Agenda Item HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL Decision Report

agenda item: hampshire county council ======================== decision report =============== decision maker: ---------

Agenda item:
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
========================
Decision Report
===============
Decision Maker:
---------------
Executive Lead Member for Children’s Services
Date:
-----
17 July 2012
Title:
------
Review of Hampshire’s Boarding Provision at the Westgate and Kings’
Secondary Schools, Winchester
Reference:
----------
3902
Report From:
------------
Director of Children’s Services
Contact name:
-------------
Martin Shefferd – School Organisation Officer
Chris Holt – Head of School Organisation
Tel:
----
01962 845746
01962 845673
Email:
------
[email protected]
[email protected]
1 Executive Summary
1.1 This paper reports on the outcome of the public consultation
regarding the proposal to close the girls’ boarding provision at The
Westgate Secondary School and the boys’ boarding provision at Kings’
Secondary School.
1.2 The proposal came about because of questions regarding the
feasibility of Hampshire’s boarding provision and concerns regarding
the practical and financial viability of the boarding provision at The
Westgate School in particular.
1.3 There is no intention to change the function of Rotherly Nursery,
an early years setting which is predominantly housed in the same
building as the Westgate boarding provision although it may be moved
into new premises on this site.
2 Contextual information
========================
2.1 Hampshire’s non-statutory boarding provision was created to cater
for children of service personnel. In the first instance boarding
facilities were provided at grammar schools in Winchester: Peter
Symonds for boys and Winchester County High School for girls. The
boarding house at Montgomery of Alamein Boys School (which later
amalgamated with Danemark School for Girls to become Kings’ School)
was established in 1966 to cater for the children of service personnel
living in Hampshire who did not access the grammar school boarding
provision. Following the change to a comprehensive education system
the girls’ grammar school became The Westgate School and continued to
offer boarding provision for girls with Kings’ School continuing to
offer boarding provision for boys.
2.2 As at January 2012, of the twenty seven girls boarding at Westgate
one is a member of a service family. Two girls are from families
resident in Hampshire, six are from families resident in the United
Kingdom and nineteen are from overseas families. The overseas pupils
are entitled to free education through their immigration status.
2.3 As at January 2012, of the twenty nine boys boarding at Kings’
five are members of service families. Eleven boys are from families
resident in Hampshire, seven are from families resident in the United
Kingdom and eleven are from families living overseas.
2.4 The number of girls accessing boarding provision at The Westgate
School has been a concern for several years with regard to its
financial viability. Of the present twenty seven boarders seventeen
will have left the school by the end of July 2013 with low numbers in
the lower year groups (see table 1 below). Despite efforts to attract
boarders the numbers at The Westgate School are predicted to fall to a
financially unsustainable level.
Service family boarders, for whom the provision was originally
intended, represent a very low proportion of pupils accessing the
boarding provision at the two schools. This, together with concerns
regarding the financial viability of the Westgate provision and the
requirement for significant capital investment to improve its physical
condition led to the formal consultation process being agreed on the
future of the boarding provision in Winchester. It should be stressed
that the provision is not designed or used to address any form of
additional educational or social need, but is purely to do with
enabling physical access to the schools for families who do not live
in the vicinity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.5 When considering the closure of maintained schools’ boarding
provision local authorities are required to consider state boarding
schools within one hour’s travelling distance from the school. One
such boarding facility has recently been opened at The Wellington
Academy in Tidworth with 100 beds available. Currently this
establishment has over 50 unfilled beds. If Hampshire’s boarding
provision ends parents and carers wishing to secure boarding education
for their child will have the opportunity to do so at The Wellington
Academy.
2.6 The Westgate School
Boarding facilities for up to thirty four girls at The Westgate School
are provided in Rotherly House, predominantly on the first floor of a
two storey building. The ground floor of the boarding house
accommodates Rotherly Nursery, a high quality early years setting
registered for fifty five places.
An Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) inspection report for
The Westgate School’s boarding provision in 2007 stated that “the
boarding environment is of an unacceptable standard”. As a result of
some investment a subsequent Ofsted inspection of boarding provision
in March 2009 found that the “overall standard of boarding
accommodation is satisfactory. While some areas remain unsatisfactory,
there has been a significant improvement in the overall provision”,
and concluded that the effectiveness of boarding provision was good.
However it would require significant further capital investment to
ensure a sustainable improvement in the physical condition of the
provision (section 4.1 refers).
2.7 The number of boarders at The Westgate School, particularly in
years 10 and 11, has been boosted by companies such as Academic Asia
and British Schools, which organise boarding places for foreign
students in the English maintained state boarding sector. However, the
future of such placements cannot be guaranteed.
2.8 Kings’ School
-----------------
Kings’ Boarding House provides for up to thirty two boys. The most
recent Ofsted inspection of Kings’ boarding provision took place in
March 2009 and found that “the overall standard of boarding
accommodation is good” and that the effectiveness of boarding
provision was outstanding.
2.9 Rotherly Nursery
--------------------
The nursery occupies the majority of the ground floor of Rotherly
House and provides a high quality setting for up to 55 children aged 2
to 5. Younger children are catered for in an adjacent building.
Rotherly Nursery was inspected by Ofsted in March 2009 when it was
reported that it had maintained a high standard of care and guidance
since its last inspection in 2007 and that the effectiveness of this
early years foundation setting was outstanding.
10.
Table 1 below gives the actual and forecast number of boarders
(as reported by each of the schools in January 2012):
--------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1: Actual and forecast number of boarders
Westgate
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Total
2011/12
2
4
4
7
9
1
27
2012/13
1
2
4
6
7
20
2013/14
1
2
4
6
13
2014/15
1
2
4
7
2015/16
1
2
3
Kings
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Total
2011/12
6
5
5
6
4
2
1
29
2012/13
6
6
5
5
6
2
2
32
2013/14
6
6
6
5
5
28
2014/15
6
6
6
6
5
29
2015/16
6
6
6
6
6
30
10.
Table 2 below gives the updated forecast numbers of boarders for
September 2012 and subsequent years and assumes that Kings’
School does not take Year 7 boarders with effect from September
2013 and that Rotherly closes in August 2013.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2: Forecast boarder numbers with a closure decision
Westgate
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Total
2012/13
1
3
2
4
6
16
2013/14
1
3
2
4
10
2014/15
1
3
2
6
2015/16
1
3
4
2016/17
1
1
Kings
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Total
2012/13
1
6
9
4
4
1
2
27
2013/14
1
6
9
4
4
1
25
2014/15
1
6
9
4
20
2015/16
1
6
7
2016/17
1
1
10.
Table 3 below gives the forecast number of boarders for
September 2013 onwards with all boarders being accommodated in a
mixed gender boarding provision.
Table 3: Forecast boarder numbers in mixed gender facility with a
closure decision
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Total
2013/14
2
9
11
8
4
1
35
2014/15
2
9
11
4
26
2015/16
2
9
11
2016/17
2
2
3 Timing of possible closure and security of a school place
3.1 During the consultation period, and owing to uncertainty about the
future of the boarding provision, a number of girls have opted to
leave the boarding provision at The Westgate School at the end of the
2011/12 academic year. The number of boarders now expected for the
2012/13 academic year is 16 (Table 2) rather than the 20 shown in
Table 1 above. The right of all boarders to complete their education
at The Westgate School (girls) and at Kings’ School (boys) is a given.
As such all boarding pupils will be able to access their secondary
education at their respective school until the end of year 11. Should
the recommendation to close boarding be agreed it is recommended that
Rotherly House be closed with effect from 31 August 2013 and no new Y7
boarders will be admitted to Kings House in September 2013 and
subsequent years with the Kings House facility closing at the end of
August 2017.
3.2 Should the recommendation to close the boarding be agreed, in line
with the above timescales, and the closure of the boarding house be in
advance of pupils completing their statutory secondary education, then
alternative provision for the girls boarding needs would be arranged
for those wishing to continue their education at The Westgate School,
in accordance with the County Council’s commitment to do so.
Individual assessments of pupil’s needs and requirements would be
undertaken in conjunction with pupils, parents and school staff in
order to identify appropriate alternative provision. Mixed gender
boarding would be provided at Kings House following some temporary
internal reconfiguration of the house.
4 Finance
4.1 Rotherly boarding house requires significant capital investment to
improve tired facilities. In 2009 this was costed at £278,000.
4.2 A decision to close the boarding provision at The Westgate School
with effect from the end of the summer term 2013 and at Kings’ School
with effect from the end of the summer term 2017 would have both
revenue and capital implications. As the number of boarders declines
over time the boarding provision at both schools would become
increasingly financially unviable and there would be a need to use
existing Schools Forum mechanisms to cover the resultant revenue
shortfalls at each of the schools.
4.3 Based upon the timescales in 4.2 above and the forecast number of
boarders set out in tables 2 and 3 above, and taking into account
staff costs, running costs and income from boarding fees, the
anticipated overall shortfall in revenue funding for The Westgate is
expected to be £153,000 and for Kings’ £146,000: a total of
approximately £300,000.
4.4 There are provisions within existing Schools Forum arrangements to
cover the exceptional circumstances that the closure of the boarding
provision represents for both schools in terms of revenue funding.
4.5 As referred to in section 3.2, the cost of creating mixed gender
boarding through the temporary reconfiguration of the Kings’ boarding
provision to enable mixed gender boarding has been costed at £60,000.
5 Early Years provision
5.1 The nursery occupies the majority of the ground floor of Rotherly
House and provides a high quality setting for up to 55 children aged 2
to 5. Babies and very young children are catered for in an adjacent
building, Rotherly Cottage. Both provisions will remain on the
Westgate site.
6 Consultation
6.1 Consultations commenced on 28 March 2012, with a closing date for
comments of 15 June, based around a dedicated web site containing all
the consultation materials, at www.hants.gov.uk/boardingreview.
6.2 A full list of consultees, together with a schedule of meetings
and drop-in sessions which have taken place regarding the consultation
on the proposal to close the boarding provision in Winchester are
attached as appendices 1 and 2 respectively.
6.3 The consultation document attached as appendix 3 was widely
distributed and was published on the County Council’s website. The
attached questionnaire (appendix 4) asked recipients to indicate
whether or not they agreed with the proposal to close the boarding
provision and invited comments. A breakdown of the 16 questionnaire
responses received is set out in Table 4 below. Issues raised through
the website and a summary of the comments on the issues are shown in
11 below.
Table 4: Boarding consultation responses
Number of responses
Agree with proposal to close
Disagree with proposal to close
Parent of child at the school
Parent of child in boarding provision
Boarder
Member of support staff
Member of boarding staff
School governor
Member of the community
Other
16
6
10
2
7
0
0
1
4
4
4
The breakdown of the 16 responses shows a total of 22 as some
respondents were in more than one category.
6.4 A position statement has been received from the Headteacher of The
Westgate School (Appendix 5) in which it states that, “Governors are
aware that there will be an inherent cost involved in any winding up
of the Rotherly boarding facility. The Governors would want
reassurance from the LA that any such costs would be met by the LA”.
The statement concludes that “...Governors would support any proposal
to close boarding.”
7 Issues raised by Consultees (In the section below the consultees
responses are shown as R and the County Council’s comments are shown
as C)
7.1 R - Comments were made by a number of consultees that all boarders
should be allowed to stay in Rotherly House until they have completed
their secondary age education.
C – Section 4 above sets out the revenue implications if the proposal
to close the boarding houses is implemented. Keeping Rotherly House
open until all boarders have completed their education at The Westgate
School would result in even greater financial exposure.
7.2 R - Questions were asked about whether the boarding establishments
might close more quickly if boarders began to leave and the boarding
numbers dropped more quickly than forecast.
C - Should the boarding houses close it is recommended that Rotherly
House closes at the end of August 2013 with Kings House closing at the
end of August 2017. It is not anticipated that the boarding houses
would close any earlier if the number of boarders fell more quickly
than forecast, but this would of course be kept under review, with the
welfare of the boarders being the primary consideration.
7.3 R - A number of respondents mentioned that there was a sense of
belonging to the boarding community and that the overseas boarders
provided a cultural diversity within the schools that would be lost if
the boarding houses were closed. Some respondents raised the point
that boarders from overseas and within this country benefit from
boarding as they are able to help each other with the others’
language.
C – The cultural diversity which boarders bring to the respective
schools is acknowledged. However this in itself is not sufficient
reason to maintain boarding provision in light of issues set out in
section 2.4 above.
7.4 R - A number of consultees raised the potential of the land at
Rotherly being used to provide the additional primary places for
Winchester and whether this was the reason for the boarding
consultation.
C – The potential for the Rotherly House site to provide the required
additional primary school places in Winchester is not the reason for
the proposal to close the boarding provision. This is set out in 2.4
above. Any decision regarding boarding will not pre-determine any
decision regarding primary school places.
7.5 R - Some consultees suggested that if the boarding houses were to
become mixed gender then boarding could continue in Hampshire as there
would be a sufficient demand for the places.
C - Mixed gender boarding may be possible but the purpose of why
Hampshire has boarding still needs to be addressed. Originally it was
for pupils of service personnel and there is a significant decline in
that sector wishing to send their children to Hampshire’s boarding
schools. The Westgate boarding house is not viable going forward given
the number of pupils in the early years of secondary boarding at the
school. The projections on school places in Winchester show that all
three Winchester secondary schools will be full from Winchester City
pupils from 2016. The principle of local places for local children is
a strong one, and therefore the admittance of pupils from outside
Winchester into the boarding provision, and thus into the schools is
contradictory to that principle.
7.6 R - Concerns were expressed about where the girl boarders will be
accommodated in order to finish their studies at Westgate. Most girls
would not want to go to another boarding house elsewhere in the
country as they would have to build up friendship groups again, which
may not be easy.
C - The boarders at Rotherly are entitled to complete their education
at The Westgate School. Should the recommendation to close the
boarding be agreed and the closure of the boarding house be in advance
of pupils completing their statutory secondary education in accordance
with their wishes, then alternative provision for pupil’s boarding
needs would be arranged in accordance with the County Council’s
commitment to do so. Individual assessments of pupil’s needs and
requirements would be undertaken in conjunction with pupils, parents
and school staff in order to identify appropriate alternative
provision and boarding places could be made available at Kings House
or elsewhere as appropriate.
7.7 R - Some parents send their children to boarding school to build
up their confidence and independence which could not happen if the
boarding houses were to close.
C – It will still be possible for parents to send their children to a
boarding school but not in Hampshire. There are a number of state
boarding schools across the country including Wellington Academy in
Tidworth.
7.8 R - Some consultees stated that if you close the boarding houses
in Hampshire they will be lost forever.
C - If the decision it to close the boarding houses in Winchester it
is unlikely that boarding provision in a Hampshire maintained school
would be reinstated.
7.9 R - Concerns were expressed by a number of consultees who said
that they had heard that the boarding houses are definitely closing
and that whatever is said as part of the consultation will not make a
difference to the outcome.
C – No decision has been made. On 17 July 2012 the Executive Lead
Member for Children’s Services will consider the outcomes of the
consultation on the proposal to close Hampshire County Council’s
boarding provision. All responses to the consultation will be
carefully considered before any decision is made.
7.10 R - The boarding staff at Rotherly asked if it would be possible
to bring more girls into the older year groups by recruitment through
“Academic Asia” and “British Schools” to help keep the number of girl
boarders at a level that would sustain the boarding provision.
C - The challenge of bringing older students into the boarding house
is not just one of accommodating them within the house. A major issue
would be one of timetabling in the older year groups as the girls
would be coming into full year groups with the timetabling already
set. The school would also potentially be admitting boarding pupils
from outside Hampshire into the school when local children had been
refused a place because the year group was full.
7.11 R - A number of consultees were concerned about the future of the
staff working in the boarding houses and what would happen to them
should the boarding houses close.
C - Hampshire County Council will work with all members of staff who
may be under the threat of redundancy as part of this process. Human
Resources personnel would work with individual staff in an effort to
secure alternative employment although there may be some redundancies.
7.12 R - There was a suggestion from some consultees that the County
Council should have a definite alternative for the boarders that could
be shared as part of the consultation. One consultee was particularly
concerned about the welfare of the girls and questioned if the County
Council had thought through the implications of closing the boarding
houses.
C – Boarders’ welfare is of paramount importance and the County
Council refutes the suggestion that this is not the case. As already
stated in this report alternative provision for pupil’s boarding needs
would be arranged in accordance with the County Council’s commitment
to do so. Individual assessments of pupil’s needs and requirements
would be undertaken in conjunction with pupils, parents and school
staff in order to identify appropriate alternative provision.
7.13 R - Some consultees asked if it would be possible to leave the
boys boarding house open and close Rotherly as the Kings boarding
house was still capable of attracting a sufficient number of boys to
make the house financially viable.
C - This option would be bound to fall foul of the sex discrimination
provisions in the Equality Act 2010, and has been considered by the
Courts in the context of single-sex grammar schools (section 9
refers).
7.14 R - A number of consultees queried the different timing of the
closure of the boarding houses.
C - It is recommended that any closure of the boarding houses is
staggered: Rotherly at the end of August 2013 and Kings at the end of
August 2017 as Kings has the greater number of boarders and is
currently financially viable. Kings House, with some temporary
internal adaptations, could become a mixed gender boarding facility.
This would allow the girls remaining at The Westgate School to finish
their education whilst boarding at Kings.
7.15 R - Concern was expressed about the future of the nursery
provision which occupies the ground floor of Rotherly House.
C - The nursery provision in the ground floor of Rotherly House would
remain either within the existing accommodation or be re-housed in new
accommodation on the same site.
7.16 R - Some consultees asked what would happen to Rotherly House if
it was decided that the site was not required to provide the
additional primary places in Winchester.
C - If Rotherly House were to close to boarders and the site on which
Rotherly sits is not required to provide the additional primary places
in Winchester it is likely that Rotherly House will remain with the
nursery provision on the ground floor and the Westgate School would
determine how best to use the rest of the accommodation.
7.17 R - Some of the boarders suggested that the uncertainty for them
could affect their GCSE grades which, in turn, will affect the
school’s results.
C - It is recognised that this is an unsettling time for boarders. The
staff in the school and the houseparents will work with the boarders
to minimise any distractions for them.
7.18 R – There was concern that the girls need somewhere to board
until the completion of their education and there were suggestions
that if Rotherly House was to close then the boarders could be
accommodated in Kings House.
C – One of the options being considered as part of the consultation is
the possibility of Kings House being reconfigured to allow mixed
gender boarding until all pupils have completed their studies at The
Westgate and Kings Schools. The issue of both boarding houses
remaining open until the boarders have completed their education at
each of the schools is one of finance. Leaving both boarding houses
open will cost considerably more than the figures shown in section 4.3
of this report.
7.19 R – Some respondents linked the boarding consultation to the
primary places consultation and asked if it would be possible to build
a new boarding facility on the Rotherly site at the same time as any
new primary school places are built, with a suggestion that a new
boarding house would always be full.
C - The reason for undertaking the consultation on the future of
boarding is about the viability of the boarding facility at Rotherly.
With the numbers at Rotherly dropping to a level that makes the
facility unsustainable it is unrealistic to assume that a new boarding
facility will be full. In addition, with very limited capital funding
for basic need school places available there would be no justification
for spending capital on new boarding provision.
7.20 R - A member of the community wished the boarding to remain open
and felt that with the current economic climate with both parents
having to work this would be a possibility for more families. They
stated that they were unaware of the boarding possibilities in
Winchester and that they may have considered this option for their
children.
C - The Westgate School has advertised the boarding provision in
attempts to increase the number of boarders but this has failed to
produce the required number to keep the provision viable.
7.21 R - A comment from a boarding parent with a child at both
boarding establishments raised a concern about the number of boarders
in the boarding house immediately before it closes and how one or two
boarders would feel about being there on their own.
C – Should the decision be to close the boarding provision and to
cater for all boarders in Kings boarding house with effect from
September 2013 then it is inevitable that numbers will fall year on
year. Boarding staff will ensure that pupils’ welfare remains
paramount.
7.22 R - A member of staff quoted some of the comments raised by the
boarders during the consultation meeting with them. It was suggested
that Rotherly House should remain open until all the girls have
completed their education at The Westgate School. A similar suggestion
was made by the parent of one of the boarders.
C – The difficulty is one of financial viability of Rotherly House.
There is not a sufficient number of female boarders wishing to board
at the school in years 7, 8 and 9 and as the larger groups of boarders
in years 10 and 11 leave the boarding house becomes even more
financially unviable.
7.23 R - A parent of a boarder raised concerns over the welfare of her
daughter and stated that the boarding staff have looked after her
daughter very well and she has settled into boarding life with the
other girls.
C – The welfare and safety of any boarder is of paramount importance
and boarding staff at Kings House would also ensure that the pupils
are well looked after.
There were 16 responses through the website as shown in Table 4 in 6.3
above.
7.24 R – Of the six responses that agreed with the proposal to close
the boarding houses four were members of The Westgate Governing body
and two members of the community. Of these responses three made
reference to the cost of the provision of Rotherly House and raised
concerns about whether the school budget should be used to meet any
funding shortfall. No comments were made by the other three
respondents.
C - It is recognised that there should be no detriment to the school’s
budget for any shortfall in income from the boarding provision as the
provision winds down.
Of the 10 responses disagreeing with the proposal to close the
boarding houses four made no additional comments.
7.25 R - There was a range of comments in the other six responses
including that a mixed gender facility should be provided; the ease of
access to The Westgate School by boarding in Rotherly should be taken
into account and the multi-cultural aspect of having overseas boarders
should be retained.
C - A mixed gender boarding facility could be provided at one of the
boarding houses but this does not address the question of why boarding
was provided in Hampshire in the first place. One of the proposals is
that a mixed gender boarding house be made available until all Y7
pupils complete their education.
7.26 R - Concerns were expressed about the poor planning and timing of
the proposal and that parents were not aware when choosing a boarding
place for their daughter that the provision was going to close during
their time at the school. The response also goes on to state that some
pupils were offered a place for September 2012 and were then told it
was not available. The response concludes that “this appears to be a
land grabbing exercise to provide places which the council have only
just realised were needed”.
C - The timing of any proposal to close the boarding houses will
always be at the “wrong time” for some boarders, especially those that
have just entered into the school at Y7. The comment about pupils
being offered a place and then having it withdrawn is refuted. The
school has confirmed that their process for accepting boarders
includes a number of steps including a formal offer letter to parents
asking them to confirm that the boarding place is still required and
asking for a deposit to secure the boarding place. Only after
receiving this deposit is the boarding place formally held for the
pupil. The “land grabbing” comment is misguided. As explained at the
consultation meeting the proposal to explore the Rotherly site for
additional primary places genuinely arose after substantial
discussions about the future of boarding houses.
7.27 R - The response from the State Boarding Schools’ Association
stated that those local authorities fortunate enough to have state
boarding should recognise their unique position of responsibility
especially where, increasingly, the government is acknowledging the
importance of the state boarding provision. It continues that the MoD
actively encourages its personnel to consider state boarding places
for continuity of education, costing the taxpayer substantially less
than it would in the independent sector. It also suggests that some
LAs are seeing state boarding places, where appropriate, as a
sometimes invaluable and cost effective alternative to placing
children in care. It concludes that to close a state boarding house
because many of the children already boarding are from an ethnic
minority flouts equality and discrimination legislation.
C - It is recognised that central government has acknowledged the
importance of state boarding, but in these straitened times any
boarding provision has to be self sustaining. For Rotherly boarding
house this is not the case. It is the case that the MoD encourages
their personnel to seek state boarding places for their children but
this is not reflected in the take-up of boarding places in Hampshire.
The final comment about closing the boarding houses because many of
the children are from an ethnic minority group is refuted. This
comment has come about following a misunderstanding by the State
Boarding Association representative. This representative is referring
to the additional information collected as part of the consultation
questionnaire which requests ethnic background, age, etc., to ensure
that comments have been received from a cross section of the
community. Information from this part of the questionnaire was never
to be used as a comment about the ethnic mix within the boarding
houses.
8 Personnel implications
8.1 The closure of the boarding provision will impact upon all
existing boarding staff. As a responsible employer the County Council
would manage the situation sensitively and every effort would be made
to redeploy staff into appropriate alternative posts and to avoid
redundancies.
9 Legal Implications
9.1 In terms of the planning duty on a Local Authority to secure
sufficient schools for its area, that duty only extends to pupils in
its area ("local schools for local pupils"). It is this duty which
triggers the need to have due regard to eliminating discrimination in
the exercise of public functions (the Public Sector Equality Duty).
Analysis of the take-up of the boarding places by Hampshire pupils
would suggest that even if potential unlawful discrimination was
identified in the Equality Impact Assessment ("EIA"), to which regard
must be had, that could be outweighed by the ongoing capital liability
for maintaining the buildings, in times of budgetary restraints.
9.2 So far as the current cohort of boarding pupils is concerned, as
arrangements are to be made to enable them to complete their education
at the schools as boarders (albeit not necessarily in the current
location), there does not appear from the EIA to be any realistic
prospect of any form of unlawful discrimination arising.
10 Equality Impact Assessment
10.1 A full Equality Impact Assessment is attached as Appendix 6.
11 Conclusion
11.1 The reasons for the proposal to close Hampshire’s maintained
boarding provision are three-fold: the boarding provision at The
Westgate School is financially unviable; the number of boarders of
service personnel are a significant minority; the Rotherly boarding
house requires significant capital investment to improve tired
facilities. Of the present 56 boarders only 13 are from families
resident in Hampshire.
11.2 Both governing bodies accept the rationale for closure.
11.3 The revenue implications of supporting the schools as the
boarding provision is wound down can be covered from within the
existing Schools Forum exceptional circumstances arrangements.
12 Recommendations
It is recommended that:
12.1 Public Notices be published in accordance with Section 19 (1) of
the Education and Inspections Act 2006, to end the boarding provision
at the Westgate Secondary School with effect from 31 August 2013 and
at Kings’ Secondary School with effect from 31 August 2017.
12.2 A report setting out representations to the public notice be
brought back to the Executive Lead Member for Children’s Services
decision day in December 2012 for a final decision.
CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION:
===============================
Links to the Corporate Strategy
===============================
Hampshire safer and more secure for all:
----------------------------------------
no
Corporate Improvement plan link number (if appropriate):
========================================================
Maximising well-being:
----------------------
no
Corporate Improvement plan link number (if appropriate):
========================================================
Enhancing our quality of place:
-------------------------------
no
Corporate Improvement plan link number (if appropriate):
Other Significant Links
=======================
Links to previous Member decisions:
Title
Reference
Date
Review of Hampshire’s Boarding Provision at the Westgate and Kings’
Secondary Schools, Winchester
3675
23 March 2012
Direct links to specific legislation or Government Directives
Title
Date
None
Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background documents
The following documents discuss facts or matters on which this report,
or an important part of it, is based and have been relied upon to a
material extent in the preparation of this report. (NB: the list
excludes published works and any documents which disclose exempt or
confidential information as defined in the Act.)
Document
Location
Copies of consultation responses
Children’s Services Department
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS:
===================
Equalities Impact Assessment:
=============================
A full Equalities Impact Assessment is attached at Appendix 6.
Impact on Crime and Disorder:
The proposals have no impact on crime and disorder.
Climate Change:
How does what is being proposed impact on our carbon footprint /
energy consumption?
No impact has been identified.
How does what is being proposed consider the need to adapt to climate
change, and be resilient to its longer term impacts?
No specific measures have been identified.
14.