Richmond Borough Schools Chat 5

[BayJay2]

Welcome! This is the latest in a series of threads about Richmond schools, which was first triggered by the council's publication of its Education White Paper in February 2011.

Please do join in the chat. There’s a bunch of us who’ve been following the thread for a long time, and we sometimes get a bit forensic, but new contributions are always welcome, and if it’s something that’s been covered before we can always direct you to that part of the thread.

We generally talk about local education policy, the impact of national policy, the performance of the borough’s schools, and admissions-related issues. We began by talking about Secondaries, but tend to talk a lot about primaries too, so the title of the thread has evolved this time to take that into account.

If you have a few hours to spare and want to catch up on 2 years of local education history, then below are the links to the old threads. We have to keep starting new threads because each only hold 1000 posts. The first two threads run in parallel, as one was started on the national Mumsnet site, and another on the local one:

1a) New Secondaries for Richmond Borough?: Mumsnet Secondary Education (Feb 2011 – Nov 2011)
1b) New Secondary schools for Richmond!: Mumsnet Local (Feb 2011 – Nov 2011)

1. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 2: Mumsnet Local (Nov 2011 – May 2012)

1. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 3: Mumsnet Local (May 2012 – Nov 2012)

1. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 4: Mumsnet Local (Nov 2012 – Oct 2013)

1. This thread: Richmond Borough Schools Chat 5: Mumsnet Local (Oct 2013 - ????)

Finally, to find out how to add links, as well as smilies and emphasis, see these Mumsnet guidelines.

Chris, there is actually no set capital budget for individual free schools. Each one is justified on an individual "value for money" basis. Buying land/buildings in London will always be expensive, but it is capital investment, and can be justified within appropriate parameters.

Sorry, my Bellevue Education link doesn't seem to work but here's another profile of the 'entrepreneur and private equity investor currently focusing on the education sector'. And a bit more here that references a Hong Kong company (related to a Chinese laundry?!).

Anyway, neither GEMS nor Bellevue have had bids approved or have named sites so I wouldn't presume anything. Except that Turing House must be first in the queue if anything suitable comes up?

Interesting background mum but can I be a bit pc here about the racial stereotyping. You obviously don't know my background and day job but I did wince at that one and find it a bit offensive.

Sorry Heathclif, and no offence or racial stereotyping intended at all. One the 'related companies' was the Kai Shing Laundry Service Company Ltd and I was wondering about the connection with education. But another 'related company' was 'Mass Profit Development Ltd'. Perhaps that illustrates the point better that the private equity behind it is seeking to make a profit.

Oh sorry! I didn't realise it was an actual Chinese laundry

Actually the Hong Kong Education market is overflowing with new players, there is a population boom and a shortage of school places. So if not already involved in the education sector there then clearly just an investor rather than an active partner.

It is also one of the few other places in the world where the Catholic Church runs a lot of the local public schools, but they are inclusive.

mum it looks as though this is one of the web of companies that come under the Sun Hung Kai umbrella. Sun Hing Kai are one of the main property companies in Hong Kong, and the pearl river delta (not sure if they have other mainland interests), and the family who own it one of the richest www.businessweek.com/news/2014-01-28/sun-hung-kai-property-s-kwok-family-reaches-deal-on-interests They are involved in the education sector. To build new developments in Shenzhen, the special economic zone across the border from Hong Kong in China that has grown from fishing village to huge metropolis in under 40 years you have to provide the schools and other services. One of the wives oversees that part of their strategy, they are though very traditional Mainland Chinese Schools, lots of drilling, singing patriotic songs and listening to propaganda at lunchtime, calisthenics with breakfast, though with an emphasis on teaching in the English medium as well Mandarin and Cantonese. I don't think it is a model which would go down well in St Margaret's. I would doubt very much that this is anything but (what would be for them) a tiny investment that diversifies their portfolio.

Some further involvement in education www.cambridgetrust.org/partners/sun-hung-kai-properties-kwoks-foundation-ltd

www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celebrity-business/men/thomas-and-raymond-kwok-net-worth/

Knowing what I do, as a parent I would be seeking assurances that the private investors were sleeping partners and were not going to try and involve themselves in the strategy and day to day running of the schools on the basis of little knowledge of education in general and the needs of St Margaret's parents in particular.......

The laundry is of course another sensible strategic activity given the hotels and serviced apartments in their portfolio

Wow, interesting research Heathclif - especially about the bribery charges. It's a different world. The Plato One link is given in a 2011 document but another name has come up in google searches. The group is still rapidly acquiring private schools but property is a big asset in that sector.

Looks like another primary proposer for September 2015. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/education/2041699-Calling-all-mums-in-favour-of-a-new-free-school-opening-in-Fulham-and-Richmond? Presumably focused on where there is most demand for a bilingual Spanish English education. I don't think they can have done much research on existing proposals / sites etc. and their chances of success. I don't think that there is a Spanish equivalent to the Lycée, German School etc. but then both of those are private.

mum I would be careful of drawing conclusions about corruption charges from a western perspective, Chinese society on the mainland works in an organic way rather than via rule of law and the anti corruption agencies in Hong Kong are on a frontline defending the rule of law, I don't know the full background but the involvement of a Hong Kong private equity investor in corruption in Asia would not necessarily ring alarm bells about their involvement in activities in Europe. It is a bit surreal that we have proposals that involve Middle Eastern and Asian money in providing free school places in Richmond but given the flows of global capital not that surprising really. It just proves how small and global our world is now. I think the key thing is that parents reassure themselves that the schools will be run by education professionals who will work within the existing frameworks for the operation of schools and use of public money that would safeguard their children's education.

hi there is the Spanish school in Ladbrooke grove for 5-18 year olds . its free if you or one of your parents is a Spanish national. quite a few from Richmond go there
Instituto Español Vicente Cañada
Blanch

Thanks twick. Then I especially can't see how this could seriously be considered by the DofE given the evident scarcity of sites in the borough, and in the light of the overwhelming parental demand for places in mainstream community primaries, unless there is something we don't know....... Potentially four of the Free School programme primaries ( Turing potentially if there is room on the site, Bellevue and GEMS, and a specialist bilingual school) opening in one borough in 2015?

Heathclif yes, it is all surreal and a very different world. The problem with private equity backing companies forming trusts as vehicles to operate UK schools is that while they do not put in a penny, they expect to receive millions of pounds of funding, and they will know every single loophole in terms of making a profit. They may see UK state schools as a shop window for investors in global profit-making operations - but with the PR budgets they have to spend, that guarantees nothing for parents in terms of quality, continuity, or responsiveness.

IES Breckland is a cautionary tale of the involvement of private equity-backed operators in state schools. Two recent articles on the problems of governance in free schools:

www.itv.com/news/anglia/2014-04-01/ies-breckland-parent-of-former-pupil-voices-anger-at-failures-he-believes-damaged-his-daughters-education/

www.theguardian.com/education/2014/apr/01/kings-science-academy-questions-over-free-schools-policy

mum yes, as a parent I would be extremely sceptical about these various players, much better a proposal rooted in the community.

Agreed.

Although Turing House went outside the normal admissions round, and all those offered a place have an alternative offer, it attracted 360 (or so) applications. In 2013 there was an average 2.97 applications per place so without a site, that was a decent level of interest. Whitehall Park in Islington, also operated by Bellevue Place, went outside the admissions round too, but attracted only 72 applications for 60 places (cf. Richmond here in Appendix 1 where half of the primaries receive more for first preference alone).

Correction - the Islington school was for 56 places.

The RTT has: Lib Dems and Conservatives take aim on Richmond school places:

Cllr Gareth Roberts, Liberal Democrat spokesman for education, said: It was established some years ago that there would be a need for a new, community secondary school by 2015 at the latest . . I’m afraid that lack of planning has led to a situation which is so desperate that at the Turing House parents’ meeting the Tory administration was forced to admit that it is actively negotiating secondary bulge classes for 2015 as a contingency plan.

His statement in full: Lib Dems Demand Action On School Places:

Today’s RTT has Ex-cabinet member refused appeal (p 5), Turing House row continues (p 9) and Kings Group to sponsor free schools in the UK (p 21); and a letter from Frank Snelling - Answer to demand is to build more faith schools not fewer (p 22)

Today's Observer has an article on a leaked memo about particular problems of free schools and performance.

So far they have a higher failure rate than existing schools: of those inspected so far, 71% have been rated good or outstanding compared with 80% nationally, 10% are inadequate compared with 3% nationally. The memo acknowledges particular problems of free schools operating from scratch, i.e.:

'operating in temporary sites without a clear permanent home; new, inexperienced and often isolated trusts needing to upskill themselves to run a school for the first time; instability in principal appointments and senior leadership teams'

It's good for children that the DfE is planning to monitor and support free schools more closely rather than risk that they fail, and this new policy must be behind the decision for Turing House not opening this year.

However, in fairness they need to treat LA-maintained schools equally, and withdraw threats of forced academisation which can disrupt any attempts by an LA to put a long-term action plan into place.

Mum, the Turing House decision is directly attributable to Recommendation d (page 9) in this National Audit Office report, which says the DfE should: "Assess the lessons from projects with high and low capital costs, setting out how it determines that using temporary accommodation and paying over its valuations for properties offers value for money. The Department faces rising capital costs and some approaches lead to higher costs"

Basically, they don't want to end up paying over the odds for a permanent site because they're being held to ransom over time-limited temporary accommodation.

The document referred to in the Guardian article was probably referring to the same issue. It is a 40 page report, and the Guardian has pulled out a few points from it, but its hard to judge their context without seeing the document itself.

The interesting thing about it is that if site A is valued at, say, £5M, but the vendor wants £8M for it then it might be vetoed as poor value for money, and potentially passed over for a Site B worth, say, £45M (as in the case of the Harris Westminster 6th Form).

However, if the reason site A is valued at £5M, rather than £45M, is just because of its existing usage designation (e.g. educational rather than business use), then its a false economy. Once a school is built, both sites would essentially be worth the same.

Just read the letters page of the RTT and am so annoyed by the one on the need for more faith schools! Letting in more non faith pupils will result in a decline in standards as the 'ethos' will be diluted - so offensive...

Twix45: if you are offended - reply! It's painless, costs nothing and the RTT will certainly publish it, though not this week unless you reply before Tuesday mid-day.

The writer, FJ Snelling, is obviously an Old Fogey; the RTT will be delighted to receive a riposte from someone more representative of the borough's residents.

Write to: [email protected]