Public Consultation Meeting at Eccles, Hargham & Wilby CE VA Primary School

Public Consultation Meeting at Eccles, Hargham & Wilby CE VA Primary School 26.03.14

Public Consultation Meeting at Eccles, Hargham & Wilby CE VA Primary School

Minutes of the Meeting held on Wednesday 26th March, 2014, at 6 p.m.

Present: Sam Nixon (SN), Executive Headteacher, Jigsaw Partnership

Alison Cunningham (AC), School Organisation Officer and Advisor

Richard Snowden (RS), Head of Admissions

Nikki Forshaw, Additional Needs Area Co-ordinator

Peter Lotarius, Governor

In attendance: Sarah Jones, Clerk

1. Alison Cunningham opened the meeting, welcomed those present and asked the panel to introduce themselves. Alison explained that she and Richard Snowden attended the first meeting at Eccles last week, but that not everyone had the opportunity of attending. Consequently a second meeting has been arranged for this evening.

Alison clarified that there would be a time limit for the meeting. There would be a maximum of one hour to answer general questions from those present and any strategic queries about the consultation process. Following that there would be half an hour for more personal queries from individual families regarding their children. Nikki Forshaw would be available to answer private questions.

AC clarified that this situation was not unique. In October 2013 a letter went out to all schools with fewer than 50 pupils on roll as part of the Norfolk Small Schools Strategy to advise them that they would be subject to a review. The continuing existence of small schools in the current national financial funding arrangement is difficult. Firstly, all pupils are to be funded on the same level in all schools. Secondly, there is the question of standards at schools in the county with a great deal of press interest over the last 18 months. Both funding and standards difficulties have brought to the fore the future of small schools in Norfolk.

A number of years ago the governors at Eccles Primary had the foresight to enter into a partnership. A year ago this was extended to include KenninghallPrimary School, with Sam Nixon as Executive Head of the Jigsaw Partnership. The governors came to the conclusion when they looked at the budget then that small schools were protected. The new funding arrangement was to be phased in over three years, which gave some protection.

The minimum budget guarantee is now coming to the end of its 3 year protection. The Governors asked the Local Authority to investigate further the future of the school. The Diocese has discussed this and has given permission for the highest strategy group to consult on the proposal ‘to cease to maintain’ Eccles Primary.

Next week, on 4th April, the public consultation period ends and a decision will be taken by the Cabinet Minister on whether to proceed to a Public Notice. This will involve a 4 week period of public representation before a final decision is made by the Cabinet Minister.

Following this introduction, AC opened the meeting to take questions from those present.

1)Q. Do you not feel the Headteacher is ‘top heavy’ in taking away from the school budget?

Response: AC - This is not part of the issue. Under the Funding Formula money will follow the pupils.

Reply: I was formerly a governor at this school, but left for this reason. I do not agree with the set up.

2)Q. The Funding method is very expensive – couldn’t costs be cut?

Response: AC - Looking at the budget over 3 years it is not sustainable.

Response: Peter Lotarius, governor - The budget has been tight for the last two years during the partnership with Carlton Rode. Joining the Jigsaw Partnership was a step forward and has reduced costs for the school as well as maintaining standards. Two years ago governors could see the squeeze on funding but expected numbers to increase. The 3 year budget allocation was set with the expectation of there being 30 pupils on roll. A year ago the numbers levelled off and then the figures went down. In addition, the changes in funding are having an effect on the budget. The third year of the budget is showing a deficit, which is not permissible. We could not see where the future lay in two years’ time because of low pupil numbers. This is not due to teaching standards. The projected numbers are way below what we’d anticipated and set the budget on and consequently we have a very serious problem.

3)Q. There is a passionate feeling amongst the community about all that has been done. These figures must be written down somewhere. People would like to see the figures. Are the figures available in the public domain?

Response: Sam Nixon – The budget figures for the previous 5 years are available online.

4)Comment: The problem is not about care – the staff care passionately and it is not lack of ability. The problem is down to finances. The school is excellent at what schools are meant to do.

Response: AC – You say the school is thriving, but I would contend this. The school is not responding to the needs of the community. Many parents are choosing to send their children to other, larger, schools. Parents do not see Eccles as a thriving school offering the breadth of educational experiences needed for children in the area.

5)Q. What has changed in one year? Reply: AC - It is not just over one year.

Q. Last year we had a higher number entering the school than the year before. This year numbers are low. What can we do?

Response: RS - The total population of the school has decreased. Families have chosen to move their children.

Q. In the Autumn Term 4 or 5 pupils left after a leak from the governors regarding the letter about small schools. Has this loss of 4/5 pupils made the difference?

Response: AC - This is the vulnerability of very small schools. In the past they were cushioned by the LA paying for ‘phantom pupils’. In some years there were 6 or 7 pupils in Reception Year, in some years none. In this economic climate it is becoming increasingly difficult.

Q. Doesn’t the LA have a duty of care to the pupils? Response: AC - Yes, but not necessarily at this school.

Q. What about the children with special educational needs? Response: AC - This is a mainstream school.

Comment: Over the years county have pushed special needs children towards Eccles. Then other parents of mainstream children may not want to send their children here. Therefore, the LA cannot use the argument that it is mainstream.

6)Q. I am on the Old Buckenham Parish Council and I have two questions - i) OldBuckenhamSchool is full. Many pupils come from Thetford. Why can’t you fill in the gap by sending children from Thetford here? ii) You mention the ‘disadvantages of small schools’. What are these?

Response: RS - I agree that Old Buckenham Primary is bursting at the seams, but the LA does not pay for transport. The process is driven by parental preference. More than half the children at Old Buckenham Primary are not from the catchment area. We have to recognise parental preference. For pupils with statements we have to consider it.

7)Comment: It is not a problem of funding, but of advertising, if there are spare places here and schools are over full elsewhere.

Response: AC - It is very difficult to promote a school. Across the county parents choose not to send their children to the small school that is nearest to their home. In Norfolk a larger school may only have 80 to 100 pupils. One reason parents do this may be, for example, that they don’t want their child to be the only boy/girl in a year group.

Response: SN – It’s right that advertising is the key. Eccles has only had a school website for the last year. Even so, 18 out of the 27 pupils came from out of catchment. This is due to the ‘pull factor’ of the school.

Comment: This is dual standards. You claim parents don’t want to come to small schools. At the same time many choose to come here. If there were better advertising, more may choose to come here.

8)Comment: One factor is that women work. Parents choose schools with Before and After School Clubs. Where is the next nearest school? Also, this is a ChurchSchool. Response from many: Where is the diocese tonight? There was general agreement that the lack of a representative from the diocese tonight was a negative point.

9)Parent of a child with a statement of SEND - If this school closes I don’t see an appropriate school for my child. Response: AC - Nikki Forshaw works with parents regarding parental choice on an individual basis. In parallel with this all other parents will be contacted. There will be discussions after the meeting with individual parents.

10)Q. I have been reading about the Sparsity Factor. Does NCC cover this? Response: RS - Part of the Funding Formula for the LA is the Sparsity Factor, which relates to the proximity of your school to other schools in the area. AC added that all schools are either ‘rural’ or ‘urban’. Some are designated as ‘sparse’. AC did not think that Eccles was classified as ‘sparse’. Where there is the sparsity factor there may be extra funding. Comment: SN – Sparsity also relates to where a child lives and the distance to the nearest school.

11)Comment: A Parent – the possible closure based on finances is very short term. Response: AC - There is a lump sum for each school and then a per pupil sum. In a small school there is a cost to the LA budget. The cost of a teacher is roughly equivalent to 27 pupils. The LA tends to work in units of 30, but it is still viable at 27. Below that figure it is difficult to balance the budget and maintain the school.

Parent response: I agree, but will you save by moving pupils to another school? AC - Governors, the diocese and the LA are trying to see a sustainable future for the school.

12)Q. From a member of staff – In April 2013 Eccles joined the triple partnership to safeguard its future. 12 months later we are facing possible closure – this is a remarkably short time to turn around. It is hard not to be cynical and believe we were given false hope. Why was a rescue plan not launched much earlier?

Response: AC replied that it was not the LA that initiated the partnership – this was started by the schools themselves, with the blessing of the LA. At Eccles there has been a struggle to keep going for many years. The problem is not precipitous. We are going through the process of finding a solution. If the decision is not to go ahead with closure, we will most likely be back again in 2 years’ time.

13) Comment: lady from Banham PC – There is nothing in the minutes of last week’s meeting about how upset everyone is about this consultation. I am from Banham PC and no-one at Banham School knew about this process and the Head did not know about the previous meeting. If people are not informed they cannot put their views forward and therefore the LA will have limited information to base a judgement on. A letter was sent to the Parish Clerk in Banham about the closure proposal, but there were no directions on what to do with this information.

Response: AC – If the LA gave directions to Parish Councils on how to act, they would be criticised.

Response: Peter Lotarius – I am the Chair if Quidenham Parish Council. Parents should be telling everyone about this. We need to mobilise people. We are up against schools with higher profiles. We cannot expect the PC to do the work for us. We have been liaising with parents in Quidenham.

Comment: Banham PC rep. – The covering letter came out without saying schools must circulate the information. The LA has not done its job of informing /consulting with parents in the local area. Response: AC – The parents we’re required to consult with are the ones at this school. We are required to inform parents in neighbouring schools.

14) Comment: Stephen Askew, Local Councillor – We all feel passionately about Eccles Primary School. Numbers are the key. Therefore a rescue strategy is needed. Peter L. has worked hard in the parish and has done his best to keep the school going. We need a serious campaign to get the numbers up. We need to promote the school, with help from the LA. We need people to do something about the situation, including the LA. Applause from the meeting.

Response: PL – At the start of the partnership we knew we could keep up the teaching standards. Others, e.g. the cluster, have not been supporting the partnership. The Diocese is not supporting the partnership. There is no mechanism to help get more children into the school. Parents have three choices on their admissions application. Do Kenninghall parents (or those that put Kenninghall as their choice) know that Eccles is part of the same partnership? One of the previous heads (at Eccles) said it was ‘not the done thing’ to go out and try to round up pupils.

PL said he shares the frustration of the member of staff (Q.12) – We went into partnership primarily to support Teaching and Learning. It has not been long enough to attract more pupils. We have an excellent Head of the Partnership. The passion of the parents that are left keeps me going as a governor. Planning regulations need to be more lenient in order to sustain rural schools. If we can keep open, I don’t believe we will be here in 2 years’ time. We have learnt a lot in the last 2 years. Applause.

Response: RS – I’d like to explain the LA role. Back in 1980 the LA allocated children to schools. Later, the government decided parental preference was an important factor. County currently have 30,000 admissions per year. It is a neutral process – by law. The LA cannot engage in specific marketing for one school. This is not permitted.

Response: S. Askew – The LA should be able to give information about a school, as much as possible. Information should be readily available, so people will see it. There are plans afoot for development. People should realise that a few more houses in villages will do more good than in towns.

Response: RS – we do signpost parents to the school website. We encourage parents to go and visit the school. We are not allowed to show partiality.

AC – intervened to say 3 more comments would be taken and then the main meeting would close.

15) Q. If we lost one teacher, is it a possibility for the Head to teach? Response: AC – One thing we can equate with quality of teaching in a school is that there is a benefit if the Headteacher does not teach.

16) Comment: I’d like to congratulate the staff at Eccles – they do a very good job. We have a petition signed by 189 people in support of the school. How can we use this as part of the marketing? Response: AC – The petition will go as part of the consultation process. This is not a referendum.

16) Q. Education standards in Norfolk are bad – there has been a lot of press publicity. This school was rated by Ofsted as ‘Good’. How will it help to close a school that’s rated ‘Good’? Response: AC – When was the last Ofsted Inspection? It was in 2011 under the old framework. Under the New Framework, small schools are finding it very difficult to obtain a ‘Good’ grading from Ofsted. We cannot keep waiting for Ofsted – we have to look at the school as it is now. The LA has fairly accurate data on schools’ performance.

17) Q. What is going to happen now? Response: AC – The GB has made a decision to go to a consultation process. This involves the GB, The Executive Head, the teachers, parents and others.

Response: PL - The GB has a responsibility to the children. The quality of the experience they receive at Eccles cannot be guaranteed. If you want to keep the school open then you have to convince the GB something has changed. It is not just a question of numbers, you need people with skills. You need something that will change our present view. If you can convince me then I’ll make sure the diocese hears about it.

Q. By what date?

Response: AC – We are in a statutory process. The consultation closes on Friday 4th April. A decision will be made by the Diocese and the LA as to the next stage, which would be to publish a Public Notice for a 4 week period for a decision to be taken by NCC. The head of NCC will hear different views. It is not a vote.

Q. PL – The governors are in the midst of looking at the budget. The budget meeting was postponed until next week. We have not done a full Budget Plan yet for Eccles. How does this feed into the process? Response: AC - 4th April is the end of the statutory consultation process. The GB can feed its views to the consultation process. Comment: SN – We can give an indicative budget.

Comment: There are two important bodies involved – i) The Diocese – who didn’t turn up for this meeting, and ii) the LA, who are focussed on the disadvantages of a small school. You say all the governors can do is fill in the form. Response: AC – The LA is not focussed on the disadvantages, but the facts.

18) Comment: Emails have been sent by Elizabeth Truss, MP, urging everyone to send in consultation forms by 4th April.

19) Q. What is the figure of people with first, second and third choices for Eccles in the admission applications? Response: RS – There is only one family with a place for Year R at Eccles. The number of children in the school will not affect the consultation. The number of children affects the viability of the school.