ITEM CMDSI2
CABINET MEMBER FOR SCHOOLS IMPROVEMENT 2 APRIL 2008
SEN PROVISION – PROPOSED CHANGE OF AGE RANGE TO INCLUDE 16-19 PROVISION
Report by Director for Children, Young People & Families
Introduction
1. The Cabinet at its meeting on 15 January 2008 (Annex 1) agreed to the publication of formal proposals to extend the age ranges of schools as set out below. Individual notices were published for each school with the other school notices referred to as related proposals.
2. Extend the age range from 16 to 19 years at the following special schools designated for pupils with severe learning difficulties and profound and multiple learning difficulties:
Bardwell SchoolFrank Wise School John Watson School Kingfisher School Mabel Prichard School Springfield School
3. Extend the age range from 16 to 19 years at Fitzwaryn School, a special school designated for pupils with moderate learning difficulties and severe learning difficulties.
4. Extend the age range from 16 to 18 years at Iffley Mead School, a special school designated for pupils with complex moderate learning difficulties.
5. Extend the age range from 16 to 18 years at Northfield School, a special school designated for pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties.
6. Extend the age range from 16 to 18 years at Woodeaton Manor School, a special school designated for pupils with emotional and social difficulties.
7. The decision-making power in terms of determining the notices 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.
8. The notices were published between 27 February 2008 and 29 February 2008 and expired following 4 weeks of formal consultation between 26 and 28 March 2008 (Annex 2). In accordance with new legislation the notice was posted at each school gate and relevant local libraries. A copy of the proposals (attached at Annex 3) and the notices were sent to each school’s governing body and the Secretary of State and additionally made available on the Oxfordshire County Council website. 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 proposed implementation date for each proposal is 1 September 2008.
The Proposal
9. The proposal is to extend the age range at each school as part of the Local Authority's strategy to widen the range of options and enable a flexible approach to post 16 education for students with special educational needs in Oxfordshire that includes the option of continued special school provision. The current age range admitted to each school is shown below.
Bardwell School, 2 – 16 Fitzwaryn School, 2 – 16 Frank Wise School, 2 – 16 Iffley Mead, 5- 16 John Watson School, 2 – 16 Kingfisher School, 2 – 16 Mabel Prichard School, 2 – 16 Northfield, 11 – 16 Springfield School, 2 –16 Woodeaton Manor School, 11- 16
Making a Decision
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 16 – 19 Provision. The Learning and Skills Act 2000 provides an entitlement to further education and training for young people aged 16-19. Schools and colleges should offer high quality provision that meets the diverse needs of all young people, their communities and employers. 16-19 provision should be organised to ensure that, in every area, young people have access, within reasonable travelling distance, to high quality learning opportunities across schools, colleges and work-based training routes. Decision Makers should therefore consider all proposals which affect local 16-19 provision (i.e. both proposed school expansions and proposals to add a new sixth form) in the context of the principles below.
· quality – all provision for all learners should be high quality, whatever their chosen pathway;
· distinct 16-19 provision – all young people should be attached to a 16-19 base which will meet the particular pastoral, management and learning needs of this group;
· diversity to ensure curriculum breadth – well-managed collaboration between popular and successful small providers will enable them to remain viable and to share and build on their particular areas of expertise;
· learner choice – all learners should normally have local access to high quality 16-19 provision in a range of settings and any proposals for change to this provision should take into account the views of all stakeholders;
· affordability, value for money and cost effectiveness – proposals for change should include how any capital and recurrent costs and savings will lead to improved educational opportunities.
14. Funding and land. The decision-maker should be satisfied that any capital required to implement the proposals will be available.
15. Special Educational Needs (SEN) Provision. When reviewing SEN provision, planning or commissioning alternative types of SEN provision or considering proposals for change LA's should aim for a flexible range of provision and support that can respond to the special educational needs of individual pupils and parental preferences, rather than necessarily establishing broad categories of provision according to special educational need or disability. When considering any reorganization of SEN provision LA's and all other proposers of new provision will need to demonstrate to parents, the local community and decision makers how the proposed alternative arrangements are likely to lead to improvements in the standard, quality and/or range of educational provision for children with SEN.
Financial and Staff Implications
16. There are no further financial and staffing implications other than those detailed in the January Cabinet paper
RECOMMENDATION
12. 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: Cabinet papers 18 July 2006, 19 December 2006, 16 October 2007 and 15 January 2008
Contact Officer: Simon Adams, Assistant Head of Service, Young People and Access to Education Tel: 01865 810602
Allyson Milward, Principal Property & Assets Officer, Raising Achievement Service Tel: 01865 816447 March 2008
|