Rochdale Year 6 pupil destinations for school year 2013- 2014. It shows the proportion of pupils progressing to the township’s secondary schools, and those choosing to attend schools outside the Township and the Borough. This trend is looked at each year and is the basis for projecting future demand for places. The township currently retains just less than 8 out 10 Year 6 children. Most significant is the trend for 10% of year 6 children to seek places in Pennines Township secondary schools.
EXPECTED DEMAND FOR YEAR 7 PLACES across PENNINES and ROCHDALE TOWNSHIPS 2015-2024 33. For the purpose of developing an appropriate strategy to meet place planning needs, the projected numbers and place demand for the two townships have been combined. This means that a balanced view on the need for extra places can be taken, whilst recognising the different patterns of demand in this part of the Borough. The graph below shows that in the period 2015 to 2017, whilst overall there is a need for a small number of extra places, to meet the effect of local demand and demographic pressures, 60 extra places will be needed in Pennines Township from 2015. From 2018 onwards the demand for extra places will rise so that in 2019 and 2020, up to an extra 180 places will be needed (i.e. 6 forms of entry), and thereafter about 120 extra places (i.e. about 4 forms of entry). The background data for demand set against capacity for each of Pennines and Rochdale Townships is set out in APPENDIX NINE .
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 12
2013/14 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2011/12 2012/13 2017/18 2018/19 Year 6 Pupils 1643 1609 1603 1674 1760 1762 1781 1894 1932 1941 1909 1893 1914 1925 Year 7 Expected Pupils 1546 1473 1476 1603 1689 1675 1694 1806 1851 1858 1774 1792 1803 1801 Year 7 Places 1700 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 Extra Places Needed enough places overall -9 5 -14 -126 -171 -178 -94 -112 -123 -121
MEETING THE EXPECTED DEMAND FOR YEAR 7 PLACES across PENNINES and ROCHDALE TOWNSHIPS 2015-2019 34. For 2015, 2016 and 2017 it is expected that additional places will be needed to meet the current pattern of demand and preference and so 60 extra places are expected to be needed in Pennines Township. That level of provision will need to continue in Pennines Township thereafter. For 2018, a further 60 places will be needed to address demographic demand in Rochdale Township alone. Additionally, in 2019, a further 60 places will be needed.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 13
School year 2013/14 2014/15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Year 7 Places 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 Expected Pupils 1476 1603 1689 1675 1694 1805 1851 204 77 -9 5 -14 -125 -171
Summary and Proposals to meet the additional demand in Pennines and Rochdale Townships 35. Consultation was undertaken on the basis of separate proposals for each Township, with the proviso that the cross-township position in 2018 and 2019 onwards be considered. The proposals were as follows:
*Pennines Township : to provide an additional 60 places in the Township for the period to 2017, and that for the period 2018 and 2019 any further places would take account of the scope for additional capacity in Rochdale Township. The proposal therefore is that an extra 60 Year 7 places (two forms of entry) are provided in the township, 30 places at each of Wardle Academy and Hollingworth Academy for the period to 2017.
*Rochdale Township : to provide an additional 60 places to meet the Rochdale Township demand for the period 2018 and 2019. Also consideration needs to be given to a further extra 60 places for 2018 and 2019 to meet further demand across both Pennines and Rochdale Townships. The four Rochdale Township schools to be considered to take additional children are Falinge Park, Kingsway Park, Matthew Moss and St.Cuthbert’s. Two forms of entry are needed for the period 2018 and 2019 to meet the township need.
36. The outline proposal as it affects each school is as follows:
Wardl e Academy (Academy) Net Capacity: 1200 Admit 30 children in Year 7 in each from September 2015/16. This will require the provision of additional teaching space, for which a feasibility Published Admission study will be needed. This accommodation should be considered as permanent. As an Number: 240 Academy School, the Academy Trust and Governing Body are responsible for buildings and admissions, and would need to formally agree to taking additional Current NOR- 1105 children. Hollingworth Academy Net Capacity: 1200 Admit 30 children in Year 7 in each from September 2015/16. This will require the provision of additional teaching space, for which a feasibility Published Admission study will be needed. This accommodation should be considered as permanent. As an Number: 240 Academy School, the Academy Trust and Governing Body are responsible for buildings and admissions, and would need to formally agree to taking additional Current NOR- 1195 children
St Cuthbert’s RC (Voluntary Aided) Admit 30 children in Year 7 in each from September 2018/19 Net Capacity: 1200 The extent of additional accommodation required will need to take account of overall Published Admission number on roll in the school at the time of the required additional places. If the Number: 240 provision of additional teaching space is required, a feasibility study will be needed. Views are needed on whether this accommodation should be considered as Current NOR- 1169 permanent or temporary. As a Voluntary Aided School, the Governing Body is responsible for admissions, and would need to formally agree to taking additional children.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 14
Kingsway Park (Foundation) Net Capacity: 1200 Admit 30 children in Year 7 in each from September 2018/19 Published Admission The extent of additional accommodation required will need to take account of overall Number: 240 number on roll in the school at the time of the required additional places. If the Current NOR- 946 provision of additional teaching space is required, a feasibility study will be needed. Views are needed on whether this accommodation should be considered as permanent or temporary. As a Foundation School with a majority Trust, the Trust and the Governing body are responsible for the Buildings and admissions and would need to formally agree to taking additional children. Matthew Moss (Community) Net Capacity: 924 Admit 30 children in Year 7 in each from September 2018/19 Published Admission The extent of additional accommodation required will need to take account of overall Number: 180 number on roll in the school at the time of the required additional places. If the Current NOR- 794 provision of additional teaching space is required, a feasibility study will be needed. Views are needed on whether this accommodation should be considered as permanent or temporary. Falinge Park (Community) Net Capacity: 1200 Admit 30 children in Year 7 in each from September 2018/19 Published Admission This will require the provision of additional teaching space, for which a feasibility Number: 240 study will be needed. Views are needed on whether this accommodation should be Current NOR- 1141 considered as permanent or temporary.
SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION OUTCOMES 37. The full consultation responses are set out in APPENDIX EIGHT . The consultation asked whether enough places were being planned for each of the Townships. The consultation also sought views on where any extra places ought to be provided.
38. For Pennines Township : 53% of respondents did not consider enough places were planned, and there was a consensus that 30 places extra places should be provided at each of Wardle Academy and Hollingworth Academy.
39. For Rochdale Township : 53% of respondents considered there were enough places being planned. With regard to where additional places ought to be provided are concerned, 36% of respondents put forward Falinge Park, 18% Kingsway Park, 24% Matthew Moss and 12% St.Cuthberts.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXTRA PLACES IN PENNINES and ROCHDALE TOWNSHIPS 40. Taking account of the views expressed through the consultation, together with the information in this report and appendices, the recommendation is that additional places be provided in Pennines and Rochdale Townships follows: * 30 additional places from September 2015 onwards at Wardle Academy; * 30 additional places from September 2015 onwards at Hollingworth Academy; * 30 additional places from September 2018 onwards at Falinge Park; * 30 additional places from September 2018 onwards at Kingsway Park; * 30 additional places for September 2019 at Matthew Moss; * 30 additional places for September 2019 at St.Cuthberts RC; * additional capacity should not be added to schools until current places are filled; and * where applicable this is subject to agreement with the Diocesan Authorities, Academy Trusts and Governing Bodies as appropriate.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 15
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
41. Capital funding for 11-16 additional school places will be through the Education Funding Agency’s (EFA) formulaic capital allocation for Basic Need. This will include provision at academy schools. Should a school consider future additional sixth form places, capital support for additional post 16 places would be directly through the EFA’s “Demographic Growth Capital Fund” which provides support for maintained schools, academies and sixth form colleges. It includes provision for 11-25 year olds with special needs. The formulaic allocation for Basic Need for all local authorities was already been announced and covers the financial years 2015/6 to 2017/8.
42. Revenue funding for additional places would be via formula funding through Dedicated Schools Grant.
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
43. The Local Authority has a duty to secure sufficient school places and is also the strategic commissioner for new school places in its area. If new schools are proposed, current legislation sets out the arrangements for the procurement of such establishments. The Local Authority will have a responsibility to provide additional school sites as required
RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS
44. There are a number of risks to be considered in developing a strategy for additional secondary school places:
- Independent promoters bringing forward proposals for new school places which are not consistent with addressing the strategic need for additional places or the achievement of the objectives of the BSF Strategy for Change; - The availability, timing and level of significant capital funding from the Education Funding Agency to support 11-16 basic need may not be sufficient to meet the aspirations of providers; - Whether schools and/or post 16 providers wish to collaborate in bringing forward proposals; and - The longer term (post 2019) scale of additional demand for places in Middleton and Rochdale/ Pennines;
EQUALITIES IMPACTS
45. The Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) is attached as Appendix Seven The main points arising from the EIA are: * The additional secondary school places will improve parental preference in the Borough As well as ensuring that the Authority can meet its duty to provide enough school places. * Cabinet will be recommended to consider the report of the Working Group and the strategy to meet the increase in demand.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 16
RECOMMENDATIONS
46. The recommendations of the Group for meeting the additional demand for secondary places for the period 2015 to 2019 across the Borough are summarised below.
HEYWOOD Sept Sept Sept Sept Sept TOWNSHIP 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Current Year 7 330 330 330 330 330 Places Expected Year 7 303 306 323 324 339 Pupils Extra Places 0 0 Extra places needed Extra places needed -9 Needed for flexibility for flexibility Proposals: where Enough places Enough places 30 extra places at 30 extra places at 30 extra places at extra places will overall overall Holy Family RC/CE Holy Family RC/CE Holy Family RC/CE be made available College College College
MIDDLETON Sept Sept Sept Sept Sept TOWNSHIP 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Current Year 7 600 600 600 600 600 Places Expected Year 7 568 552 596 639 629 Pupils Extra Places 0 0 -39 -29 Needed Extra places needed to address Roman Catholic demand Proposals: where Enough places Enough places overall, but 30 extra places at 30 extra places at extra places will overall 30 extra places at Cardinal Langley RC. Cardinal Langley RC; Cardinal Langley RC; be made available 30 extra places at 30 extra places at St.Anne’s Academy. St.Anne’s Academy.
PENNINES and Sept Sept Sept Sept Sept ROCHDALE 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 TOWNSHIPS Current Year 7 1680 1680 1680 1680 1680 Places Expected Year 7 1689 1675 1694 1805 1851 Pupils Extra Places -9 5 14 -125 -171 Needed Extra places Extra places needed Extra places needed to to address Pennines needed to address Pennines demand address Pennines demand demand Proposals: where 30 extra places at 30 extra places at 30 extra places at 30 extra places 30 extra places extra places will each of: each of: each of: at each of: at each of: be made available * Wardle * Wardle * Wardle * Wardle * Wardle * Hollingworth * Hollingworth * Hollingworth * Hollingworth * Hollingworth * Falinge Park * Falinge Park *Kingsway Park *Kingsway Park *Matthew Moss *St.Cuthberts
Secondary Places Working Group November 2014
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 17
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX ONE MAP OF SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN THE BOROUGH BY TOWNSHIP
APPENDIX TWO HOW MANY CHILDREN IN OUR SECONDARY SCHOOLS AT PRESENT JAN 2014 CENSUS
APPENDIX THREE CURRENT PHYSICAL AND ADMISSION CAPACITIES OF SCHOOLS DIVERSITY OF PROVISION
APPENDIX FOUR A: How the pupil projections are developed B: School Capacity Data and Accommodation C: Housing Developments
APPENDIX FIVE STANDARDS IN SCHOOLS
APPENDIX SIX SCHOOL PLACE DEMAND- ADMISSION PREFERENCES & APPEALS
APPENDIX SEVEN EQUALITIES IMPACT ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX EIGHT CONSULTATION RESPONSES
APPENDIX NINE : PLACE DEMAND & CAPACITY DATA: PENNINES and ROCHDALE TOWNSHIPS
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 18
APPENDIX ONE Map of secondary schools in the Borough by Township
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 19
APPENDIX TWO How many children in our secondary schools at January 2014 census
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 20
APPENDIX THREE PHYSICAL CAPACITY, ADMISSION PLACES & CATEGORY of SCHOOL
SCHOOL Category Net Admission Capacity Number Heywood Township Holy Family RC/CE College VA RC/CE 600 120 Siddal Moor Sports College Community 1050 210 Middleton Township Middleton Technology High School Community 1350 270 Cardinal Langley RC High School RC VA 900 180 St Anne’s Academy (30 places /year group CE) Academy 750 150 Pennines Township Wardle Academy Academy 1200 240 Hollingworth Academy Ac ademy 1200 240 Rochdale Township St Cuthbert’s RC Business and Enterprise College RC VA 1200 240 Kingsway Park High School Foundation 1200 240 Mathew Moss High School Community 924 180 Oulder Hill School & Language College Community 1500 300 Falin ge Park High School & Performing Arts College Community 1200 240 13,074 2,610 BOROUGH SUMMARY - DIVERSITY OF PROVISION Admission Places % of Places Community 1200 46% Voluntary Aided Roman Catholic (RC) 495 19% Voluntary Aided Church of England (CE ) 45 2% Academy CE 30 1% Academy 600 23% Foundation 210 9% Total 2,610 100%
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 21
APPENDIX FOUR A: How the pupil projections are developed B: School Capacity Data and Accommodation C: Housing Developments
A: How Pupil Projections are Developed Sources of Data: 1. Birth data is obtained from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), on an academic year basis by postcode. This is a full year in arrears. For the immediate past academic year (for which ONS data is not available) birth data is obtained at Ward level from the health authority. When available the ONS data is used to replace the Health Authority ward level figures. Actual pupil numbers from the May School Census are used. Actual pupil numbers include the 2 Academies, and are obtained directly from the schools.
Use of Raw Data to produce Projections: 2. For Primary schools pupil number projections are produced at Borough level and for each of the Four Townships. At Secondary level projections are produced at Borough level only. The spreadsheet used calculates a progression ratio for every year group. It first calculates the % of pupil born in the appropriate year that were then in the Reception classes after their 4th birthday. The model then tracks each cohort as it progresses through the school system to calculate what % is retained from one year to the next. The pupil projections submitted to DfE are at Borough level.
3. A weighted average is then calculated as the basis for projections of future numbers. The model uses births and number on roll data from 2007/8. The most recent years are given a higher weighting given that we expect them to more accurately reflect current trends and, therefore, the likely trend over the next few years.
4. The weighted average for each Year Group is then applied to the most recent actual pupil numbers to give a projection for the next school year, and the weightings are then applied to projected figures to calculate subsequent years’ numbers. This applies to all year groups including Y12 and Y13. It should be noted that 3 school Sixth Forms close completely in August 2012, and there is likely to a further sixth form closures in 2013, so projected Sixth Form numbers are subject to a wider margin of error.
Additional Factors allowed for: 5. The final stage in developing the projections includes an element for new housing developments. Only those sites with planning permission with houses under construction are included. The basis of calculation is an average standard pupil yield of 0.1 secondary age children and 0.25 primary age children per new house built. So for every 100 houses there would be an extra 10 secondary age children and 25 primary age children, which are then split evenly across each school year group (except Sixth Form). The assumption is that the development is completed equally over 2 years. For the Borough as a whole this works out at a modest 21 children per primary year group and 12 children per year group of secondary age. The net effect of migration is taken account of through the progression ratios which include an allowance of 3% for flexibility.
B: SCHOOL CAPACITY DATA and ACCOMODATION 6. An analysis of the accommodation available at each school has been undertaken. Based on this there is a standard Department for Education (DfE) method for calculating how many
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 22
children a school can take (the Net Capacity Assessment) and how many children should be in each year group (the Indicated Admission Number). The Published Admission Number should not be less than the Indicated Admission Number. For school place planning purposes the emphasis is on the Planned Admission Number (PAN), because that is the minimum number of children that must be admitted.
C: HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS 7. The draft Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment for 2013 identifies the number of housing sites with planning permission and under construction, as well as other sites with planning permission and also potential housing sites. The Table below summarises these new housing developments for the Borough, by township over the next 15 years.
8. For the purposes of developing pupil projections, however, only new houses on sites that are under construction can be included in the calculations (excluding houses completed). In common with most northern local authorities an overall average of 3 pupils per year group for each 100 houses (pupil yield) is used. This means that for every new 100 houses there will be a need for an extra 21 primary age pupils (and 15 secondary age pupils).
9. The following table sets out the total additional place demand by township based on April 2013 sites under construction: Township Total number of Houses Houses Houses Potential on sites under Completed still to be Pupil Yield construction built Heywood 666 278 388 12 additional pupils per year group= 84 extra primary age children and 60 extra secondary age children Middleton 637 185 452 15 additional pupils per year group= 105 extra primary age children and 75 extra secondary age children Pennines 490 53 437 12 additional pupils per year group= 84 extra primary age children and 60 extra secondary age children Rochdale 635 58 577 18 additional pupils per year group= 126 extra primary age children and 90 extra secondary age children Borough 2428 574 1854 57additional pupils per year Total group= 399 extra primary age children and 285 extra secondary age children
Township Potential additional Houses on sites with Planning Permission in next 10 years Heywood 69 Middleton 371 Pennines 265 Rochdale 1277 Borough Total 1982 Source: RMBC Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment 2013
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 23
APPENDIX FIVE STANDARDS IN SCHOOLS
School Current OfSTED Overall A* - C in A* - C A* - C Closing the Gap % Grade KS 4 English in in disadvantaged 5 A*-C Maths Science achieving expected Inc E+M outcomes 2013 English Maths
Siddal Moor Satisfactory 54% 62% 65% 58% 45% 56% (2012) Holy Family RC/ Good 50% 57% 65% 88% 36% 48% CE (2013) Middleton Outstanding 68% 77% 74% 93% 75% 62% Technology (2006) Cardinal Langley Good 66% 73% 73% 86% 48% 56% (2012) St. Anne’s Good 46% 57% 60% 83% 64% 59% Academy (2013) Hollingworth Outstanding 67% 69% 82% Not 55% 73% Academy (2008) Available Wardle Academy Good 66% 72% 74% Not 71% 73% (2011) Available Falinge Park Good 57% 68% 70% 46% 73% 63% (2013) Kingsway Park Good 51% 61% 57% 72% 68% 59% (2013) Matthew Moss Requires 52% 63% 62% 56% 54% 55% Improvement (2013) St. Cuthbert’s RC Requires 55% 70% 64% 72% 52% 50% Improvement (2013) Oulder Hill Good 48% 49% 77% 77% 40% 70% (2012)
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 24
APPENDIX SIX SCHOOL PLACE DEMAND ADMISSION PREFERENCES, APPEALS
SECONDARY SCHOOL PREFERENCES and APPEALS DfE 2011 -12 on time 1st Places 1st Prefs % Sep-11 Appeals No. PAN prefs Prefs Offered offered 1st Prefs places No. No. Total expressed 1stMar11 Offered offered Appeals Upheld 4083 Siddal Moor 210 343 189 193 189 100% 202 3 1 4801 Holy Family RC & CE 120 250 113 120 113 100% 118 2 0 4091 Middleton Tech 210 369 163 181 163 100% 187 5 3 4611 Cardinal Langley RC(A) 180 415 194 180 176 91% 189 5 0 6905 St. Anne's Academy CE 150 190 70 71 70 100% 86 0 0 5401 Hollingworth (F) 240 629 291 241 235 81% 244 30 9 5400 Wardle (F) 240 415 183 215 183 100% 216 2 0 4612 St.Cuthbert's RC(A) 240 426 259 270 259 100% 268 10 4 5402 Kin gsway Park 240 464 164 173 164 100% 185 4 2 4088 Matthew Moss 180 428 168 172 168 100% 170 3 1 4089 Oulder Hill 300 648 209 245 209 100% 250 2 0 4086 Falinge Park 240 474 213 226 213 100% 223 0 0 2550 5051 2216 2287 2142 96.60% 2338 66 20
on 1st DfE time 1st Places Prefs % Sep-12 Appeals No. 2012-13 PAN prefs Prefs Offered offered 1st Prefs Places No. No. Total expressed 1stMar12 Offered offered Appeals Upheld 4083 Siddal Moor 210 299 186 193 186 100% 191 0 0 4801 Holy Family RC & CE 120 237 123 120 120 97.60% 122 0 0 4091 Middleton Tech 210 340 180 189 180 100% 197 0 0 4611 Cardinal Langley RC(A) 180 310 148 156 148 100% 165 0 0 6905 St. Anne's Academy CE 150 200 98 100 98 100% 111 0 0 5401 Hollingworth (F) 230 585 310 240 238 76.80% 241 23 5 5400 Wardle (F) 240 376 167 216 167 100% 211 0 0 4612 St.Cuthbert's RC(A) 270 383 209 230 209 100% 226 0 0 5402 Kingsway Park 240 365 147 155 147 100% 161 0 0 4088 Matthew Moss 180 349 142 145 142 100% 155 0 0 4089 Oulder Hill 300 555 237 269 237 100% 247 0 0 4086 Falinge Park 240 424 203 215 203 100% 222 0 0 2570 4423 2150 2228 2075 96.50% 2249 23 5
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 25
1st DfE on time 1st % Prefs Places Sep-13 Appeals
No. 2013-14 PAN prefs Prefs 1st Prefs offered Offered places No. No. Total Offered 1stMar13 offered Appeals Upheld 4083 Siddal Moor 210 234 143 100 143 147 158 0 0 4801 Holy Family RC & CE 120 203 113 100 113 120 121 0 0 4091 Middleton Tech 210 301 183 100 183 204 210 3 3 4611 Cardinal Langley RC(A) 180 362 210 82.9 174 180 194 12 6 6905 St. Anne's Academy CE 150 190 86 100 86 98 114 0 0 5401 Hollingworth (F) 240 515 284 82.4 234 240 249 20 3 5400 Wardle (F) 240 358 206 100 206 236 254 0 0 4612 St.Cuthbert's RC(A) 240 284 147 100 147 161 176 0 0 5402 Kingsway Park 240 390 188 100 188 198 214 0 0 4088 Matthew Moss 180 293 121 100 121 130 141 0 0 4089 Oulder Hill 300 519 220 100 220 266 271 0 0 4086 Falinge Park 240 323 179 100 179 182 218 0 0
2550 3972 2080 95.87 1994 2162 2320 35 12
1st DfE on time 1st % Prefs Places May-14 Appeals
No. 2014-15 PAN prefs Prefs 1st Prefs offered Offered places No. No. Total Offered 1stMar14 offered Appeals Upheld 4083 Siddal Moor 210 245 142 100 142 145 153 4801 Holy Family RC & CE 120 201 116 100 116 118 119 4091 Middleton Tech 270 314 194 100 194 205 214 4611 Cardinal Langley RC(A) 180 333 178 98.3 175 180 180 6905 St. Anne's Academy CE 150 201 101 100 101 101 110 5401 Hollingworth (F) 240 593 303 83.8 254 260 259 5400 Wardle (F) 240 405 240 90.4 217 240 268 4612 St.Cuthbert's RC(A) 240 271 157 100 157 166 181 5402 Kingsway Park 240 382 176 100 176 185 206 Not Available Yet Information Not Available Yet Information 4088 Matthew Moss 180 310 147 100 147 151 164 4089 Oulder Hill 300 532 243 100 243 266 272 4086 Falinge Park 240 408 217 99.5 216 240 240
2610 4195 2214 96.57 2138 2257 2366 0 0
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 26
APPENDIX SEVEN Equalities Impact Assessment
What are you assessing? Please tick the appropriate box below. Function Strategy Policy Project Other, please specify below X
Service: Section: Early Help & Schools School Organisation and Development Responsible Officer: Name of function/strategy/ policy/ project assessed: Chris Swift Providing Additional Secondary places in the Rochdale Borough from September 2015 onwards Date of Assessment: 8 April 2014 Officers Involved: Chris Swift & Yasin Khan 1. What is the purpose of the function/strategy/policy/project assessed? (Briefly describe the aims, objectives and purpose of the function/strategy/policy/project) There is a need to consider providing additional secondary places in the Rochdale Townships from September 2015 onwards. This is because the number of year 7 students for admission to secondary schools, across the borough will begin to increase significantly over the next few years. The effect of this means that in additional to the current number of secondary school admissions places and beyond. For this reason a stakeholder working group was set up to consider these issues and to formulate proposals for consultation. The view of the Working Group is that this additional need will be best met by expansion on the current school sites. The key aims and objectives are to secure sufficient school places, which respond to the views of parents in terms of type and diversity of provision and offer fair access for all children. Due to the rise in demand, it will be necessary to provide additional secondary school places from September 2015 onwards. 2. Who are the key stakeholders? The key stakeholders are: • Parents and pupils living in key areas of Rochdale, where they have experienced a notable rise in demand for secondary school places. • Carers and children in the Borough, and Governing Bodies of all Community, Voluntary controlled schools as well as Academies and foundation schools from the Borough 3. What is the scope of this equality impact assessment? That is, what is included in this assessment. The scope of this equality impact assessment s ets out the details of the need for additional secondary school places in the period2015-2019. Based on current projections additional year 7 places will be needed in each Township in that period. The Local Authority has a statutory duty to secure sufficient school places in this area, and is the strategic commissioner for the provision of additional places that might be required. 4. Which needs is this function/strategy/ policy/ project designed to meet? Ensure that there are enough school places in the Rochdale Township to meet the increased demand. From September 2014 the number of year 7 students for admission to secondary schools will begin to increase across the Borough. The pattern and extent of growth in demand is not evenly distributed, and the trend of year 6 children leaving for out-of- borough school continues. By 2020 there are expected to be 2934 year 6 children and of these, on current patterns of preference, 2828 will attend Rochdale Borough secondary schools. This is an overall shortfall of 216 places. The September 2014 published admission number (PAN) IS 2610 places. 5. Has a needs analysis been undertaken? Yes. The Local Authority has a duty to ensure that there are sufficient school places. Each year an analysis is undertaken of the supply and demand for school places. The analysis and proposed ways of meeting the need for extra places across the Rochdale Borough is then the subject of consultation. The need for additional secondary school places is the subject of this EIA, and the detailed analysis of need is the substance of the Consultation Document which can be accessed through the following link: http://consultations.rochdale.gov.uk/
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 27
6. Who is affected by this function/strate gy/ policy/ project? Parents, Carers, pupils & Schools are the main groups affected by an increase in provision. These additional groups include: staff at the school, Diocesan and church Authorities, Secretaries of recognised Trades Unions, elected members and the local MPs.
7.Who has been involved in the review or development of this function/strategy/ policy/ project and who has been consulted? State your consultation/involvement methodology. In order to plan effectively to meet the expected increase in demand, in December 2013 Rochdale Local Authority set up a Stakeholder Group comprising representatives of Secondary Headteachers, College Principals, Elected Members, school governors, Primary Headteachers and Diocesan Authorities to look at the supply and demand for additional secondary school places.
The remit of the Group, therefore, was to look at the strategy for meeting the need for extra pupil places across the Borough over the next five years (2015 onwards), to consult on such revised proposals and report to the Executive Member Children Schools & Families on the outcomes of that consultation by Autumn 2014. The membership of the Group comprises:
• Cllr Martin, plus 3 elected Members nominated by the respective Group Leaders; • Assistant Director Early Help and Schools; • 4 Secondary Headteachers nominated through the Pioneer Trust; • 1 person nominated by the Manchester Diocese; • 1 person nominated by the Salford Diocese; • 1 Primary Headteacher nominated by RAPH; • Principal Hopwood Hall College; • Principal Rochdale Sixth Form College • 1 School Governor nominated through the Governor Forum
The purpose of this consultation paper is to present for public consultation proposals from the Working Group as to how many additional places ought to be provided, and where and when they should be provided. The consultation will involve parents, carers, pupils, staff and governors of schools, Head teachers and Governing Bodies of schools in the Borough, Secretaries of Recognised Trades Unions, Salford and Manchester Diocesan Authorities, the Methodist Church, Elected members, MPs for the Rochdale Borough. Consultation will be undertaken for 6 weeks in June and July 2014.
8. What data have you considered for this assessment and have any gaps in the data been identifie d. What action will be taken to close any data gaps? Analysis of: • Pupil projection data • Pattern of past admissions to schools and parental preferences • Availability of places • Birth data • Net inward pupil movement into and around the Borough • New housing developments • 9. Are here any other documents or strategies which are linked to this assessment? If so, please include hyperlinks to these documents below, where available. • School Organisation Plan 2010-14 for Rochdale Borough which can be accessed at: http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/PDF/2011-03-23_School_Organisation_Plan_2010-14_v1.pdf
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 28
10. What impact will this function/strategy/policy/project have on all th e protected groups? This includes both positive and potentially negative impacts. Race Equality The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact on race equality considerations. The increase in school places will extend the opportunity for parental preference. Disabled People Any additional accommodation will be compliant with meeting the needs of disabled children and adults. The access needs of disabled parents/carers who take children to school and the access needs of any disabled residents who live near the school will be addressed by a revised School Travel Plan. Carers The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact on carers. The increase in school places and will improve accessibility to local schools. Gender The proposed changes d o not have an adverse impact based on gender considerations . Age The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact based on age considerations. Armed Forces and Ex -Armed Forces Personnel The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact based on arme d forces and ex service personnel considerations. The increase in school places and will improve accessibility to local schools. Sexual Orientation The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact on sexual orientation considerations. Gender Reassignm ent The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact on gender reassignment considerations. Religion or Belief The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact on religion or belief consi derations. Consultation included faith schools and their administrative bodies and proposals will reflect future demand for Roman Catholic and Church of England places. Pregnant Women or Those on Maternity Leave The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact on pregnant women or those on maternity leave. Marr iage or Civil Partnership The proposed changes do not have an adverse impact on marriage or civil partnership considerations. 11. What are your main conclusions from this analysis? There is a need for additional secondary pupil places due to the increas e in demographic demand across the Borough for the period September 2015 and beyond. Proposals have been put forward as to how the increased demand for places will be met, and Cabinet will take decisions on these proposals. 12.What are your recommendat ions? The additional secondary school places will improve parental preference in the Borough as well as ensur ing that the Authority can meet its duty to provide enough school places. Cabinet will be recommended to consider the report of the Working Group and the strategy to meet the increase in demand. 13.What actions are you going to take to address the findings of this assessment? Please attach an action plan including details of designated officers responsible for completing these actions. As the pro posals do not have an adverse impact on the protected groups, there are no targets. The Action Plan, however, sets out the process for implementing the strategy if approved.
Signed (Completing Officer):______Chris Swift_____ Date: _2nd June 2014
Signed (Head of Service): ______Date: ______
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 29
Equality Impact Assessment Action Plan 2014/15 Action Outcome Target Date Resource Lead For Implications Officer Completion Undertake public Working Group 8th September Officer time C Swift consultation considers 2014 Y Khan consultation responses Report to Decision on where Oct 2014 Officer time C Swift Cabinet extra school places Y Khan to be provided Feasibility Informed decisions August 2014 Officer time and C Swift Studies on where extra commissioning Y Khan places to be feasibility studies provided Report to Implementing the Oct 2014 Officer time C Swift Cabinet Cabinet decision Y Khan
Further dialogue Formal proposals Nov 2014 Officer time C Swift with Individual agreed at school Capital resources Y Khan school heads level identified to Governing Bodies support / Trusts Implementation
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 30
APPENDIX EIGHT CONSULTATION RESPONSES:
INTRODUCTION 1. Consultation on the need for extra secondary school places was undertaken between 2nd June and 20th July 2014. In total the following responses were received: • The total number of responses received for all the Townships were 403 • 88 responses were received from members of the Youth parliament • 1 Letter received from Redwood Secondary School • 1 Letter received from Holy Family RC & CE College • 1 Letter received from Whittaker Moss Primary School • 1 e-mail received from Linda Fisher interim Chief Executive
2. The responses to the consultation are set out and summarised in the following sections, by Township.
HEYWOOD TOWNSHIP 3. In total there were 127 responses in respect of Heywood Township, and 21 were from members of the Youth Parliament. The consultation pro-forma was as follows: Are enough extra places being planned for Heywood? Please tick YES NO If up to 30 extra places are to be provided at one of the Heywood Schools- at Holy Family which school would you prefer to see these places provided? Siddal Moor
COMMENTS or alternative suggestions to provide extra Year 7 places:
NAME/contact email-
4. In summary : • 53% of the total recipients indicated there were not enough places being planned for Heywood • 46% of the total recipients indicated there were enough places being planned for Heywood • 74% of the recipients indicated they would prefer Holy Family to have the additional 30 extra places for Heywood • 25% of the recipients indicated they would prefer Siddal Moor to have the additional 30 extra places for Heywood • 86% of the members of youth parliament indicated that enough places are being planned for the Heywood • 14% of the members of youth parliament indicated that enough places were not being planned for the Heywood • 82% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer Holy Family to have the additional 30 extra places for Heywood • 18% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer Siddal Moor to have the additional 30 extra places for Heywood
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 31
Q1 Are enough places being planned for Q2. If up to 30 extra places are to be provided at Heywood Township? one of the Heywood schools- at which school would you prefer to see these places provided?
55
50 53% 45 46%
40 Yes No
The Youth Parliament Response are summarised as follows: Q1 Are enough places being planned for Q2. If up to 30 extra places are to be provided at Heywood Township? one of the Heywood schools- at which school would you prefer to see these places provided?
5. The comments received were as follows : • A general school would be more appropriate than a religious based one; • Where as Holy Family already have sufficient room to accommodate these pupils, where as Siddal Moor would have to build / provide porta cabins to accommodate; • Siddal Moor has just had a new build and in my opinion it can cater for 30 more pupils. Holy Family had also had a new build but on a much smaller scale; • Not as many students will be able to go over the border to Bury. St Cuthbert's not as popular as St Vincents students to Heywood may increase; • I think Siddal Moor is already too big without adding more places; • I feel that Siddal Moor is a large enough school, its Ofsted report is not as good as Holy Family, so as a parent I would prefer my children to go to Holy Family. Siddal Moor does not have a very good reputation as far as I can see with poor behaviour and discipline, so I don't see parents wanting their children to go there; • If funding is an option maybe a brand new high school could be built, creating more spaces for children in years to come; • Holy Family is a more popular school than Siddal Moor. Extra Places need to therefore be provided at Holy Family rather than Siddal Moor to ensure parental preference is met; • Could you not have 15 places at each school extra? • Mathew Moss is on the border of Heywood - could yr7 be allocated a place there in addition to Heywood schools??
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 32
• Both schools could do with extra places in my opinion as I feel both are great schools and I would rather my son go to one of them than none; • Maybe do a survey now to find out how many 8 year olds have already decided on which high school they want to attend. My grandson and his friends have already decided may be early surveys are what is needed; • Siddal Moor has too many children per year and I think it would be detrimental to their learning if more children would be added at this school; • I wouldn’t put my child in either school as they are both too crowded and as a result of that I feel my child would not get the education he needs; • Split the numbers maybe 20 to Holy Family and 10 to Siddal Moor; • 15 Extra places in both schools; • I suggest placing 15 extra places in each school as they can be easily accommodated for minimal cost if any; • Siddal Moor has already gone through the disruption of expansion; • Exam places for C of E students to secure more first choices; • I would prefer extra places to be provided by Holy Family; • Already have two children at Holy Family college and my youngest is of high school age in 2017. I hope there will be more spaces for her. I live in Rochdale not in the catchment area in Heywood; • Holy Family is able to accommodate the extra places needed. It would also provide extra places, available across the borough, to parents who would wish to have a faith based education for their children; • As Holy Family is the smaller school and has more space it would be preferable for all the places to go there. It would make the schools a more equal intake and therefore improve choice for parents; • There is a need for these extra spaces, but in five years’ time schools can change and parents may require the extra spaces placing differently. Is this going to be reviewed either annually or bi-annually? • Holy Family would not cope with a 25% increase in pupils without further buildings. Should the places be split across both schools @a 10% of sizes i.e. 20 @ Siddal and 10 at Holy Family? • I think Holy Family should get the extra places as Siddal Moor is already a very large school. Holy family will still remain small even with extra places; • I do not feel that enough extra places are being planned for Heywood; • I cannot see how providing the extra places at Siddal Moor and Holy Family will resolve this issue. Holy Family are not meeting Ofsted requirements at present with the current intake, so adding further numbers to a struggling school will only add to the problem and fail the potential pupils attending that school; • Siddal Moor is already a very large, imposing school. Making schools bigger and bigger is not a solution. Pupils run the risk of getting lost in a very large system and establishment. Many of my friends children are concerned about bullying or have been a victim of bullying at this school, making Siddal Moor larger will only add to this problem; and • There is a very strong argument that supports the building of another school in particularly - west ward Heywood. The people of Heywood have been failed by the demolition of Heywood Community School and the lack of future secondary school places in the future is clear proof of this.
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 33
MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP 6. In total there were 51 responses in respect of Middleton Township and 23 responses from members of the Youth Parliament. The consultation pro-forma was as follows: Are enough extra places being planned for Middleton? Please tick YES NO If up to 60 extra places are to be provided at two of Cardinal Langley RC School YES NO the Middleton Schools- do you support 30 extra places at each of these schools? St Anne’s Academy YES NO COMMENTS or alternative suggestions to provide extra Year 7 places:
NAME/contact email-
7. In summary : • 39% of the total recipients indicated there were not enough places being planned for Middleton • 59% of the total recipients indicated there were enough places being planned for Middleton • 61% of the recipients indicated they would prefer a 50/50 split between Cardinal Langley and St Annes Academy to have the additional 60 extra places for Middleton • The remaining 48% of the recipients indicated they would prefer Cardinal Langley to have the additional 30 extra places for Middleton • The remaining 46% of the recipients indicated they would prefer St Annes Academy to have the additional 30 extra places for Middleton • 30% of the members of youth parliament indicated that enough places are being planned for the Middleton • 70% of the members of youth parliament indicated that enough places were not being planned for the Middleton • 52% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer Cardinal Langley to have the additional 30 extra places for Middleton • 48% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer St Annes to have the additional 30 extra places for Middleton
Q1 Are enough places being planned for Q2. If up to 60 extra places are to be provided at two of the MiddletonTownship? Middleton schools- do you support 30 extra places at each of these two schools?
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 34
The Youth Parliament Response are summarised as follows: Q1 Are enough places being planned for Q2. If up to 60 extra places are to be provided at Middleton Township? two of the Middleton schools- do you support 30 extra places at each of these two schools?
8. The comments received were as follows : • If we are struggling for school places already why are Taylor Wimpey proposing to build another 357 houses in the catchment are of both these schools; • As even more homes are being built in Middleton the problem will only get worse so I think another school is needed. Plans should be put in place now to start building another high school; • Underutilised space in Midd Tech to cover the places required. Temporary requirements to cater for religious preference should not be tax payer funded when space is available, especially in tough economic climate. If required they can hire a porta cabin; • Not enough school places for British children of their choice; • How about a new school, instead of overcrowding the existing schools. Does this mean there will be enough rooms /facilities and resources in the existing school/ I doubt it surely we need a new large school to sustain this kind of growth? I didn't really want my son (in reception now) going to such a huge high school; • As long as classrooms aren't overcrowded I'm on board; • Transport should be free if it is required; • Put 45 in Cardinal Langley RC School, due to a new Headteacher and lack of students and 15 in St Annes Academy; • Put all 60 in St Annes Academy to build up the strength of the school as new Headteacher in place; • Split it up as otherwise young people will have to be crammed to other areas; • Cardinal Langley are academically better so if more places are given to Cardinal Langley pupils will have better GCSE results; • Make two other little schools; • Make a new school or two smaller schools -they could make more rooms; • These schools are ideal and have the facilities grounds and bus services already in place. They both start at 8:30 and finish 2:30pm. Half an hour before peak flow traffic through town centre; • Would a possibility of a new school be considered rather than extending or overcrowding the current schools? • I hope to send my child to Cardinal Langley and so hope there are sufficient places; • No other ideas but I am concerned that cardinal Langley seems to have a lot if supply teachers now so how would they cope; • Whilst I have indicated 60 places should be given to Cardinal Langley, consideration should be given to how many children are expected to move from current catholic primary schools in the township (i.e. St John Fisher, Our Lady's, St Peters and St Thomas More) to Cardinal Langley before deciding on how the actual extra places should be allocated; and
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 35
• The consultation paper mentioned that Middleton receives a large number of children from outside the area wanting to be placed in the township, as well as most of the local children staying in the area. As Cardinal Langley is a VA faith school, my concern would be that if my child/ren did not get a place at that school then they would need to travel outside the area to be placed in another RC school. For non RC pupils, there is a choice of two alternative schools.
PENNINES TOWNSHIP
9. In total there were 97 responses in respect of Pennines Township and 22 responses from members of the Youth Parliament. The consultation pro-forma was as follows:
Are enough extra places being planned for Pennines? Please tick YES NO If up to 60 extra places are to be provided at Hollingworth Academy YES NO two of the Pennines Schools- do you support 30 extra places at each of these schools? Wardle Academy YES NO COMMENTS or alternative suggestions to provide extra Year 7 places:
NAME/contact email-
10. In summary : • 53.6% of the total recipients indicated there were not enough places being planned for Pennines • 33% of the total recipients indicated there were enough places being planned for Pennines • 56.7% of the recipients indicated they would prefer a 50/50 split between the two schools to have the additional 60 extra places for Pennine • The remaining 39.7% of the recipients indicated they would prefer Wardle to have the additional 30 extra places for Pennines • The remaining 39.2% of the recipients indicated they would prefer Hollingworth to have the additional 30 extra places for Pennines • 45% of the members of youth parliament indicated that enough places are being planned for the Pennines • 55% of the members of youth parliament indicated that enough places were not being planned for the Pennine township • 55% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer Wardle High to have the additional 30 extra places for the Pennines • 45% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer Hollingworth to have the additional 30 extra places for the Pennines
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 36
Q1 Are enough places being planned for Q2. If up to 60 extra places are to be provided at two of Pennines Township? the Pennines schools- do you support 30 extra places at each of these schools?
60.0 50.0 100.0 40.0 56.7% 30.0 39.2% 39.7% 50.0 20.0 33% 53% 13% 10.0 0.0 0.0 Yes No Other Hollingworth Wardle % of Academy Academy responders who entered 50/50 split
The Youth Parliament Response are summarised as follows: Q1 Are enough places being planned for Q2. If up to 60 extra places are to be provided at Pennines Township? two of the Pennines schools- do you support 30 extra places at each of these schools?
11. The comments received were as follows : • Parking Traffic Noise; • Potential problem overcrowding leads to behavioural problems and fall in standards, personal experience if this is a secondary teacher. Reinstate free bus passes to allow children to attend church schools from Pennine area. Remove cost barrier, relive pressure on places. Negotiate with Bacup and Rawtenstall grammar school allow children from area to go if pass exam rather than get band 3 higher results; • No for Wardle as too far due to travelling; • 1. Build another secondary school in the area.2 Do not accept pupils from feeder schools which are out of the catchment area &/ or are nearer to the other high schools. I.e. Kingsway; • 1. Both new schools that have only just been built should have had room for / to accommodate growing number of pupils.2. Another secondary school should be built.; • The places should be provided by the schools with the highest number of applicants (parent’s first choice! • I want to send my son to blue coats school in Oldham. If no place them in Hollingworth. He is in year 3 now; • If as indicated by point 2, these places are for 2015/16, there will be a shortfall of 35 places. If as indicated by point 6 these places are for 2017+ then it will be sufficient only for 1/2 a year! • 60 extra spaces are insufficient for some school years. If the spaces expected continue to increase as in 2015-16 etc. where are the pupils going to go to schools. There used to be a secondary school at Littleborough do we need one now? • Looking at the figures 60 places aren’t enough anyway as in 2015-16 95 extra places are needed;
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 37
• As both Wardle and Hollingworth are new builds and the shortage places has been known for quite some time this appears to be inadequate planning. I’m unclear of the value of this consultation; • Why have these numbers not been planned for with both the new school builds; • I think it’s a good idea to provide 30 extra places at each of these schools. That gives parents equal choice of school places. I am a governor for a primary school and more parents now apply to Wardle and Hollingworth; • Renovate and reopen Littleborough high school as it is obvious from the numbers that places are only going to continue to increase meaning facilities will need to alter again and again; • My concerns are can these schools manage with extra children? What about class space? Parents do not want larger student classes! Both these schools are new builds and seem to be smaller. My 10 year old goes to Wardle in September. The school looks great but the more children squashed into classes has an effect on their education. You have also got to take into consideration children who have behavioural and learning difficulties. A larger class is more difficult to handle. Unfortunately I don’t have any suggestions just concerns; • 30 Places for each school; • 50/50 Split depending on the intake of the schools as it stands; • I think that there are not enough places a new school should be built as the demand is so high in these areas; • There are not enough places planned as 60 spaces wonts be enough for 2015-16 as it is at -95. Maybe make a new school to fit 480 extra people per year; • Build a new school - Get Wardle and Hollingworth to help out; • Could build a new school without investing a little; • Possibly work to build a new school especially if both are over subscribed; • Purely as Hollingworth is bigger and accommodate easier; • Without knowing what going to happen in future years it’s difficult to guess if 30 places is enough so can’t say if a new school would be better; • It seems pretty clear to us that we need a new school. Its only 5years till we need an extra 143 places, we have thought for a long time that Rochdale needs a grammar school, we send out children to Bacup & Rawtenstall grammar school. A lot of families don’t have that option.; • The new building at Wardle was already reduced by 10% in order to cut costs and doesn’t have the physical capacity for more intakes. Hollingworth was not reduced and capacity proved when the accommodated additional pupils in the past; • The local authority should have used data available to plan for additional future place requirements. The schools and facilities should be used based on previous budgets to ensure teaching provided is to the highest standard over billing the school could lead to unhappy environment for the children and lead to bad behaviour; • We don’t want to the school to get too big. We think children learn better when there are smaller numbers; • Parking school become too large; • I don’t think any of schools should take extra children, unless new buildings can be built to accommodate the extra children as things are already tight at Wardle Academy and I’m sure Hollingworth are the same too; • These schools are already oversubscribed / overcrowded extra classroom space and staff should be provided or build another secondary school in RMBC. Plenty of brown sites around; • Even more is needed; • Wardle academy is incredibly cramped already. The new build isn't sufficient for the current pupil numbers. Overcrowding alongside the poor quality of the actual build will mean that the school will suffer dramatically, causing the school to shell out huge funds on repairs rather than
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 38
on the pupil's learning. Once again I think that the only way to accommodate extra students is to build extra classrooms and facilities; • I feel that as both of these school have just recently been through the process of building work being done I feel that it is appalling that you are now considering adding more pupils to these schools, and I am appalled that you consider adding on or putting up temporary classrooms at either of these sites; • As a parent of children that have and still attend Wardle Academy I am not happy at the thought of more pupil intake. If Rochdale had not got rid of Littleborough High & Balderstone over the past years I am sure there would have been adequate school provision within the authority. On a recent photo of year 11 leavers I was shocked to see just how many pupils are in a school year. How can pupils be given any individual personal care and attention when there are so many pupils for the already over stretched teaching and non-teaching staff to deal with; • I am shocked and appalled at the suggestion that you think that adding additional pupils to ALL the schools in the borough will give a good education to any secondary pupil. Teachers have a difficult enough job to do without the addition of more pupils; • Once again Rochdale council is a sham and your short short-sightedness is bewildering. Why was this issue not dealt with when all these schools within the authority were being rebuilt? You should be ashamed; • Should have made provisions for school to take more capacity of pupils and employ extra teachers instead of government cuts. Also extra pupil’s means less quality teaching on an individual pupil basis; • I don’t think it is fair that the intake, classes are large enough. Build more new schools and stop cutting funds; • My concerns are- Can these schools manage with the extra children?- What about class space?- Parents do not want larger student classes!! • Both these schools are new builds and seem to be smaller. My 10 year old goes to Wardle in September. The school looks great!! But the more children squashed into classes has an effect on their education; • You have also got to take into consideration children who have behavioural and learning difficulties. A larger class is more difficult to handle; • Unfortunately I don't have any suggestions just concerns.
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP
12. In total there were 128 responses in respect of Rochdale Township and 22 responses from members of the Youth Parliament. The consultation pro-forma was as follows:
Are enough extra places being planned for Rochdale? Please tick YES NO If up to 60 extra places are to Falinge Park YES NO Mathew Moss YES NO be provided at four of the Rochdale Schools- at which Kingsway Park YES NO St Cuthberts YES NO Schools would you like to see the additional places COMMENTS or alternative suggestions to provide extra Year 7 places:
NAME/contact email-
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 39
13. In summary : • 27% of the total recipients indicated there were not enough places being planned for Rochdale • 53% of the total recipients indicated there were enough places being planned for Rochdale • 36% of total recipients indicated they would prefer the additional places to be accommodated at the Falinge School • 24% of total recipients indicated they would prefer the additional places to be accommodated at the Mathew Moss School • 18% of total recipients indicated they would prefer the additional places to be accommodated at the Kingsway School • 12% of total recipients indicated they would prefer the additional places to be accommodated at the St Cuthbert’s School • 14% of the members of youth parliament indicated that enough places are being planned for the Rochdale • 8% of the members of youth parliament indicated that enough places were not being planned for the Rochdale • 40% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer Mathew Moss to have the additional 60 extra places for the Rochdale Township • 27% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer Falinge Park to have the additional 60 extra places for the Rochdale Township • 22% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer Kingsway to have the additional 60 extra places for the Rochdale Township • 11% of the members of youth parliament indicated they would prefer St Cuthbert’s to have the additional 60 extra places for the Rochdale Township
Q1 Are enough places being planned for Q2. If up to 60 extra places are to be provided at four of Rochdale Township? the Rochdale schools- at which schools would you like to see the extra places?
40 100 30 36% 20 18% 24% 50 53% 10 12% 27% 20% 0 0 Falinge Kingsway Matthew St Yes No Other Park Park Moss Cuthberts
The Youth Parliament Response are summarised as follows: Q1 Are enough places being planned for Q2. If up to 60 extra places are to be provided at Rochdale Township? four of the Rochdale schools- at which schools would you like to see the extra places?
60 40 40 20 27 22 0 11 Falinge Kingsway Matthew St Park Park Moss Cuthberts
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 40
14. The comments received were as follows : • I have no comment; • It unfortunate I can’t make a yes/no decision here because I think It needs someone with more knowledge about schools and the community which surround them Thanks; • 60 is an under estimate; • Hollingworth High School; • Share Places between schools to cover areas from which children live; • Work with other boroughs to provide solutions-a lot moving to Bury Council out of Rochdale- Why? • I would also send my child to Oulder Hill School; • Falinge Park is our catchment area, so it is beneficial for us. I feel that something needs to be thought of as a long term solution i.e. more schools being built, because soon all the existing schools will bulge their maximum capacity over the coming years; • Falinge Best School in Rochdale; • Not enough catholic schools in the area, my children are catholic and cannot attend a catholic primary school. I would like at least a catholic secondary school; • Any Catholic schools please, we are Catholic but couldn’t get a place in a primary catholic, left alone secondary catholic; • Best school where more primary schools are referring their pupils after year 6. Also parents are fighting to get a place for their kids where there is a best quality of education; • It is a good idea to provide extra places , I agree with it fully. Thank you very much; • I feel that there are enough extra places being planned for Rochdale. I would like the 60 extra places to be provided at Kingsway Park and Mathew Moss; • Our 5 year old will need a place at Falinge in 2019. Her sister starts in Sept 2014. We will also have a child at Healey. We couldn’t travel to school for that reason. School places need to be where the demand is . Many Families are unable to travel far to school also wish to be with siblings. Both my partner and self-work full time so my mum does the school runs. Many grandparents are in this position; • Make a new school as there is quite a high demand & make enough places as this township has highest demands; • Or an alternative would be build another school with a more central location; • Free transport should be provided; • I think that a new school should be built where the demand is, if not more places should be made in all schools; • I think that Falinge and Mathew Moss should have the majority of students as they are well performing schools; • Build a big school near Asda; • New school overall maybe; • St Cuthbert's not really a friendly environment coming from hindsight not focused on education; • Could have a new school in central Rochdale; • Build a brand new school for all the students instead of splitting into schools with different standards, levels of education and travel cost make one in the middle of Rochdale; • Would prefer to have a new school; • Splitting it by four schools = 15 each seems pointless. Extending four schools by so little. Two schools would make more sense; • I would like to see additional places added to Falinge and Mathew Moss; • I'm unclear why Oulder Hill is not an option for additional places which is where I would have chosen to piut all the extra places;
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 41
• After receiving the Rochdale Township Consultation paper. I was rather confused to say the least as it say only 60 Places needed. When in fact it is over 500 places needed throughout Rochdale. You should have given information for the TOTAL places needed and plans for this. Doing the consultation based on individual township`s is misleading. As I Know about the housing developments in Castleton and off Broad Lane I knew 60 places was totally inadequate. I also see that the different types of school`s i.e. Foundation, Faith, Community etc, could lead to difficulties if the Foundation schools refuse to allow the extra places any school that refuses or being awkward about it should have all public money / tax payers money Stopped; • I would like to see additional places added to Falinge and Mathew Moss; • One question I have is how we are factoring these projections into the provision of extra housing across the borough and in the absence of a Community Infrastructure levy ( CIL ) at present how the Planning Service are considering this information when approving planning applications. We hope to have a CIL within the timescales of these demand projections so how will that become relevant and what difference will that make. When we support and put forward new sites for housing how does the information feed in to ensure we have informed decision making. Really informative report just interested to understand how it all fits together with the progress of the Core Strategy our housing strategy and I assume the Councils capital programme. Happy to get feedback on my points as part of the larger consultation process; • I have been asked to e-mail you on behalf of the governing body at Whittaker Moss Primary School. A question about provision for children with SEN was raised at our recent governors' meeting. Governors at Whittaker Moss wonder why Redwood School has not been included as one of the schools to increase places. Surely if there is an increase in children requiring places, there will be an increase in children with SEN that will require a place at a high school that can cater for their needs? As Redwood is the authority's only special needs high school, surely it should have been included in the consultation process? The Governors feel strongly about this issue as we have had a pupil this year who could not get into Redwood and who will now be educated in a special needs high school out of the borough. With additional children coming through the system, the situation is only bound to get worse. We hope you are considering children with SEN carefully during this process;
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 42
APPENDIX NINE : PLACE DEMAND & CAPACITY DATA: PENNINES and ROCHDALE TOWNSHIPS
School year 2013/14 2014/15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Year 7 Places 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 Expected Pupils 496 538 575 538 545 591 623 Extra Places Needed -58 -95 -58 -65 -111 -143
2013/14 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2011/12 2012/13 2017/18 2018/19 Year 6 Pupils 365 333 341 376 402 376 381 414 436 437 436 486 477 462 Year 7 Expected Pupils 455 452 496 538 575 538 545 591 623 624 604 674 661 640 Year 7 Places 470 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 Extra Places enough places Needed overall -58 -95 -58 -65 -111 -143 -144 -124 -194 -181 -160
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 43
School year 2013/14 2014/15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Year 7 Places 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 Expected Pupils 980 1065 1114 1137 1149 1214 1228 Extra Places Needed enough places overall to meet township need -14 -28
2013/14 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25
2011/12 2012/13 2017/18 2018/19 Year 6 Pupils 1278 1276 1262 1298 1358 1386 1400 1480 1496 1504 1473 1407 1437 1463 Year 7 Expected Pupils 1091 1021 980 1065 1114 1137 1149 1214 1228 1234 1170 1119 1141 1162 Year 7 Places 1230 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 Extra Places Needed enough places overall -14 -28 -34 30 81 59 38 ………………………………………………………………… ENDS ………………………………………………………
Secondary Place Planning Group- Final Report Nov14 v1 Page 44