Agenda item

An Outline on how "academisation" of schools will change the education landscape in Surrey and the further implications for the Council.

Declarations of Interest:

None.

Witnesses:

Nicholas Smith, Schools Commissioning Officer

Julie Stockdale, Head of School Commissioning

David Monk, Headteacher of Pond Meadow School

Louise Druce, Headteacher of Stamford Green Primary School

Linda Kemeny, Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    The Headteacher of Pond Meadow School advised that it began to consider academy status in 2013, and eventually converted in 2014. The school had considered the pros and cons of academy conversion and believed that on balance it would be possible to achieve the same benefits of academy status through other means. The school finally chose to convert, however, because the education landscape was changing and would be academy centred in the future. The new Pond Meadow Academy Trust aimed to be a multi-academy trust as it could chose its partners now, rather than face being forced into partnerships at a later date. The Pond Meadow Academy Trust explored shared savings within a multi-academy trust model, and it hoped to develop this with other local Special Schools. When it initially converted there was a more attractive financial offer from the Department for Education than available now.

2.    Members questioned whether the Council could still fulfil its statutory requirement to ensure fair admission policies across Surrey’s schools under the new academy system. Officers informed the Board that the Council would need to maintain a good relationship with schools in order to help ensure school places and fair admissions.

3.    Officers also reported that academies ran their own admissions but now bought services from the Council. Officers suggested it would therefore be in the Council’s interest to maintain these core services in order to ensure that the schools continue to use these services. Officers claimed that academies and converting schools are keen to stay within the ‘Surrey family’ of schools; however academies can use alternative service providers and the Council cannot require compliance as they are now independent from the Local Authority.

4.    Members commented that Council services needed to think like a private company in order to continue to sell its services to academies, and questioned whether the services were considering this approach. Officers reported that services were working towards a strategy that would position the Council, and its services, well in the future, and that this strategy was being co-designed with Surrey’s schools.

5.    The Headteacher of Stamford Green School, a non-academy school in Epsom that received an Outstanding Ofsted report in February 2015, informed the Board that the school had a working party, lead by the Governor Vice-Chairman, to explore options for the school’s future. The options include: remaining as a local authority maintained school, becoming an academy trust, becoming part of an umbrella trust or joining a multi-academy trust.

6.    The Board queried whether it remained the Local Authority’s responsibility to drive school improvements, including safety and standards control. Officers informed the Board that it was unclear where the responsibility for school improvements and standards lay, however, the Council aimed to retain a level of input and advice for school improvement within the County. The Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement commented that school improvement had been a priority for some years, and that the Council needed to protect and ensure that it is at the forefront of school improvement alongside the academies.

7.    The Board referred to reports of academy trusts spanning a large geographical area, sometimes even out of county borders; Members questioned whether the Council was doing enough to support schools in finding local partnerships. Officers answered that the Council was working with and very willing to help schools become academies, as well as joining existing trusts. Officers also informed that there had been no evidence to suggest that long distance being an issue within academy trusts. It was mentioned that there are differing models up and down the country and that there was no definitive best model.

8.    Members commented that as multi-academy trusts grow and develop, there is an importance for the governor role to grow too in order for the governorship to represent all the academies in the Trust.

9.    The Board decided it needed a better understanding of the various trusts, academies and schools within the county; where these education providers are heading and their general character in their communities. Members also felt that the Board requires a clear understanding on what the Teaching Schools are doing within the academy agenda.

10.  Members commented that it would be beneficial to the Council to have a ‘go-to’ person as link to Surrey’s multi-academy trusts; and also suggested that the Council should ask the Government on how the local authority will take care of their responsibilities in order for school places to be provided for. Officers explained that the Council was working closely with the Regional Schools Commissioner and in doing so was trying to ensure that resources and provision was kept up with demand. Officers are also expecting a white paper in March 2016 around some of the issues raised.

11.  Members raised the point that as the academy agenda continues there will become a substantial loss in funding for maintained schools. Members voiced concerns that services and provision for maintained schools needed to remain in the future. Officers agreed that this needed to be at the forefront of the Council’s planning.

12.  Members queried whether the future strategy will help address the £45m spending on non-maintained Special Educational Needs (SEN) places in Surrey. Officers reported that the Council was engaged in positive conversations on new Free Schools, with a view for these future schools to increase the SEN provision within the County.

Recommendations:

1.    The Board thanks the witnesses for the comprehensive introduction to ‘academisation’ of schools process in Surrey. The Board requests a further report from the council’s school commissioners, with input from schools, on the results and outcomes of the ‘academisation’ process. 

The Board recommends that Officers compile a comparison of school results against the types and profiles of institution (i.e. Local Authority Maintained School, Academy, part of a Multi-Academy Trust). 

2.    The Board also recommends that it receive a report on the council’s ongoing strategy to maintain proactive involvement with education in Surrey in light of the shift towards 'academisation', including business plans for the provision of services, development of good governance, and consideration of how to develop Teaching Schools to maintain supply of high quality teachers to Academies in Surrey.