2.1       The Primary Capital Programme (PCP) is a part of a programme of investment in facilities for education which also includes Building Schools for the Future (which will support the re-modelling of Secondary school provision) and Children’s Centres funding (to provide a range of support for parents and carers of children aged 0-8).

2.2       The overall aim of the PCP is to rebuild, remodel or improve at least half of all primary schools nationally. It is intended to complement a local authority’s existing strategies to ensure ongoing school improvement, provide an opportunity to respond to population changes and to extend the range of facilities available to families with young children. However, the funding will not result in the major transformational change that will be funded through the Building Schools for the Future Programme.

2.3       The Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) are clear that they expect this funding to supplement and not replace the funding already committed to the development of the school estate. It should be supplemented wherever possible by contributions by funding from other sources such as developers and capital receipts.

2.4       The DCSF objectives and an understanding of existing pressures on primary schools in Croydon have been used to develop criteria for the first phase of the PCP. Primary Schools have been invited to put forward expressions of interest against these criteria and an initial set of proposals developed as the basis for the Council’s submission. A Primary Capital Project Board will be established in June 2008 to take forward the implementation of the first stage of the Strategy and to over see the development of the longer term strategy. The delivery of this programme will require increased project management capacity within the LA. This will be financed from the PCP funding. In later years it may be possible to achieve some economies of scale through integration with the infrastructure created to deliver the BSF programme.

3          Detail

3.1       The PCP is additional government funding for Croydon’s 89 primary schools. It should also be viewed in the context of other capital funding to support primary schools:

3.2       The funding is intended to rebuild, remodel or improve at least half of all primary schools nationally and should:

·        Create primary schools equipped for 21^st century learning, at the heart of the community, with a range of children’s services in reach of every family

·        Deliver a strategic approach to capital investment  - supporting national policy aims, delivering world class standards, access to joined-up services for children and families; and addressing local needs and priorities

·        Rebuilding, remodelling or refurbishing or taking out at least 5 per cent of school buildings in the worst physical condition (Higher for the most deprived communities)

·        Focussing resources on deprivation nationally and in every authority; and

·        Reconfiguring the primary capital stock to account for demographic change^[1]

3.3       When identifying schools for investment 2009/10 – 2011/12, consideration has been given to the development of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme and the third phase of the Children’s Centre programme. Subsequent phases offer the opportunity to consult on proposals that offer the opportunity of integrated cross-phase provision.

3.4       It is proposed that the first phase of the programme the LA will meet the DCSF aims set out above by a programme which will:

1.      Support school improvement by bringing together higher and lower performing schools through reorganisation including by amalgamation

2.      Allow the expansion of high-performing, popular schools where there is demand for additional places in the area

3.      Support inclusion by creating resource bases for pupils with special educational needs

4.      Support the development of extended services within primary schools

5.      Allow a move away from mixed age classes

6.      Improve school kitchens/dining facilities                                 

7.      Improve access

8.      Modernise to address poor building design   

3.5       The reasons for focussing on these areas are set out below, leading to proposals in Appendix A which will

·        Recognise the impact of building condition on achievement

·        Respond to parental aspirations

·        Recognise demographic change

·        Enable closer co-operation across phases

·        Improve in-borough provision for pupils with Special Education Needs

·        Enable parents to be involved in their children’s education.

3.6       Pupil Numbers - Primary school numbers have been falling over the last decade. There is some evidence that numbers are increasing again but current projections are that they will not reach previous overall levels. The increase in population is not uniform across all areas and is particularly marked north of the town centre.

3.6.1   The LA handled the reduction in pupil numbers by reducing the number of forms of entry at undersubscribed schools and by the closure of one single form of entry primary school. It will not always be possible or appropriate to accommodate increased pupil numbers by reversing these decisions. The space released in schools has largely been used for improvements such as quiet rooms for pupils, resource areas for pupils/parents and more recently for the inclusion of Children’s Centres. In some older build schools it has allowed Governing Bodies to re-model classrooms to provide class bases which are closer to current requirements of size. However low pupil numbers in some schools has been accompanied by lower funding allocations with a potential impact on standards.

3.6.2   The PCP allocation does not include a large allocation for “Basic Need” to meet increases in pupil numbers by new build. However the re-modelling of the secondary estate offers potential opportunities to re-model buildings to create additional Primary provision. Some additional provision can be made through expanding the 2 schools which have 1.5 and 0.6 Forms of entry. Both schools are popular and oversubscribed. Both have to organise pupils in mixed age classes because of the financial constraints imposed by non-standard pupil numbers.

3.7       Standards - Standards in some Primary schools need to be improved. Whilst overall the majority of pupils are educated at School Improvement levels 1 & 2, there are some areas of the borough where it is harder for children to access a high quality education, particularly in the North, West and Central Local Delivery Partnerships. The authority is addressing this in a number of ways. Although ultimately standards are reliant on high quality teaching and personalized learning, the organisation of a school can have an impact on standards.

3.7.1   Croydon has a high proportion of separate infant and junior schools; all but one pair is on the same site. Whilst recent consultations on proposals to amalgamate have been supported by parents & carers, many parents have expressed support for smaller groupings of pupils and have been worried that 4 year olds starting Reception will be overwhelmed by 11 year olds ready to move on the secondary education. This can be overcome through sensitive zoning within the school and strategies of school management, but it is clear that parents need to be confident that these will be effective.

3.7.2   A school covering KS1 & KS2 would support the view that “the curriculum should help children move seamlessly from nurseries to schools, from primary to secondary” ^[2]  However the same can also be achieved by encouraging close co-operation across establishments through either soft or hard federations. Although there are a large number of headteacher networks ^[3]  which might equate with a soft federation, hard federations have not been extensively used in Croydon. There are some successful examples which can form the basis for future discussion and the development of models of organization which respond to the needs of the local community, potentially including cross-phase arrangements.

3.7.3   The high proportion of separate schools means that the DSG supports a high number of head teacher salaries. An increase in the number of Primary schools would release this funding to be distributed via other pupil-led factors. The number of separate schools also means that there is a high demand for school governors. Some Governing Bodies of linked Infant & Junior schools have federated and manage the business of the two schools together, many are still separate.

3.8       Special Needs - There are in the region of 370 Primary age pupils with statements in Croydon schools. The borough has a shortage of in-borough provision for pupils with more complex special needs. This is a considerable pressure on the Direct Schools Grant and on centrally retained budgets for transport costs. It also means that children are separated from their natural community.

3.8.1   The Authority has used disability access funding to ensure that there is a fully accessible school building in each area. However, in order to support and meet the principle of parental preference all schools need to be supported to develop their ability to cater for children with a wide variety of needs. This may include the provision of hygiene rooms, plus the issue of building accessibility. Schools have also supported the development of an equipment library which can be used to meet short-term, individual needs. The LA will develop this approach supported by the increased funding that is available and will also devolve a significant proportion of the funding to Local Delivery Partnerships.

3.9      School Meals - The new Local Area Agreement includes measures of child obesity and government has been clear about the importance of the standards of the food provided in Schools. The extension of the school day to cover Breakfast Clubs and After-school provision increases the profile of school catering. It places increased demands on the facilities and on the skills of a wide range of staff.

3.9.1   There is a wide variation in schools across the borough between the levels of entitlement to Free School Meals and Free School Meal uptake. Numbers are recovering after a disappointing fall during the period of adverse publicity about school meals. Many dining halls need environmental improvements, and many would be inadequate if Free School Meal uptake were to reach 100%. A high proportion of kitchens have been upgraded over the last 5 years, but some remain inadequate. These will be a priority for investment in the first years of the PCP.

3.10    General Maintenance - The Authority is aware of some schools with a considerable backlog of repairs which are impeding effective teaching and learning and these schools will be included in the priority investments. The current estimate of the backlog of repairs on the Primary estate is £9,000,000. Teams within the Authority are also looking at the carbon footprint of the schools. This work will need to be developed so that the subsequent phases of the PCP can make an impact in this area. Work is also in hand to update the suitability surveys. Ideas of classroom size and required facilities have evolved since many of Croydon’s schools were built. Some classrooms in the borough’s older schools are considerably smaller than in schools built more recently and this can be compounded as today’s 11 year olds are larger than an 11 year old at the turn of the 20^th century. Many high-performing schools have smaller classrooms than would be built today, so there is not an automatic link to lower achievement. Equally, many schools with surplus space have made effective use of that to develop family or quiet spaces.

3.10.1 It will be important to review the net capacity assessments to ensure that they reflect any modifications made by Governing bodies using Devolved Formula Capital. The published net capacity figure is used by developers and the Planning Department to assess whether Section 106 (“planning gain”) should be paid if a large development is likely to generate increased use of local services.

3.10.2 Half of all schools will receive an enhanced level of Devolved Formula Capital rather than major investment / refurbishment. The Asset Management Policy will be reviewed to provide a coherent framework for Governors of these schools to use as a guide to investment.

3.11    Local Delivery Partnerships - The Local Authority has established Local Delivery Partnerships (LDPs). These will bring together a range of partners (schools, the PCT, the Police, the Voluntary Sector) to work together and commission services which will achieve the ambitions of the Children’s Plan. The LDPs cover recognizable communities and are large enough to be able to pool resources, creating an effective purchasing and influence base. The needs of each Local Delivery Partnership will continue to influence the development of proposals and will be kept under review,

3.12    Proposals - The table attached at Appendix A sets out the proposed priority areas for investment 2009 – 2011. This table was compiled after consultation with Primary Schools against the criteria set out above. The first year projects are “quick wins” - projects that can be started without the publication of additional public notices, although some may require planning permission. Projects requiring statutory consultation have been deferred to the second and subsequent years of the programme to allow time for these processes.  There are no proposals for investment in the eastern area of the Borough at this stage (LDP East) to ensure that all proposals take the BSF programme into account. Subsequent phases will include investment in this area. Given the fast pace of change within children’s services, it is important that the projects identified for the second and subsequent years of the programme are reviewed against the criteria together with new and emerging demands by the Primary Capital Programme Board as soon as possible.

4.         CONSULTATION

4.1       The proposals listed above result from discussions with individual schools and expression of interests in response to a letter from the Divisional Director (Partnerships and Learning). As described above, considerable consultation will be required with stakeholders as other proposals are developed. The LA will launch discussions with the Church of England Diocese and the Roman Catholic Dioceses about potential schemes in VA schools.

4.2       As indicated above, there will be further consultation through the PCP Programme Board before the programme for the first year is finalised and before the programmes for the second and subsequent years are completed.

5          FINANCIAL AND RISK ASSESSMENT CONSIDERATIONS

5.1       Revenue and Capital consequences of report recommendations