Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 8 July 2010.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 8 July 2010 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any Declarations of Interest from Members.

There were no declarations of interest received.

To receive an update on actions following the previous Committee meeting. 

The Committee received an update on actions following the previous meeting (Agenda Item 4).

The first meeting of the Housing Register Task Group was held on 27 September 2010 and a further meeting scheduled for 5 November 2010. 

Much of the discussion at the first meeting related to the contact made with people on the Common Housing Register (CHR) as part of reviews.  A particular concern for the task group was the more vulnerable people on the CHR who could potentially be removed from the CHR as a result of this process.  The next meeting had an item on the agenda to explore ways for Ward Members to assist with the process of making contact with residents, but there were data protection restrictions.  It was hoped that a report could be presented to the Committee at its next meeting. 

RESOLVED that the update would be noted. 

Purpose: To receive an update on progress with the Playbuilder Scheme. 

The Committee considered a report providing progress with the Playbuilder Scheme (Agenda Item 5).

David Hogg presented his report and made the following points:

·                    West Berkshire was awarded a grant of £1.1m capital and £44k revenue in 2009 with the expectation of building new play facilities or refurbishing existing dilapidated play facilities.

·                    There was a requirement for at least 11 individual projects to be completed within 2009/10 and 2010/11.

·                    12 highly successful projects were completed in 2009/10 which brought significant improvements to play facilities.  Positive feedback had been received from the local communities involved.

·                    Based on the tight timescales experienced in 2009/10, the process for 2010/11 commenced as early as possible and a further 12 projects were agreed. 

·                    However, it was announced on 14 July 2010 by the Secretary of State that the funding was not guaranteed and local authorities were instructed to cease activity until a review of the funding had been completed.

·                    Information was provided to the Department for Education (DfE) to advise that ground work had started for two projects and that all 12 had binding agreements with West Berkshire Council to commence work. 

·                    Some time passed before any feedback was received.  This was a difficult situation for those with projects in hand and other sources of funding were being considered, but no feedback had been received on these to date. 

·                    A letter received today (21 October 2010) was circulated to the Committee which advised that West Berkshire Council would be awarded the full capital amount requested of £585k.  This was a higher figure than that stated in the report as it included an additional amount to cover a project that was already completed. 

·                    It was hoped that this good news could be communicated to those with projects as soon as possible, but a decision had been taken to delay this until the full terms of reference had been received from the DfE.  This would ensure that there was no reason why the funding could not be distributed, i.e. time restrictions to complete work.  In addition, the ring fence attached to this grant had been removed and there was the potential to reconsider its spend, although it was hoped that commitments would be fully honoured.  The Select Committee shared this view and felt it should be protected as capital money. 

·                    No mention had been made as to whether revenue funding would be received.  This was stopped at the same time as the capital funding and as a result the Project Manager’s fixed term contract had to be ended.  This member of staff was in a position to recommence work at short notice and discussions were ongoing to confirm if revenue funding was available and to seek a way to restart the post without significant delay.

RESOLVED that the update would be noted and David Hogg thanked for his efforts in ensuring this funding was received in full. 

Purpose: To receive a report from the supporting small schools Officer group to assess what further work, if any, is required by the Select Committee. 

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 6) detailing the findings and recommendations of the Supporting Small Schools Review.

Ian Pearson introduced the item by making the following points:

·                    This extensive piece of work commenced in February 2010 when the Select Committee approved terms of reference for a review.  The review membership included Councillors Irene Neill and Alan Macro as Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Select Committee.  Its terms of reference were as follows:

o             To review the leadership, governance, funding and performance of small schools in West Berkshire, in partnership with schools and the Oxford Church of England (CE) Diocese.

o             Small schools in the scope of the review were those with a roll of one hundred pupils or less in 2008 and/or 2009 (January census).  The review would consider demographics, value for money, asset issues and the contribution schools made to the communities they served.

o             In addition, the review would look at successful and innovate ways other authorities support small schools in their areas.

·                    The review focussed on a number of key areas and the findings for each of these areas was detailed as follows:

Performance

Efforts were made to establish whether there was any correlation between school size and performance levels, but this was inconclusive.

It could be more challenging for smaller schools to achieve good results due to the need for mixed age classes.  It was also true that due to the small numbers of pupils, performance when recorded as a percentage could be negatively skewed by one pupil.  The high number of pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN) in some small schools could also affect performance. 

When considering the results of Ofsted inspections, it was found that all the small schools were rated as being satisfactory or higher.  There were some cases where schools were considered satisfactory in many areas, whereas others were seen as having outstanding or good practices.  Similar results were provided following Statutory Inspections of Anglican Schools, which were conducted for the small CE schools. 

Attainment levels in English and Maths at KS2 showed a range of performance across small schools.  Some achieved consistently above the West Berkshire average, some performed at a similar level and others below the average.  This meant that it was not easy to consider small schools as single group in terms of performance levels.

Successful small schools remained very popular with parents with the result that they were often at capacity.  This often included a number of pupils attending from outside the catchment area. 

Catchment/Demography/School Organisation

Of the 16 schools reviewed five had a roll average of less than 50 over the last five years and one school an average of below forty.  School popularity was changeable, but it took time for an unpopular school to recover and be viewed more favourably by parents. 

The review group felt that viability was an issue if numbers dropped below a certain level.  No view had been taken on a particular number, but it was a factor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

Purpose: To consider and prioritise the work programme for the remainder of 2010/11.  

The Committee considered the work programme for the remainder of 2010/11 (Agenda Item 7).

Councillor Irene Neill advised of a seminar she attended recently on the Big Society and felt this was an initiative that could be explored by the Committee.  This was supported by Members who felt it was opportune to look at enabling people and encouraging them to take responsibility in their own communities.  The need to better share existing facilities was felt to be an important factor to consider, as was the potential to improve transportation links for those living in rural areas. 

Stephen Chard agreed to discuss this piece of work with colleagues in Policy and Communication to help form a proposed way forward.  This would be agreed with Committee Members before the proposal was taken to the OSMC for approval.  It was then hoped that the topic could be added to the work programme and work commenced at January’s meeting. 

An item was on the work programme for January’s meeting to monitor the changes being introduced to the Youth Service.  However, it was agreed that the need for this item would be reviewed after the OSMC had conducted its wider review on activities for teenagers in December 2010. 

The joint review conducted with the Greener Select Committee into the accessibility of public transport continued.  It was hoped that an update would be provided on this work at the next OSMC. 

RESOLVED that:

(1)       Stephen Chard would form a proposal for conducting a piece of work on the Big Society.  This would be agreed with Committee Members before the proposal was taken to the OSMC for approval. 

(2)       The need for the item regarding the changes being introduced to the Youth Service would be reviewed after the OSMC had conducted its wider review on activities for teenagers in December 2010. 

(3)       The work programme would be noted.