ITEM CMDSI2
CABINET MEMBER – 4 DECEMBER 2007
TOWER HILL SCHOOL-EXTENSION OF THE AGE-RANGE OF THE SCHOOL BY THE ADDITION OF A NURSERY CLASS
Report by Director for Children, Young People & Families
Introduction
1. The Cabinet Member for Schools Improvement at his meeting on 2 October 2007 agreed to the publication of a statutory notice to extend the age range of the school by the addition of a nursery class following a period of informal consultation. This has the effect of changing the age range of the school from 4-11 to 3-11.
2. The decision-making power in terms of determining the notice now lies with The Cabinet or can be delegated to the Cabinet Member for ‘Schools Improvement’. This follows decisions taken by the Cabinet in July under new legislation encompassed in the Education & Inspections Act 2006 (EIA 2006) whereby School Organisation Committees were abolished and arrangements became the responsibility of the relevant local authority. In meeting as ‘decision-maker’ the Cabinet or Cabinet Member must have regard to government guidance and statutory timescales otherwise a decision can be referred to the independent Schools’ Adjudicator for reconsideration. At its meeting in July the Cabinet confirmed that in considering notices as ‘Decision-maker’ it was necessary for the Chairman of the Council to determine that the decision could not be subject to ‘call-in’ as this would, in most cases, mean that the Cabinet’s role would be negated by referral to the Schools’ Adjudicator. The Cabinet decision must be made within 2 months of the close of the notice period.
3. The notice was published in the Oxford Times on 12 October 2007 and expired following 6 weeks of formal consultation on 23 November 2007 (Annex 1) (download as .doc file). In accordance with new legislation the notice was posted at the school gate and the local library. A copy of the proposal (attached at Annex 2) (download as .doc file) and the notice was sent to the school’s governing body and the Secretary of State. Responses to the informal consultation are available in the Members’ Resource Room and will be available at the meeting. To date no objections to the proposal have been received.
The Proposal
4. The school currently admits children in the September after their 4th birthday. Younger children attend the local Pre-school, which is due to close in December 07. The school proposes to open a nursery class to ensure continuity of provision for these children and to help improve standards on entry to year 1. The school is a medium sized community school with a current roll of 140 including Foundation Stage.
Making a Decision
5. In terms of reaching a decision all proposals should be considered on their merits but the following factors should be borne in mind but are not considered to be exhaustive. The Cabinet Member for Schools Improvement must be satisfied that the statutory consultation has been carried out prior to the publication of the notice. Details of the consultation should be included in the proposals. The Decision Maker must be satisfied that the consultation meets statutory requirements. If some parties submit objections on the basis that consultation was not adequate, the Decision Maker may wish to take legal advice on the points raised. If the requirements have not been met, the Decision Maker may judge the proposals to be invalid and should consider whether they can make a decision on the proposals. Alternatively the Decision Maker may take into account the sufficiency and quality of the consultation as part of their overall judgement of the proposals as a whole.
6. The effect on standards, school improvement and diversity. The government aims to create a dynamic system shaped by parents that delivers excellence and equality closing weak schools and encouraging new providers and popular schools to expand. Decision Makers should be satisfied that the proposals will contribute to raising local standards of provision and improved attainment and consider the impact on choice and diversity. They should pay particular attention to the effect on groups that tend to under-perform including children from certain ethnic minorities and deprived backgrounds. The decision-maker should consider how the proposals will help deliver the ‘Every Child Matters’ principles.
7. School characteristics. The decision-maker should consider whether there are any sex, race or disability discrimination issues that arise and whether there is supporting evidence to support the extension and take into account the existence of capacity elsewhere. The decision-maker needs to consider the accessibility of the provision for disadvantaged groups as the provision should not unduly extend journey times or cost.
8. Funding and land. The decision-maker should be satisfied that any capital required to implement the proposals will be available.
Financial and Staff Implications
9. There are no staffing implications arising from this report. Approximately £15,000-£20,000 capital is required. The Local Authority will donate a start up grant of £9,000. Governors have agreed to prioritise this work in the school’s development plan and will meet any additional costs.
RECOMMENDATION
10. The Cabinet Member for Schools Improvement is RECOMMENDED to either:
(a) reject the proposals; (b) approve the proposals; (c) approve the proposals with a modification (e.g. the proposal implementation date); or (d) approve the proposals subject
to them meeting a specific condition.
JANET TOMLINSON Director for Children, Young People & Families
Background papers: Responses to the Informal Consultation
Contact Officer: Michael Mill, Strategic Manager (Property & Assets) Tel: (01865) 816458
December 2007
|