Agenda item

To receive and consider the annual report to the Office of the Schools Adjudicator.

Piers Brunning, Service Manager Policy, Strategy and Partnerships invited the members of the Forum to engage in a discussion of the main items of the Local Authority Report to the Schools Adjudicator.  A template of the report was set out in Agenda pages 15-28.

Piers went through the questions in the template and during the discussion of the report the following points were made:

·           The report was being completed and would be ready for submission by the end of June;

·           The Forum agreed that there were no concerns relating to the admission arrangements for Looked After Children (LAC) or previously LAC;

·           There were also no concerns over the admissions of children with disabilities.  Piers informed that the Local Authority was in the process of setting up two new specialist units, one in Emmbrook for ear impairment and one in St Crispins for Autistic Spectrum Disorder;

·           The Headteachers present described the increasing difficulty in obtaining Education Health Care Plans (EHCP) for children, even when they believed their needs were very severe.  This was disappointing as it took a long time for staff to prepare the cases.  A Headteacher reported that it was more cost effective to use the school’s own budget to meet the child’s needs then go through the process of applying for a statement, which was a lengthy process with no guarantee of success;

·           The Forum noted that it was also difficult to secure funding for children who were just below the level to secure an EHCP;

·           Members expressed concern that going forward, schools would not be able to meet the needs of children within the current arrangements of reduced funding for Special Educational Needs;

·           Members agreed that the co-ordination of admissions had worked well, the Local Authority provided this service to most schools in the Borough;

·           David Babb stated that the government was aware of the issue of multiple offers (where schools co-ordinated their own admissions).  This was not a problem in Wokingham at the moment because Wokingham co-ordinated the admissions process for most schools in the Borough.  David also stated that it was much easier for parents to apply just once rather than having to apply to several different schools; 

·           Members noted that there was potential for children to be out of school for longer if the co-ordination arrangements weren’t managed by the Local Authority;

·           David Babb knew of other authorities that had stopped co-ordinating the admissions for schools who were now going back to being the central point of co-ordination because this was a better system;

·           It was disappointing to note that some parents were still reluctant to put down more than one preference in their applications, particularly in the Earley area.  It would be helpful if parents in the Earley area considered putting Earley St Peters as one of their preferences to avoid being diverted to schools much further away;

·           Piers reported that there was less pressure for secondary school places this year.  This was due to a number of factors, for example the opening of Maiden Erlegh Reading, Bulmershe improvements and the new secondary school in Arborfield;  

·           Regarding the school admission appeals process, most schools in the Borough used the services provided by Wokingham Borough Council, as a traded service;

·           Piers informed that there were ongoing discussions within the Council about splitting the Admissions team into two. Part of the team would move to the Costumer Services department to deal with the operational aspect of admissions; the other half of the team would be involved with the more strategic side of admissions;

·           The Forum expressed great concern about the idea of splitting the admissions team.  It was felt that the system worked very well as it was.  Members feared mistakes could be made by inexperienced officers in Costumer Services and it would be the schools who would have to deal with the consequences;

·           Members emphasised that some of the parents’ queries over the phone were very complex and it took a long time to train admissions officers;

·           Piers stated that going forward people would be encouraged to use the online services more.  Piers admitted that there were risks in this strategy, but new ways of working were being explored;

·           Members were informed that there had been significant changes in staff within the admissions team. Notably, the retirement of Sue Riddick represented a great loss of expertise.  Piers stated that the senior officers were relatively stable and no changes were expected at that level;

·           It was noted that there were a number of new schools being created in the Borough.  These schools would be academies which were their own admission authorities.  Piers was confident that the academy trusts were experienced and would be compliant with the proper admissions processes;

·           The Forum noted the ongoing issue of monitoring fraudulent residence or the use of gamesmanship to obtain school places.  The Earley area was of particular concern, the Local Authority was looking at ways in which to write a policy to deal with this situation;

·           Piers affirmed that once a place had been offered to a child, it was very difficult to withdraw it.  Also there was no legislation to stop people from moving after the allocation of a place, the address was only relevant at the point of application;

·           Some Members expressed frustration with the current position on summer born children to delaying their entry to school.  This had an impact on the school’s budget and it also prevented other children from joining the school.  David Babb informed that this was one of the areas that was going to be reviewed by the new Admissions Code, as the government recognised there were issues with the admissions of summer born children;

·           Some Headteachers had noticed that when parents weren’t offered their first preference of school they were more likely to delay entry in the hope of obtaining their first preference in the next year;

·           Headteachers stated that if a number of parents decided to delay their child’s entry to school, this could have severely implicate the school’s budget;

·           Patricia Cuss stated that some summer born children were not emotionally ready to start school and would benefit from delaying their entry, and this should also be considered;

·           Piers stated that there was concern that by delaying entry to school, these children would not receive their entitlement of 12 years of statutory education;

·           David Babb stated that there could be a consultation before the draft code was written;

The Forum agreed that it had been useful to be able to discuss and contribute to the report before its completion and submission.

RESOLVED That the final report be included in the agenda for the next meeting of the Forum.