Agenda item

(To receive a report which invites the Committee to consider a consultation on the future of Brocklesby Park primary School and potential closure (Final Decision))

Consideration was given to a report which invited the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee to consider the proposal to close Brocklesby Park Primary School (Final Decision) which was due to be considered by the Executive Councillor for Adult Care and Health Services, Children's Services on 22 June 2015.

Members were advised that at the time the report was produced there were 14 pupils on roll (75% surplus capacity) with no pupils due to start Reception in September 2015 and 2 leaving Year 6.  Therefore there were 12 pupils expected to be on roll at the beginning of the next academic year.  Members were advised that there were not enough pupils in the local area to sustain an educationally and financially viable primary school without relying on attracting pupils from areas closer to other schools, many of which already had surplus capacity.

It was reported that following careful consideration of how to secure a viable future for the school, the Governing Body had taken the difficult decision in November 2014 to request that the local authority started the consultation process on the proposal to close the school.

The Chairman read out a statement from Councillor A H Turner, the local member for the school, which stated that "whilst disappointed at the outcome of the recommendation he accepted the situation".

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was considered sad when a small school had to close, particularly when the parents had spoken with such passion for the school;

·         Small schools were a nurturing environment for those children who did not cope well in a larger schools;

·         It was queried whether setting up a nursery provision would help with increasing the pupil numbers.  Members were informed that there was already sufficient nursery provision in the area;

·         It was noted that the neighbouring schools were not large and so personalisation in terms of education would still be maintained;

·         It was queried whether, as the neighbouring schools were also small, if they would be faced with a situation where they would need to expand in the future.  Members were informed that there was sufficient capacity for primary school places for the current and projected number of pupils in the area;

·         There were concerns that in a rural village, the school was often the hub for the village, and so the loss of this school would impact the village.  Members were advised that this school was slightly displaced from the village centre, and a new village hall had recently been built;

·         It was also noted that it was unlikely that further housing developments would be built in the village as it was within Lord Yarborough's Estate;

·         If the school was to close, the building would revert back to the Estate, as it was built on Lord Yarborough's land;

·         It was commented that demographics changed and populations moved;

·         Significant sums of money would be needed for the school to remain open, and if an early years provision was to be introduced, then further investment in the building would be required;

·         Lord Yarborough had offered to financially support the school, but this contribution would be capped so there would still be a financial risk to the Council;

·         It was suggested whether this school could be used to create some personalised education for children to avoid exclusion.  However, members were advised that this would be a re-appropriation of use of the building.  It was also noted that it was not in an area of high exclusions, and there was a centre not far from this school which was meeting the needs of children who had been excluded;

·         It was commented that the closure of any school was a very big step;

·         It was noted that the school were proposing to submit

·          another application to the Regional Schools Commissioner to become an academy with an early year's unit as part of the Tollbar Multi Academy Trust;

·         It was suggested that the school should be given the additional year to ensure that every option to avoid closure was considered;

·         It was very stressful for parents to have their child in a school with an unknown future;

·         The Council had been supportive of the Tollbar Trust application to take over the school, but it had been the Regional Schools Commissioner that turned it down;

·         A school needed a minimum of approximately 40 pupils to be financially viable, depending on staff costs, shared resources with other schools, overhead etc.;

·         The pupil numbers at this school had been monitored for the past 8-10 years, and the school had recently seen a big drop in pupil numbers;

·         It was not advisable to teach all children in Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 in the same class;

·         There was a need to think about what the children were getting out of this school;

·         Members were reminded that it was not within the power of the County Council to appoint a sponsor for an academy;

·         It was queried whether there would be another opportunity to bring this back to scrutiny in September, however, members were advised that there were only two months to make this decision following the end of the consultation and a decision had to be made by 22 July 2015;

·         The cost of maintaining this school further was significant.  The governors of the school had asked the council to start the closure process.  It was felt by one member that it was the right decision to close the school;

·         In response to a comment made, it was clarified that the authority had not commissioned a 50 seater bus to transport 2 pupils to the school.  If that was what was provided then that was the company's decision;

·         Marketing had been undertaken by the school over the previous year to try and increase its pupil numbers;

·         There were no new housing developments planned for this area as the village was surrounded by thousands of acres of farming land;

·         If the school was to remain open for a further year it could have a budget deficit of around £50,000.

RESOLVED

1.    That the Committee support the recommendation to the Executive Councillor as set out in the report;

2.    That the following additional comments be passed to the Executive Councillor in relation to this item:

·         It was questioned whether there was enough demand for the early years unit at the school. It was noted that in terms of nursery provision, there was already sufficient capacity in the area.

·         It was queried whether there would be a shortage of primary school places in the area in future as a result of rising birth rates. The Committee was informed that there were more than enough places for current and projected numbers as there were nine other primary schools in the area. In addition, there was no new housing planned for the area as the school was in the middle of an arable estate.

·         Concerns were raised as to whether it was too soon to close the school, and whether the closure should be delayed until August 2016 to see what the outcome would be from the school's submission to the Regional Schools Commissioner to become an academy with an early year's unit as part of the Tollbar Multi Academy Trust. The Committee was informed that the delay would lead to further uncertainty for the parents and children, and that a school needed sufficient pupils to be financially viable.