SECONDARY SCHOOL PLACE PLANNING TOPIC GROUP
THURSDAY 7 SEPTEMBER 2006 AT 12.30
Report from CSF officers on (i) additional information for the Group; and
(ii) the lessons learnt by CSF from this year’s experience in Harpenden and through the work of the Group.
1. Background
A considerable amount of information and data has already been provided for the Group including:
- Jim Dalton’s initial presentation and replies to questions, on 18 May;
- the demonstration of CSF’s pupil forecasting system from Kate Ma and the presentation by Paul Garcia on Hertfordshire Property’s parallel system, on 23 June;
- also on 23 June, the written responses to questions raised by speakers at the meeting on 7 June, in written submissions and by members of the Group; and
- information on where Yr 6 children go to and Yr 7 children come from, on 6 July.
2. Further Information
However this information did not cover every point raised by the Group; and, within the resources available to support the Scrutiny and other priorities for School Access, this report provides further information to assist the Group, as follows:
Appendix 1
Table A, Area Secondary Forecast Variance Analysis
The Group will recall that County-wide the accuracy of the secondary forecast in 2005 was -0.5%, ie well within the Audit Commission’s parameter of +/-1%. The Group asked for an analysis of the area variations around the County figure and that is attached, including data on both total numbers and admission numbers.
Appendix 2
Table B, Children Who Move Address
The Group have been particularly interested in whether applications to Harpenden Schools have been distorted by families who are not long term residents in the area. This table is an analysis of the children whose address changed between their 2005 secondary transfer application, at the time of allocation in March 2005 and their secondary school attendance recorded through the PLASC return in January 2006. 706 pupils applied for the three schools. Of these, 40 changed address within the same locality and 17 moved between towns; of the 17, 10 moved out of Harpenden to:
St Albans (4)
Welwyn Garden City (1) and
Luton (5 - including one pair of twins).
Appendix 3
Table C, Fraudulent Applications
Another issue of concern to the Group is whether places are secured at Harpenden Secondary Schools by parents providing false or misleading information. As previously stated, all such allegations are thoroughly investigated and Table C summarises the position this year for the whole County. There have been 12 allegations. Satisfactory evidence was provided in 10 cases, one application was withdrawn; and in one case (for Sir John Lawes) investigations are continuing
Appendix 4
Table D, Initial Secondary Allocations, March 2006, by Parish
The Group asked to know the number of first, second, third and non ranked allocations when places were initially allocated. This is set out by parish.
Appendix 5
Table E, Out County Allocations
Information is also provided, by school, on the number and percentage of out county allocations to Hertfordshire schools.
Appendix 6
Table F, Secondary Transfer 2006 Current Position
This report summarises the position following the last round of continuing interest on 2 August. All children in the Harpenden area have now received a ranked allocation.
Appendix 7
Tables G1, G2 and G3, Destination of Yr 6 Children and Previous School of Yr 7Children
These tables amend and supplement the information presented at the last meeting. There were a few minor discrepancies in the previous data, caused mainly by the treatment of children whose chronological age and school year were not the same. These have been corrected and an additional table provided showing all the previous Hertfordshire primary schools for children at the three Harpenden secondary schools.
Appendix 8 and 9
Table H, St George’s pupils who did not attend a local Hertfordshire primary school
Some members of the Group have expressed concern that St George’s is not a truly local school; and considerable interest was shown at the last meeting at the number of children admitted to St George’s other than from a Hertfordshire maintained primary school.
Table H shows the children admitted in 2005 and expected this year, who previously attended private schools or who live beyond Harpenden and the surrounding villages. The admission criterion met for each pupil is given.
A copy of the School’s admission criteria is also attached as Appendix 9.
The data shows (i) the vast majority of the 43 children from private schools over the two years live very locally; and (ii) 27 of the 41 out county children were admitted under the sibling rule.
3. Additional points of Clarification
During previous meetings the Group have also asked officers to follow up other queries, as follows:
1) Checking on-line applications
The Group wanted to know how information given in on-line applications is checked for accuracy.
This is done in the same way for on-line applications as for those filling in the paper secondary transfer form: initially by primary school head teachers and then by CSF staff. Schools are able to view ‘their’ applications on line.
2) Unique Pupil Numbers for children who transfer from the maintained to the private sector
In these circumstances the UPN is dormant whilst the child remains in the private sector; but if (s)he subsequently returns to a maintained school, the UPN would be recognised again.
4. Lessons Learnt by CSF
Officers thought it would be helpful for the Group to know what CSF has learnt about the management of potential secondary transfer ‘hot spots’, as a result of this year’s experience in Harpenden and from the Group’s meetings.
This may then help shape the Group’s report and recommendations, including the learning points identified by CSF; hypotheses that have been tested, but did not lead to recommendations; and the Group’s conclusions and recommendations for, eg, the Education Panel or Admissions Forum to consider.
1. CSF Secondary Transfer meetings
Each year CSF staff hold approximately 12 meetings across the County in late September and early October to explain the secondary transfer process and answer questions. This year these meetings will have an increased local flavour; and the potential issues in possible ‘hot spot’ areas will be explained. This year’s meeting in Harpenden is at Roundwood Park on 27 September and, in addition, officers will attend a parents’ meeting in Wheathampstead on 13 September.
2. Stronger wording about abuses
The guidance in the Moving On booklet about the consequences of giving false or misleading information says both ‘we may withdraw’ and ‘we will withdraw’. On the basis of the data, officers think the anecdotal belief about the extent of abuses is exaggerated. Nevertheless the wording in the booklet is to be made stronger, so parents are in no doubt that they must expect their place to be withdrawn if they have provided incorrect information.
3. Appointment of an Admissions Adviser
The County Council has secured a Government Grant to appoint an Admissions Adviser over two years. She or he will be responsible for helping parents and carers for whom secondary transfer will be a challenge. These will mainly be parents who have difficulty understanding the opportunities available to their children, but will also include families faced with the difficulties of a ‘hot spot’ area.
4. Early examination of numbers and trends in ‘hot spot’ areas.
When there is a risk that an area may be a ‘hot spot’, CSF needs to examine the year 5/6 numbers and trends in plenty of time to be able to explore possible corrective action. This will include the geographical distribution of pupils in order to supplement the data from the forecasting system with local knowledge.
5. Early discussion with secondary school head teachers.
If it becomes clear that there may be a problem with insufficient places in an area to meet demand, CSF officers need to have the earliest possible discussion with local head teachers to explore the scope for adding additional places.
6. Adding places.
It should be possible to anticipate the need to add places before planned admission numbers are agreed. When this does not happen, bearing in mind the Authority’s responsibility to plan across an area and consider the impact on other schools of adding additional places, CSF needs to exploit the Authority’s ability to add a small number of places without having to apply to The Schools’ Adjudicator for an In Year Variation, as in Harpenden this year. The limit to ‘small’ is not defined in the Code of Practice on Admissions, but recent advice to CSF is that an addition of 5% should be acceptable. These places should be agreed with schools and made available for the initial allocation, thereby reducing the number of families distressed when places are first announced.
APPENDIX 1
SECONDARY SCHOOL PLACE PLANNING TOPIC GROUP
7TH SEPTEMBER 2006
Table A – Area Secondary Forecast Variance Analysis
2005/2006 FORECASTJuly 2005 / PLASC 2006 / Variance (using forecast as baseline)
AREA / ADMISSIONS / OTHER COMPULSORY / 16+ / TOTAL / ADMISSIONS / TOTAL / ADMISSIONS / TOTAL / Admissions % / Total %
LETCHWORTH / 366 / 1,413 / 266 / 2,045 / 370 / 2,083 / -4 / -38 / -1.1% / -1.9%
BALDOCK / 222 / 878 / 218 / 1,318 / 215 / 1,333 / 7 / -15 / 3.2% / -1.1%
ROYSTON UPPER / 182 / 360 / 162 / 704 / 171 / 701 / 11 / 3 / 6.0% / 0.4%
ROYSTON MIDDLE / 156 / 552 / 0 / 708 / 161 / 701 / -5 / 7 / -3.2% / 1.0%
HITCHIN / 483 / 1,927 / 524 / 2,934 / 493 / 2,910 / -10 / 24 / -2.1% / 0.8%
STEVENAGE / 1,334 / 5,375 / 919 / 7,628 / 1,320 / 7,653 / 14 / -25 / 1.0% / -0.3%
BUNTINGFORD UPPER / 199 / 407 / 200 / 806 / 195 / 788 / 4 / 18 / 2.0% / 2.2%
BUNTINGFORD MIDDLE / 164 / 588 / 0 / 752 / 196 / 767 / -32 / -15 / -19.5% / -2.0%
BISHOP'S STORTFORD / SAWBRIDGEWORTH / 896 / 3,617 / 1,165 / 5,678 / 933 / 5,765 / -37 / -87 / -4.1% / -1.5%
HERTFORD & WARE / 697 / 2,824 / 785 / 4,306 / 712 / 4,370 / -15 / -64 / -2.2% / -1.5%
HODDESDON / 559 / 2,243 / 472 / 3,274 / 535 / 3,231 / 24 / 43 / 4.3% / 1.3%
CHESHUNT / 683 / 2,776 / 518 / 3,977 / 656 / 3,958 / 27 / 19 / 4.0% / 0.5%
HARPENDEN / 509 / 2,149 / 728 / 3,386 / 545 / 3,425 / -36 / -39 / -7.1% / -1.2%
WELWYN GARDEN CITY / 594 / 2,283 / 441 / 3,318 / 552 / 3,275 / 42 / 43 / 7.1% / 1.3%
ST ALBANS / 1,486 / 6,010 / 1,679 / 9,175 / 1,498 / 9,194 / -12 / -19 / -0.8% / -0.2%
HATFIELD / 225 / 931 / 151 / 1,307 / 199 / 1,298 / 26 / 9 / 11.6% / 0.7%
POTTERS BAR / 480 / 2,058 / 681 / 3,219 / 517 / 3,297 / -37 / -78 / -7.7% / -2.4%
BOREHAMWOOD / 217 / 909 / 166 / 1,292 / 195 / 1,289 / 22 / 3 / 10.1% / 0.2%
TRING / 209 / 946 / 291 / 1,446 / 233 / 1,488 / -24 / -42 / -11.5% / -2.9%
BERKHAMPSTED UPPER / 196 / 394 / 206 / 796 / 200 / 814 / -4 / -18 / -2.0% / -2.3%
BERKHAMPSTED MIDDLE / 194 / 562 / 0 / 756 / 191 / 743 / 3 / 13 / 1.5% / 1.7%
HEMEL HEMPSTEAD / 1,232 / 4,935 / 1,082 / 7,249 / 1,226 / 7,239 / 6 / 10 / 0.5% / 0.1%
RICKMANSWORTH / 572 / 2,325 / 689 / 3,586 / 604 / 3,652 / -32 / -66 / -5.6% / -1.8%
WATFORD / 1,090 / 4,410 / 1,334 / 6,834 / 1,112 / 6,843 / -22 / -9 / -2.0% / -0.1%
BUSHEY / 582 / 2,384 / 491 / 3,457 / 572 / 3,514 / 10 / -57 / 1.7% / -1.6%
COUNTY / 13,527 / 53,256 / 13,168 / 79,951 / 13,601 / 80,331 / -74 / -380 / -0.5% / -0.5%
APPENDIX 2
SECONDARY SCHOOL PLACE PLANNING TOPIC GROUP
7TH SEPTEMBER 2006
Table B – Children Who Move Address
Applicants who have made preferences for Sir John Lawes, Roundwood Park, and St Georges who have changed addressPurpose
To identify any applicants who have made preferences for Sir John Lawes, Roundwood Park and St Georges who have changed address
Interpretation
The information has been taken from the databases from the time of allocation 01-03-05 and from Plasc data January 2006
Method
After identifying 706 pupils who applied for Sir John Lawes, Roundwood Park and St Georges, the method used was comparing the postcodes of these pupils from the allocation database (01-03-05) to those postcodes of the same pupils from the Plasc data from January 2006
Results
The table below shows those children who have made preferences for Harpenden schools who have a changed address (by postcode)
Pupil No. / Old Address / New Address
1 / Luton / London Colney
2 / Harpenden / St Albans
3 / Harpenden / St Albans
4 / Harpenden / St Albans
5 / Harpenden / St Albans
6 / Luton / Harpenden
7 / Luton / Harpenden
8 / Singapore / Harpenden
9 / Harpenden / Welwyn Garden City
10 / St Albans / Hemel Hempstead
11 / Harpenden / Luton
12 / Harpenden / Luton
13 / Harpenden / Luton
14 / Harpenden / Luton
15 / Harpenden / Luton
16 / Luton / Stevenage
17 / Camden Town / Highbury
18 / AL2 / AL3
19 / AL4 / AL3
20 / AL5 x / AL5 y
21 / AL5 x / AL5 y
22 / AL5 x / AL5 y
23 / AL5 x / AL5 y
24 / AL5 x / AL5 y
25 / AL5 x / AL5 y
26 / AL5 x / AL5 y
27 / AL3 x / AL3 y
28 / AL5 x / AL5 y
29 / AL5 x / AL5 y
30 / AL5 x / AL5 y
31 / AL5 x / AL5 y
32 / AL5 x / AL5 y
33 / LU1 x / LU1 y
34 / LU2 x / LU2 y
35 / LU2 x / LU2 y
36 / AL1 xx / AL1 yy
37 / AL3 xx / AL3 yy
38 / AL3 xx / AL3 yy
39 / AL3 xx / AL3 yy
40 / AL3 xx / AL3 yy
41 / AL3 xx / AL3 yy
42 / AL4 xx / AL4 yy
43 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
44 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
45 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
46 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
47 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
48 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
49 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
50 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
51 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
52 / AL5 xx / AL5 yy
53 / AL6 xx / AL6 yy
54 / HP2 xx / HP2 yy
55 / LU3 xx / LU3 yy
56 / AL4 xxx / AL4 yyy
57 / LU2 xxx / LU2 yyy
Please note that pupils 13 & 14 and 34 & 35 are twins and therefore have duplicate records with regard to change of address.
Summary
Of the 706 pupils who applied for a Harpenden School 57 records contained a change of address. The first 17 of which have moved from one town to another as can be shown. The remaining 40 have moved within the same town and as such, partial postcodes are shown to indicate this.
Note
To protect identity x and y or xx and yy or xxx and yyy have been used instead of the actual postcode for the fourth, fifth and sixth digits of the postcode.
APPENDIX 3