RESOLVED TO RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL:
Recommendation 1
That, subject to Connaught Junior School also agreeing to introduce a reciprocal sibling link with Bagshot Infant School, a reciprocal sibling link for Bagshot Infant School is introduced with Connaught Junior School so that Bagshot Infant School would be described as operating shared sibling priority with Connaught Junior School for 2016 admission.
Reasons for Recommendation
· It would support families with more than one child as families with a sibling at Connaught Junior School would benefit from sibling priority at Bagshot Infant School
· This proposal is in line with a separate proposal by Connaught Junior School to introduce a reciprocal sibling link with Bagshot Infant School. This recommendation is therefore conditional on Connaught Junior School implementing this change before this recommendation is ratified by Full Council
· It would provide continuity and a clearer transition for parents, children and schools and would reduce anxiety for parents
· If Connaught also introduce a feeder link from Bagshot as they have proposed, it would enable families to benefit from a sibling link for Reception even if they had a child who was due to leave the infant school before the younger child was admitted
· It would maximise the opportunity for families to keep children together or at schools with agreed links
· It is supported by Connaught Junior School and by the Headteacher and Chair of Governors of Bagshot Infant School
Recommendation 2
That a new criterion for Hammond Community Junior School is introduced for September 2016 to provide priority for children attending either Valley End or Windlesham Village infant schools as follows:
a. Looked After and previously Looked After Children
b. Exceptional social/medical need
c. Children attending Lightwater Village School
d. Siblings not admitted under c) above
e. Children attending either Valley End CofE Infant School or Windlesham Village Infant School
f. Any other children
Reasons for Recommendation
· It would introduce a feeder link for infant schools where currently none exists and in doing so would provide continuity and a clearer transition for parents, children and schools and would reduce anxiety for parents
· It would help ensure that a school within a reasonable distance could be offered to all children within the area
· It would maximise the opportunity for families to keep children at schools with agreed links
· It would support viability of Valley End and Windlesham Village infant schools
· It is supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body of Hammond Community Junior School and by Valley End and Windlesham Village infant schools
· Eligibility to transport is not linked to the admission criteria of a school and as such attendance at Valley End or Windlesham Village infant schools would not confer an automatic right to transport to Hammond Community Junior School
Recommendation 3
That a feeder link from Meath Green Infant to Meath Green Junior School is introduced for September 2016 as follows:
a. Looked After and previously Looked After Children
b. Exceptional social/medical need
c. Children attending Meath Green Infant School
d. Siblings not admitted under c) above
e. Any other children
Reasons for Recommendation
· It would provide continuity and a clearer transition for parents, children and schools and would reduce anxiety for parents
· It would enable families to benefit from a sibling link for Reception even if they had a child who was due to leave the infant school before the younger child was admitted
· It would maximise the opportunity for families to keep children together or at schools with agreed links
· It would be in line with the criteria that exist for most other community and voluntary controlled schools which have feeder and reciprocal sibling links
· It is consistent with Surrey’s planning principles set out in the School Organisation Plan
· It is supported by the Governing Body of the school
· Eligibility to transport is not linked to the admission criteria of a school and as such attendance at Meath Green Infant School would not confer an automatic right to transport to Meath Green Junior School
Recommendation 4
That, in line with the tiered arrangements that currently exist at both schools, a tiered feeder link is introduced from Wallace Fields Infant School to Wallace Fields Junior School for September 2016 as follows:
a. Looked after and previously looked after children
b. Exceptional social/medical need
c. Siblings for whom the school is the nearest school to their home address
d. Children attending Wallace Fields Infant School for whom the school is the nearest school to their home address
e. Other children for whom the school is the nearest school to their home address
f. Other siblings for whom the school is not the nearest school to their home address
g. Other children attending Wallace Fields Infant School for whom the school is not the nearest school to their home address
h. Any other children
Reasons for Recommendation
· It would provide continuity and a clearer transition for parents, children and schools and would reduce anxiety for parents
· It would enable families to benefit from a sibling link for Reception even if they had a child who was due to leave the infant school before the younger child was admitted
· It would maximise the opportunity for families to keep children together or at schools with agreed links
· It would help ensure that a school within a reasonable distance could be offered to all children within the area
· It is consistent with Surrey’s planning principles set out in the School Organisation Plan
· It is supported by the Headteacher and Chair of Governors of both schools
· There was overall support for this proposal
· Eligibility to transport is not linked to the admission criteria of a school and as such attendance at Wallace Fields Infant School would not confer an automatic right to transport to Wallace Fields Junior School
Recommendation 5
That admission criteria are introduced for Year 3 entry to Worplesdon Primary School for September 2016 as follows:
a. Looked after and previously looked after children
b. Exceptional social/medical need
c. Siblings
d. Children attending Wood Street Infant School
e. Children for whom the school is the nearest to their home address
f. Any other children
Reasons for Recommendation
· As this school now has a Year 3 Published Admission Number (PAN) the local authority has a duty to determine criteria which confirm how children will be admitted
· Other than the feeder link for children attending Wood Street Infant School, it would introduce criteria that are in line with those that exist for the reception intake to the school
· It would provide continuity and reduce anxiety for parents and children of Wood Street Infant School
· It would maximise the opportunity for families to keep children at schools with agreed links
· It is supported by the Governing Bodies of both schools
· Eligibility to transport is not linked to the admission criteria of a school and as such attendance at Wood Street Infant School would not confer an automatic right to transport to Worplesdon Primary School
Recommendation 6
That the Year 3 Published Admission Number for Cranleigh Primary School is removed for September 2016.
Reasons for Recommendation
· It is supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body of the school
· There will still be sufficient junior places for local children if the PAN is removed
· It will help support other local schools in maintaining pupil numbers
· It will alleviate funding, accommodation and staffing issues in the school
· It will have no impact on children who are currently on roll at the school
Recommendation 7
That the own admission authority schools to be included in the assessment of nearest school are decided each year according to the policy set out in Section 12 of Enclosure 1, to the submitted report.
Reasons for Recommendation
· It ensures that there will be a consistent approach in selecting schools to be taken in to account when assessing ‘nearest school’ when applying the admission arrangements of community and voluntary controlled schools
· It ensures that there is equity in the application of admission arrangements for community and voluntary controlled schools county wide
· It ensures a transparent and open policy that parents can understand
· It does not deliver a significant difference to current practice
· It ensures historical pattern of admission is taken in to account
· It prevents schools from being included due to the admission of a bulge class or a non-standard admission year
· It allows for exceptions to apply where admission authorities change their admission arrangements
Recommendation 8
That following consultation, the start date to the primary admissions round remains as 1 September for 2016 admission rather than 1 November as proposed.
Reasons for Recommendation
· Response rate from schools was insufficient to gauge whether or not there would be general support for this proposal
· This proposal will be deferred until 2017 when a more targeted consultation will be carried out with schools
Recommendation 9
That Surrey’s Relevant Area is agreed as set out in Enclosure 2, to the submitted report.
Reasons for Recommendation
· The local authority is required by law to define the Relevant Area for admissions
· The Relevant Area must be consulted upon and agreed every two years even if no changes are proposed
· Setting a Relevant Area ensures that any schools who might be affected by changes to the admission arrangements for other local schools will be made aware of those changes
· No significant change has been made to Surrey’s Relevant Area but clarity has been provided for faith schools that they should consider the advice issued by their Diocese when considering which other deanery schools to consult with
Recommendation 10
That the Published Admission Numbers (PAN) for September 2016 for all other community and voluntary controlled schools are determined as they are set out in Appendix 1 of Enclosure 1, of the submitted report, which include the following changes:
i. Ashford Park Primary - increase in Reception PAN from 60 to 90
ii. Bishop David Brown Secondary – increase in Year 7 PAN from 150 to 180
iii. Cranmere Primary – increase in Reception PAN from 60 to 90
iv. FarncombeCofE Infant School - increase in Reception PAN from 40 to 50
v. The Greville Primary – increase in Reception PAN from 30 to 60
vi. Hinchley Wood Primary - increase in Reception PAN from 60 to 90
vii. Hurst Park Primary - increase in Reception PAN from 30 to 60
viii. Manby Lodge Infant - increase in Reception PAN from 60 to 90
ix. Milford School – increase Reception PAN from 50 to 60
x. North Downs Primary School – introduction of Year 3 PAN of 4
xi. South Camberley Primary – increase in PAN from 110 to 120
xii. Stoughton Infant - increase in Reception PAN from 60 to 90
xiii. West Byfleet Infant - increase in Reception PAN from 60 to 90
xiv. Worplesdon Primary – introduction of a junior PAN of 30
Reasons for Recommendation
· Where an increase in PAN is proposed the schools are increasing their intake to respond to the need to create more school places and will help meet parental preference
· The School Commissioning team and the schools support these changes
· All other PANs remain as determined for 2015 which enables parents to have some historical benchmark by which to make informed decisions about their school preferences
Recommendation 11
That the remaining aspects of Surrey’s admission arrangements for community and voluntary controlled schools for September 2016, for which no consultation was required, are agreed as set out in Enclosure 1 and its Appendices, to the submitted report.
Reasons for Recommendation
· This will ensure stability and consistency for the majority of Surrey’s parents, pupils and schools
· The arrangements enable parents to have some historical benchmark by which to make informed decisions about their school preferences
· The existing arrangements are working reasonably well
· The arrangements enable the majority of pupils to attend their nearest schools and in doing so reduces travel and supports Surrey’s sustainability policies
· Changes highlighted in bold in sections 10, 13, 14, 19 and 20 of Enclosure 1 have been made to add clarity to the admission arrangements but do not constitute a policy change
· Changes highlighted in bold in sections 17 and 18 of Enclosure 1 have been made to comply with statutory requirements of the School Admissions Code 2014
· The change highlighted in bold in section 21 of Enclosure 1 has been made to reflect a change to Surrey’s Home to School Transport policy
· Changes to PAN that are highlighted in bold in Appendix 1 of Enclosure 1 are referenced in Recommendation 10
Recommendation 12
That the Coordinated Admission Schemes for 2016/17 are agreed as set out in Appendix 4 of Enclosure 1, to the submitted report.
Reasons for Recommendation
· The coordinated schemes for 2016 are the same as 2015
· The coordinated schemes will enable the County Council to meet its statutory duties regarding school admissions
· The coordinated schemes are working well