Agenda item

Report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

Over the last 5 years there has been a significant reduction in demand for school places within Camden and the wider London area. Forecasts of pupil demand have also been created in times of unprecedented change and challenge for families in Camden. Specifically, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have fundamentally altered people’s lives and changed patterns of migration within central London and Camden Borough specifically. The impacts of these have reduced the anticipated level of demand for school places across the Borough.

Since 2018 the Council, in partnership with its family of schools, has removed 10 forms of entry from our reception intake, responding to a reduction in birth rates of over 30% across the borough. These difficult decisions including four school closures, the most recent being the closure of St Dominic’s Catholic Primary School, ensure that our family schools remain both sustainable and responsive to the needs of their communities.

The forecast data continues show supressed birth rates within London and Camden alongside the continued effect of reductions in families moving into Camden during the COVID period. Whilst the peak of surplus anticipated from last year is not forecast to increase our new forecasts indicate that Camden will reach that peak sooner, and that the marginal increases towards the end of the planning period will not be realised to the same extent.

Primary:

The surplus over the reception year admission number is estimated to rise 6.7% in 2023 to 28% by 2032/33.

Secondary:

The Secondary Year 7 surplus is estimated to increase from 12% in 2023 to 21% by 2032/3. 

This level of anticipated surplus provision within both phases does require responses overtime to ensure the sustainability of our school offer. The Council in collaboration with schools has established a School Place Planning Group of school leaders to develop a school place planning strategy with aligned implementation plan focused on schools most acutely impacted by falling roles.

Ensuring Camden has the right number of school places is both the Council’s statutory responsibility and aligns with our We Make Camden principals and are fundamental to the implementation of the Councils Education Strategy ‘Building Back Stronger’. Preventing schools becoming financially vulnerable and thus subject to unplanned change, helps maintain strong, safe and open communities. Good and outstanding schools promote independent healthy lives and support robust growth and jobs. 

The data and forecasts of the demand for school places within Camden is reviewed annually by the authority and made publicly available. Our review incorporates all underlying demographic data including: existing provision and capacity, actual registered births and fertility, the latest Greater London Authority (GLA) forecasts for births and their relationship to school rolls, together with the additional pupils associated with new housing developments. The analysis is used to help us make informed decisions about the future organisation of school places.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Education and Inclusion.

Nick Smith, Head of Education Commissioning and School Organisation, introduced and summarised the report which set out the composite and live data projections for school places and demonstrated the basis for school place planning decision-making in Camden. There had been five years of unprecedented change, with fluctuations caused by Brexit, the pandemic and other external factors. The latest data did not indicate a further decline in pupil numbers, however it also did not show an upturn in demand in the near future. The reduction in pupil numbers had immediate budget implications for schools, such as challenges in delivering a full curriculum. The long-term trend raised questions for the Council about the sustainability of the system going forward. While surplus provision had already been removed, there was still a forecasted surplus of school places in the future. Primary schools, secondary schools and different geographical planning areas of the borough faced different contexts, but Camden had been at the forefront in working to alter provisions to match demand.

The Chair thanked officers for the report and invited questions and comments from the Committee. The following was discussed:

·       A Member highlighted the high proportion of pupils in independent schools in Camden, noting that Camden had 31 independent schools compared to Islington’s seven. They asked if there was any scope for collaboration with London Councils or other boroughs to encourage pupils into the maintained sector. Officers responded that Camden was already working with other local authorities and London Councils, which had released papers lobbying government for funding to address falling rolls. They noted that private schools in Camden often imported pupils from both London and further afield, which was not too different from Islington. Camden would welcome a joint approach to encourage more pupils to move into the maintained sector and the Cabinet Member for Best Start for Children and Families had an interest in this topic. However, officers pointed out that while this initiative could help, it would not solve the entire issue, as the private sector could not be treated as a homogenous group. Some private school families had never engaged with the state sector, while others had tried to apply for school places but were not awarded their first choice due to the admissions criteria and then left the state sector.

·       A Member asked about the differences between the secondary and primary school populations and how that impacted planning. Officers confirmed that the secondary population differed from the primary population primarily due to the locations of schools; some secondary schools were located near borough boundaries and drew a significant portion of their pupils from outside Camden, whereas primary schools tended to have more local catchment areas in pockets within the borough.

·       A Member asked whether the risks associated with a continued long-term decline in pupil numbers had been considered, particularly in terms of the potential impact on schools budgets. In response, officers explained that there was ongoing engagement with schools about the financial implications of falling rolls. A school place planning group, consisting of school leaders, was involved in interrogating data which supported transparency in decision-making around provisions. The officer highlighted that support from the Council and Camden Learning was being provided to help schools manage finances and share best practices. Additionally, the use of executive headteachers and formal federation were increasing, to bolster collaboration and efficiencies efforts.

·       Members expressed concern over the lack of strategic planning evident in the annual school place planning reports, highlighting that over the past five years the outlook had consistently been bleak. They noted that while last year offered a glimmer of hope for improvement, the overall picture remained dire, with an impending crisis appearing unavoidable. Members were particularly dismayed by the omission of special schools and alternative provisions from the report and criticised this exclusion as being at odds with Camden’s values of inclusion and ensuring every child mattered. There was also no reference in the report to the SEND Provision Scrutiny Panel’s place planning recommendations to the Council. It was stated there was a lack of a strategic approach to address the long-term financial sustainability of schools, especially in the context of declining rolls. The Co-opted Member stated that the current trend could lead to the proliferation of one-form entry primary schools, which were less financially sustainable and often less educationally effective than larger schools. Members also pointed out the potential harm caused by half-form entries on curriculum delivery in primary schools. Members called for a strategic plan that outlined scenarios for the future of Camden schools and reflected the borough’s commitment to all children.

·       Officers acknowledged the concerns raised, clarifying that the report was intended to present data rather than outline a strategy. They explained that there were limits in what could be publicly shared within the report, especially regarding school futures, to avoid adverse impacts which could intensify the challenges. Officers defended the Council’s strategic approach, pointing out significant changes in school place planning was made in collaboration with schools, and noted that all decision-related reports were reviewed by scrutiny and Cabinet. On the topic of SEND, officers agreed there was more work ahead to integrate SEND provision planning into school place planning. Officers said the recent Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) and a recent review of high-needs provision was informing their work. Officers acknowledged the urgency for a strategic shift and assured Members that political discussions were underway, with updates expected later in the municipal year.

·       A Member commended Camden for its leadership and efforts in managing challenges related to falling rolls, noting that other boroughs had fared worse. They highlighted the primary school sector needed to be more agile and competitive, particularly in comparison to private schools that could offer attractive options to parents during open days. They questioned whether Camden could adopt a more agile, system-wide approach to enhance its appeal. In response, officers acknowledged Camden’s strong structural framework, particularly through its partnership with Camden Learning, which facilitated collaboration and shared good practice among schools. Camden held a unified approach, unlike the more fragmented systems in other areas, which positioned the borough well to adapt to challenges. Officers also noted that wider policy development at the national level would play a role, and Camden Learning's model could form part of that broader strategy.

·       A Co-Member noted that incidents and poor Ofsted ratings could deter parents from schools and catalyse falling pupil numbers and they asked how some schools could be supported to improve their image. Officers acknowledged that individual incidents could impact pupil numbers in the short-term, particularly when surplus capacity was already a challenge. They stated that Camden Learning supported schools in recovering and rebuilding their reputation after such events, even though incidents could not always be prevented.

·       A Co-Member raised the importance of ensuring that all children in Camden were represented in the place planning process. They noted that there were schools with a clear oversupply of places, compared to special schools where every place was filled, which represented decisions being made and a category of children being excluded.

RESOLVED - 

THAT the Committee comment on and note the report.