Return
to Agenda
ITEM CA10
CABINET
– 21 JUNE 2005
HOME TO
SCHOOL AND COLLEGE TRANSPORT
Report by
Director for Children, Young People and Families
Introduction
- The County Council
provides either free or subsidised transport to over 12,000 young people
travelling to school or college. The policy reflects statutory requirements
that are set out in the Education Acts 1996 and 2002. The Education
& Inspections Bill currently before Parliament may lead to an extension
of the free transport that the County Council has to provide.
- On 20 December
2005 a report was submitted to the Cabinet to explain the then projected
overspend of £590,000, to provide an analysis of identified budget pressures,
set out actions already taken to address the problem and suggestions
for possible courses of action for the future. The Cabinet agreed:
- that there should
be a consultation on possible changes to the transport policy where
the County Council has discretion to provide assistance;
- that officers
should report back to the Cabinet in June 2006 on the proposals for
a new transport policy to take effect in 2007 /08.
- The following
possible options for change were to be included in the consultation:
- the phased ending
of transport to faith schools and/or continuing to provide transport
to faith schools but charging for seats on the same terms as those
set out in the concessionary scheme;
- the phased ending
of free travel for non-Oxfordshire residents to Chiltern Edge School;
- the introduction
of charging for post-16 SEN students to be in line with all post-16
charging;
- using free school
meals and maximum working tax credit as the reasons for exemptions
to the concessionary charge for transport.
- In addition the
Cabinet decided to take the following actions:
- to include as
part of the annual consultation on admissions arrangements a review
of the designated areas of those secondary schools which have areas
that overlap the county boundary, with a view to realigning them with
the Oxfordshire boundary;
- to endorse the
establishment of an integrated Transport Management Team in the Children,
Young People & Families Directorate by April 2006 as an interim
step towards the longer-term strategy of developing a centrally managed
team for all of the Council’s funded transport arrangements.
- Consultation took
place from January to 8 March 2006 and at the request of Chiltern Edge
School this was extended to 31 March. This consultation involved all
maintained schools in Oxfordshire, neighbouring local authorities, parish
councils, the Archdiocese of Birmingham, the Diocese of Oxford, and
the parents of children likely to be affected by any policy change in
the first year of operation. The consultation document was also placed
on the public website.
Proposal
1 – Travel to Faith Schools
Option
1a) - To end free travel to faith schools
- If the County
Council were to adopt this proposal there would need to be a phased
implementation and the full saving would be achieved after 5 years for
secondary school transport and seven years for primary school transport.
- The consultation
document explained that there were currently:
- 153 children
receiving free transport to a faith primary school;
- 108 children
receiving free transport to a faith secondary school;
- 130 Catholic
children receiving subsidised travel to the Blessed George Napier
from the Bicester area (at the lowest concessionary fare);
- 9 primary schools
and two secondary schools that would be affected by the ending of
free travel on faith grounds;
- that the County
Council would work with the schools to facilitate more locally organised
transport during the phasing in of any new arrangements;
- none of the
391 children currently receiving free or subsidised travel on faith
grounds would be affected by the proposed change, which would only
apply to those due to start at the schools concerned from September
2007
- the full year
net cost of the transport contracts for faith travel was approximately
£411,840(2005/06 prices).
- Table 1 below
shows the responses received regarding this proposal.
Table.
1 Responses to Option 1a – Proposal to end free travel to faith
schools
|
|
Parents
|
Schools
|
Councillors
|
Neighbouring
Authorities
|
Out
of Oxon Schools
|
Dioceses
|
Agree
|
2
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
Disagree
|
35
|
7
|
1
|
|
|
1
|
Neither
|
2
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
- Schools’ views
were evenly balanced but of the 39 parents responding 35 were against
the proposal. This represents only a small % of the 391 children currently
being transported. However, this may reflect the fact that travel arrangements
for children currently transported would not be affected.
- Parents and some
schools expressed strongly held views that they wanted pupils to retain
current transport arrangements to help them access schools of a particular
type that offered what they believe to be the most appropriate education.
However this privilege, not extended to pupils in any other schools,
is costing the Council an average of more than £1000 per pupil from
an overspent transport budget. Against the strong arguments for free
transport to faith schools it might be argued that "parental choice",
as elsewhere, should not be at the expense of others and that in these
circumstances parents are responsible for the transport of their children.
This tension is highlighted by one group of these pupils that lives
in the Bicester area, beyond the 10-mile limit of the Council’s current
policy. They have transport provided at a heavily subsidised rate and
pay only a concessionary fare. This contrasts with other parents, in
the Bicester area, who pay the full cost of a coach to a different school
of their choice that is also not local.
- To remove the
free transport to faith schools would be a break with tradition that
might have a detrimental effect on some school rolls and would certainly
be unpopular with some parents who have strongly held views. Equally,
there is a considerable cost to continuing the free transport and it
is not equitable with practice in other cases.
Option
1b) - To continue to provide transport to faith schools but to charge
at the same rates for all other concessionary travel arrangements.
- The consultation
document explained that currently this would mean charging:
- parents with
children of statutory school age £74 per two terms if they are under
3 miles from their nearest faith school or £102 per two terms if they
live over 3 miles away;
- post-16 students
who live in the designated area for the school £74 per two terms and
those post-16 students living outside the designated area would be
charged £102 per two terms.
- It was explained
that with a phased introduction and the use of distance related charging
it was estimated that there would be additional income of approximately:
- £4,000 in the
first part year of operation;
- £12,000 in the
second year of operation;
- £18,000 in the
third year;
- £24,000 in the
fourth year;
- £30,000 in the
fifth year.
- Charging arrangements
would be the same as those for concessionary travel to non- faith schools
but in those cases places are only allocated on buses that are already
running. In this proposal the overall effective subsidy would remain
at around £380k
- The responses
received regarding this proposal are shown in Table 2 below. The responses
show that a majority of the schools that responded favoured this approach
although it was not an approach popular with parents who might be affected.
Table
2. Responses to Option 1b – Continue transport to faith schools
with a charge
|
|
Parents
|
Schools
|
Councillors
|
Neighbouring
Authorities
|
Out
of Oxon Schools
|
Dioceses
|
Agree
|
3
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
Disagree
|
31
|
4
|
1
|
|
|
1
|
Neither
|
4
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
- This proposal,
if adopted, would be:
- unlikely to
affect recruitment to faith schools since those least able to pay
the charge would be exempt;
- more equitable
than current arrangements although it would still represent a significant
subsidy to those attending a faith school and would not address the
transport overspend which was the purpose of the consultation
Proposal
2 - To end free transport to Chiltern Edge School for those not resident
in Oxfordshire
- The consultation
document explained that:
- Oxfordshire
exceptionally provides free transport to 259 children from the Caversham
area of Reading to Chiltern Edge School;
- the arrangement
regarding travel to Chiltern Edge School was agreed between the then
Berkshire County Council and Oxfordshire County Council in 1992 and
in 1995, after a phased transfer of responsibility, Oxfordshire assumed
full responsibility for the cost of the transport;
- there is a potential
saving to the transport budget of approximately £140,000 per annum
after 5 years;
- The responses
received from schools were fairly evenly balanced but, as can be seen
from Table 3, there was a significant adverse response from parents.
Table
3. Proposal 2 – End free transport to children at Chiltern Edge
School for those not resident in Oxfordshire
|
|
Parents
|
Schools
|
Councillors
|
Neighbouring
Authorities
|
Out
of Oxon Schools
|
Dioceses
|
Agree
|
9
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
Disagree
|
130
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
Neither
|
8
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
- The Governors
of Chiltern Edge School are opposed to the proposal and believe that
ending free transport from the Caversham Park area would have a damaging
financial effect on the school.
- Although there
is a financial case for ending free transport it would be wise to await
the outcome of the planned reviews of secondary education before considering
such action.
Proposal
3 - To introduce transport charges for post-16 SEN students at the same
rate as non-SEN students.
- The consultation
document explained that:
- currently post-16
students who have special educational needs receive free transport
to the nearest appropriate educational placement;
- this type of
transport is high cost and low volume and must be provided to enable
access;
- this is different
from arrangements for other post-16 travellers since charging at the
concessionary rate is the norm for non-SEN post-16 students;
- it is in line
with practice pre 16 where the usual rules of free transport are not
applied to pupils with SEN who cannot reasonably attend a school even
though they may live within 3 miles
- there is a possible
maximum income of approximately £18,000 in 2007/08 and £36,000 in
2008/09 depending on the numbers of students eligible for waiving
of charges (see Proposal 4)
- The responses
received regarding this proposal are shown in Table 4 below. They show
that there was an even balance between the schools that responded and
that the majority of parents who responded did not agree with this proposal.
The number of responses was quite small, perhaps reflecting the number
of students involved.
Table
4. Proposal 3 – The introduction of charging for Post-16 SEN transport
|
|
Parents
|
Schools
|
Councillors
|
Neighbouring
Authorities
|
Out
of Oxon Schools
|
Dioceses
|
Agree
|
1
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
Disagree
|
18
|
4
|
1
|
|
|
|
Neither
|
3
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
- The financial
gain from this proposal is relatively small and would be borne by those
who are already disadvantaged. For these reasons it would probably not
be advisable to remove this discretionary service.
Proposal
4 – The use of free school meals/working tax credit as a reason to waive
the concessionary charge
- The consultation
document explained that exempting those in receipt of free school meals,
or whose parents are in receipt of maximum working tax credit, from
the concessionary charge for transport would be consistent with the
approach set out in the recent White Paper " Higher Standards, Better
Schools For All", published by the DfES on 25 October 2005. It was also
explained that this change would simplify the policy and reduce time
spent on administration.
- The responses
to this proposal are shown in Table 5 below.
Table
5. Proposal 4 – The use of free school meals/working tax credit
as a reason to waive the concessionary charge
|
|
Parents
|
Schools
|
Councillors
|
Neighbouring
Authorities
|
Out
of Oxon Schools
|
Dioceses
|
Agree
|
7
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
Disagree
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neither
|
5
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
- They clearly show
that the majority of schools that responded favoured this approach and
that the few parental responses were evenly split. However, further
work would be needed to ascertain the impact on individual families
and to establish reliable systems for replacing existing practice with
a new regime. On balance it would appear advisable not to amend the
current practice at this time.
Other
actions taken following the decisions made by Cabinet on 20 December
2005
- As decided by
the Cabinet a review of the designated areas of those secondary schools
which have areas that overlap the county boundary was included in the
annual consultation on admissions arrangements with a view to realigning
them with the Oxfordshire boundary. Following that consultation the
County Council decided not to implement any changes to the designated
areas of the three schools concerned.
- An Integrated
Transport Management Team was established in April 2006 to cover the
transport responsibilities of the Children, Young People & Families
Directorate and those of the Social & Community Services Directorate.
This conforms to the Cabinet decision taken on 20 December 2005. Changes
in management practice that flow from this will be considered separately
as part of the Best Value Review of Funded Transport which is now expected
to report in September. That paper will address management, procurement
and provision issues whereas this paper is about policy on entitlement.
Children’s
Services Scrutiny Committee
- The Children’s
Services Scrutiny Committee saw a draft of this report at its meeting
on 23 May. The Committee agreed to advise the Cabinet that:
- (by 8 votes
to 6) they support recommendation (a)(1) (ie to accept proposal 1(a),
which would end free and subsidised travel to faith schools);
- (unanimously)
they support recommendations (b), (c) and (d).
. Financial
and Staffing Implications
- The recommended
proposals will realise a sum dependent on the decisions taken about
each proposal. An indication is given in the run of the report. The
overall financial position in relation to the home to school and college
transport budget will be revisited in the context of the Best Value
review referred to above.
- There are no staffing
implications.
RECOMMENDATION
- The Cabinet
is RECOMMENDED, subject to consideration of the advice from the Children’s
Services Scrutiny Committee:
- Either:
- to accept
Proposal 1a, which would end free and subsidised travel to faith
schools; OR
- to accept
Proposal 1b, which would provide transport at the concessionary
rate; OR
- to continue
existing practice i.e. maintaining free travel to faith schools;
- not to pursue
Proposal 2, which would end free transport to Chiltern Edge School
for those not resident in Oxfordshire;
- not to pursue
Proposal 3, which would introduce of transport charges for post-16
SEN students;
- not to pursue
Proposal 4, which proposes the use of free school meals/working tax
credit as grounds to waive the concessionary charge in place of existing
criteria.
KEITH
BARTLEY
Director for
Learning & Culture
Background Papers: Consultation document and responses from consultees
Contact
Officer: Simon Adams Assistant Head of Service, Children & Young
People Tel: 01865 810602
May
2006
Return to TOP
|