Southampton Schools' future: The Council report - part 2

hnimprove staying on rates at 16.

hnretain more pupils within the city by providing good local schools which meet the needs of parents.

hnremove surplus places which represent a poor use of resources.

hncreate the opportunity of establishing learning campuses bringing together.

a range of services for children and young people hnprepare for investment to replace, renew and upgrade school buildings through Building Schools for the Future.

2. Detailed reasons for the recommendations can be found in Appendix 1 (Technical appraisal of proposals for New School West and New Schools East and Linked proposals and other Matters to be considered by the decision maker in respect of the Learning Futures Secondary Education Review): The report and its appendices takes into account the guidance set out in Appendix 2, the Department for Education and Skills document Establishing a New Maintained Mainstream School: A Guide for Local Authorities.

3. Further detailed reasons for the recommendations (iv) and (ix) will be determined by Cabinet at the time of its decision and announced at Cabinet and published in the record of decision accordingly.

CONSULTATION 4. Non statutory consultation on a range of possible options for the future of secondary education in Southampton took place early in 2006. Further non statutory consultation took place in autumn 2006.

5. Statutory consultation on the current proposals took place between 16th April and 29th May 2007. The consultation included: hnthe publication of statutory notices in the press and at the schools affected and their distribution to all statutory consultees.

hnthe publication of all relevant material on Southampton on line, with paper copies readily available in the schools affected and local libraries.

hnletters sent to all parents in the city alerting them to the consultation.

hnsix public meetings, one held in each of the schools affected, with the promoters of the new schools making presentations at the schools proposed for closure.

hnfour meetings for staff and governors, one in each of the four schools proposed for closure and replacement with new schools at which the promoters of the new schools made presentations.

6 hna drop-in meeting in the city centre at St Marys CE Primary School hna meeting for representatives of the schools councils (i.e. pupil representatives) from the four schools proposed for closure and replacement with new schools at which the promoters of the new schools made presentations hna meeting for the fourteen secondary headteacher in Southampton at which the promoters of the new schools made presentations.

hna meeting open to all elected members of Southampton City Council at which the promoters of the new schools made presentations.

Notes of the consultation meetings can be found in members rooms.

6. Members of the public and stakeholders were given the opportunity to make representations, objections or comments, by letter or email. These representations are available in members rooms. Members of the public may inspect copies of the representations at Childrens Services and Learning, Frobisher House, Southampton. An analysis of the representations, together with the Authoritys response to them can be found at Appendix 3.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED 7. The option of not closing the existing schools, and therefore not establishing new schools was considered. This approach was advocated by a number of consultees. It could be argued that the potential disruption of major change could be avoided, and that less radical change could lead to more evolutionary changes to the current system.

8. This approach has been rejected as it would have the effect of leaving the underlying problems unaddressed which necessitated the review of secondary education in the city in the first place. It would mean that a further review would be required causing additional, prolonged uncertainty. It could leave some schools facing the prospect of unviability as pupil numbers fall. It would not be a good basis for planning the redevelopment of school sites and buildings which will be possible through Building Schools for the Future.

DETAIL Decision options for Cabinet 9. Cabinet has the following options: hnTo reject all proposals hnTo approve any of the proposals without modification, or hn(after consulting the proposer) to approve any of the proposals with such modifications the authority thinks desirable hnTo approve any of the proposals (with or without modifications) subject to one or more of the conditions set out in Regulation 7(5) of the School Organisation (Transitional Provisions) (England) Regulations 2007.

(Appendix 4) Where proposals are indicated as linked Cabinet must consider them together and ensure the linked decisions are consistent.

7 Statement confirming that the Council has completed all stages of the statutory process in accordance with prevailing legislation 10. The Council has complied with all stages of the statutory process as set out in Appendix 5 of the report.

Key issues for the decision maker referenced to the statutory guidance and other relevant information 11. This section provides Cabinet with the required information to make its decision. It should be read in conjunction with the following key documents: hnDecision Makers Guidance (Local Authorities) for Establishing a New Maintained Mainstream School (henceforward referred to as The Guide) (Appendix 2) hnDecision Makers Guidance (Local Authorities) for Closing a Maintained Mainstream School (Appendix 6) hnDecision Makers Guidance (Local Authorities) for making changes to Maintained Mainstream School (other than by expansion) (Appendix 7) hnDecision Makers Guidance (Local Authorities) for expanding a Maintained Mainstream School or adding a sixth form(Appendix 8).

hnFactors considered in deciding proposals V the locally determined criteria for the new school competitions as decided by the Cabinet Member for Childrens Services and Learning on 25th March 2007 (included as Appendix 9 to this report and henceforward referred to as Local Factors) hnTechnical Appraisal of New School Proposals V the appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of the various proposals by a range of officers with specific technical expertise (included as Appendix 1 to this report and referred to as Technical Appraisal).

hnConsultation Summary V a summary of the issues raised in the consultation and the response of the local authority (included as Appendix 3 to this report and referred to as Consultation Summary). General considerations for decision makers.

12. The Guide states that the decision maker must be satisfied that no information is missing in relation to the proposals (Part C, 2. a). All relevant information has been provided.

13. The Guide states that the decision maker must be satisfied that the published notices comply with statutory requirements (Part C, 2. b). Officers advise that the published notices complied with the requirements. The text of the statutory notices can be found at Appendices 10 a) V e).

14. The Guide states that the decision maker must be satisfied that consultation was carried out prior to the publication of the notice (Part C, 2. c). Details of the prestatutory consultation can be found at Appendix 5. Officers advise that appropriate consultation was conducted.

15. The Guide states that the decision maker must take into account any linked proposals (Part C, 2. d). The following paragraphs 16 to 19 show how the proposals for Millbrook, Oaklands, the New School West and Redbridge are 8 linked, and paragraphs 21 to 24 similarly show how the proposals for Grove Park, Woolston, the New School East and The Sholing Technology College are linked.

West Southampton: an explanation of how the proposals are linked 16. Recommendations (i) to (v) relate to linked proposals for the west of the city. The overall intention of the proposals is to reduce the number of surplus places and create a pattern of provision which will contribute to raising standards on the west of the city. The attention of the decision maker is drawn to the sections Need for Places in Appendix 1 which shows the capacity of the schools, the current and forecast number on the roll of the schools in question.

17. The proposed expansion of Redbridge Community School is linked to the proposals for a new school to replace Millbrook and Oaklands. Such an expansion could only be justified if places are removed elsewhere. In the event that the proposals for a new school on the west are not taken forward no expansion of Redbridge should be implemented.

18. It would be possible to approve the proposals for the closure of Millbrook and Oaklands and the establishment of New School West without the expansion of Redbridge Community School. This would however leave fewer surplus places than would be prudent to retain and would have the effect of seriously constraining parental preference.

19. In this context, the attention of decision makers is drawn to the decision already taken by the School Organisation Committee that Bellemoor School and Regents Park Community College both become mixed schools and are reduced in capacity.

East Southampton: an explanation of how the proposals are linked 20. Recommendations (vi) to (xii) relate to linked proposals for the east of the city.

The overall intention of the proposals is to reduce the number of surplus places and create a pattern of provision which will contribute to raising standards on the east of the city. The attention of the decision maker is drawn to the sections Need for Places in Appendix 1 which shows the capacity of the schools, the current and forecast number on the roll of the schools in question.

21. The proposed change of character at The Sholing Technology College is linked to the proposal to establish a new mixed school on the east of the city. Since the establishment of the new school involved the closure of a boys school, in order to balance provision it would be necessary for TSTC also to be mixed, otherwise there would continue to be a preponderance of boys in the new school and other local schools.

22. The proposed expansion of The Sholing Technology College is linked to the proposals for a new school to replace Grove Park and Woolston. Such an expansion could only be justified if places are removed elsewhere. In the event that the proposals for a new school on the east are not taken forward no expansion nor change of character of TSTC should be implemented.

23. It would be possible to approve the proposals for the closure of Grove Park and Woolston and the establishment of New School East without the expansion of The Sholing Technology College. There would not be an excessive number of surplus places if the expansion did not take place. The reason for the proposed 9 expansion is better to meet parental preference and to round the number up so that the school can admit seven full forms of entry.