Pressure on Romsey Town Primary Schools- Let's do something!

[philosikos]

Hello. This year my child was amongst several who did not get a place at St Phillip's tho' it is our catchment school. If any parent is in a similar situation with St Philip's or Ridgefield or Abbey please get in touch. If this happened to you last year or you are worried about next year, please get in touch too -on this thread. If enough parents get together we could exert some pressure on the county council to do something, and the local city councillors will have more credibility if they speak on our behalf.
My child has been allocated to Abbey Meadows. She is very excited and I am very impressed with its teachers and facilities I have no doubt she will be well educated there. But it is a difficult to get to from Romsey Town and it is located in another distinctive community- Abbey. I would like to have the choice to send my child to her local catchment school and it seems in years to come this will be less and less likely for Romsey Town parents, especially if you live on the outer 1/2 of catchment areas for St P's & Ridgefield & St Matthew's!
If there is sufficient interest I will get a group together. Have a good day!

Though obviously once the new housing developments go through, that's a different ballgame. I presume even the council would be willing to admit to that though!

It's not just Cambridgeshire County Council. This BBC story from a few weeks ago sets out the national situation, and some of the figures are quite staggering.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-33094304

But our local authority is certainly not being very open. For example, the admissions team likes to quote that 97% of families in Cambridgeshire get one of their three choices, but they're less keen to reveal the Cambridge only statistics. Or that 50% of Romsey elder siblings didn't get any of their choices this year, and other families either put down a "choice" they didn't really want or decided to move way to escape the problem.

Regarding whether it's a blip, there's a clear trend towards it becoming more difficult to get into St Philips and other local schools.

It's true that 2011 was a difficult year, with a cut-off distance of 0.251 miles, but only 4 catchment children were denied a place, and as you mentioned there was plenty of capacity at other local schools, including Ridgefield and St Matthews.

In 2012 everyone got in.

In 2013 all catchment children got in, but nobody from outside of catchment. The cut-off distance of 0.455 miles was almost the whole catchment.

In 2014 the published cut-off distance was 0.665 miles but this was misleading as the last pupil admitted got in on religious grounds, and the true distance within catchment was 0.45 miles. There were 4 families denied a place, and no out of catchment places were available at St Matthews, Morley or Ridgefield that year.

For 2015 the cut-off distance was 0.126 miles, with one statemented child, 24 catchment siblings, 16 Catchment and 4 religious. There were 15 in-catchment families who missed out. As I understand it some parents then turned places down and so the distance increased to 0.33 miles after the second round.

So, yes there were a fairly high number of siblings, but still just only half the number of places. The key point really is that there were 31 families without a special route into the school (religious, statement or siblings) and of these 16 got in and 15 didn't, hence the 50% figure I've quoted in my last post.

Reasons for the local squeeze on places include:

• The baby boom, fuelled by inward migration of younger inhabitants as older people have moved on.
• Home building, particularly along Cromwell Road, but also dotted throughout the area
• Romsey becoming a more popular area for families; this is linked to stagnating property prices after 2007 making it more difficult to sell up and move to areas like Milton Road with posher schools
• The St Philips Ofsted rating going up from Needs Improvement to Good last year
• Oversubscription at other local schools which were traditionally preferred over St Philips (i.e St Matthews and Morley)

Some of these are definitely permanent changes, and some will get worse.

I agree with comments that primary school parents are a small constituency and there would be an outcry if allotments than building were built over for a school extension. But perhaps I can get the support of those likely to be affected in the future onboard- parents with babes in arms now?
Dave you know a lot- I suspect you work for School Admissions!
I used to read articles in the paper about primary school allocations and wonder what the fuss was about- now thinking about the impact on my child and family I understand.
I hope continued pressure on council from parents as well as councillors raising the issue (eg twitter.com/dave4labour) will keep us on the agenda.

If you want to get the support of "babes in arms" parents then you need to target all the local nurseries with some simple to understand and emotive information. Also any baby events frequented by SAHMs who don't send their kids to nursery.

I have never worked for the Admissions Team but most of my information comes from them.

Be careful with local politicans. Most of them want to make a difference, but to do this they have to get elected. Sadly this means appearing to make a difference (marketing) becomes as important as actually making a difference (which might go unnoticed).

In the run up to his election as City Councillor in 2014 Dave Baigent for example told me that this issue was the top of his agenda, but more recently has said he is up against a brick wall and there is no money available. A couple of months ago we had a by-election to the County Council (i.e the one responsible for schools) and Dave's colleague Zoe Moghadas was elected. Shortly before her election she wrote:

"I have been told there is a City review ongoing at County looking at school place demand and potential solutions .... if elected I will be in a position to ensure local concerns and suggestions are being heard and properly debated .... it is just wrong for families to have precious times ruined by the stress school placement is causing. I have of course been through it myself .... I have talked to parents trying to juggle school runs to two different schools, really difficult for them. St Philips has 14 appeals ongoing, the County have passed the cost of appeals back to the school. The Chair of Governors is saying to me this is budget that may be taken from in class support. I find this unacceptable! I will do what I can to get sensible outcomes to these problems."

However, the problem with working too closely with one party is that you can get used to further their ambitions to keep control of the City Council (Romsey being a highly marginal ward).

For example, during the by-election the Lib Dems campaigned for a new primary school for Romsey, suggesting that this could be built on the City Council Depot just over the railway bridge. Until a few months earlier they'd been insisting that the corner of Coldhams Common was the best site, and Kilian Bourke (the previous County Councillor) previously told me that "there is significant school building in schools around Cambridgeshire, including in the City. But it does involve building capacity where it can practically be built."

Suddenly the Council Depot was favoured. Why? So they could run a campaign based on the idea that the "Labour controlled City Council" needed to be persuaded to allow that to happen. Even though it's not in the Local Plan.

So petty local politics and getting elected takes precedence over improving things for local families and giving our children the best start for their education.

By coincidence while I was writing my last post the City Council issued a press release about redevelopment of the Depot site:
www.cambridge.gov.uk/news/2015/07/14/paving-the-way-for-homes-on-mill-road

As anticipated the intention is to build houses rather than a primary school, with work starting in 2017. Presumably the development will be within the St Matthews catchment area, futher reducing the slim chances of sending your child to that school if you live in Romsey and miss out on St Philips.

Thank you very much indeed for your thoughtful comments. A small group of parents are meeting next week in the evening after work to decide how we want to campaign. If you can or want to come please PM me. Otherwise I will keep you posted on what we get up to on here.

Just got back to this thread - Philosikos as far as I know all new schools have to be academies. Of course this is madness since academies are not under local authority control. You will need to bear this in mind for your campaign.

If you want to set up a free school then you can campaign for it. You need to bear in mind, however, that the costs of setting up a free school effectively come from the budget for existing schools so that the new school ends up reducing the amount of money existing schools get.

Regarding your comment about mega-schools, there are none such in Cambridge. In other cities there are primary schools with six or eight form entry, the largest in Cambridge is three form. And there are huge advantages to the child to going to a larger school: larger schools have far more in the way of resources than smaller schools; they have greater access to specialist teaching; because of economies of scale they can afford to employ specialist teachers; they don't have split-year group classes.

I

Gah, I had no idea the council depot was so imminent. That is extremely bad news for those of us with children already at St Matthews - the prospect of multiple school runs to different schools starting at identical times makes me go cold! where do they think these school places are going to magic up from? To be honest I'm not so fussed about a new school, but surely there need to be plans to further expand a school somewhere in this area? The way things are going, soon there won't even be room at Abbey meadows! Do the admissions team have their heads in the sand, or do they at least have potential options on the table to expand any local schools or shift catchments?

@niminypiminy - Are you sure about those mega primary schools? In the BBC article that I linked to it says the number of primary schools with over 800 pupils has increased from 58 to 87 nationally. That implies an intake of 120 each year. If there were 6 or 8 form entries at a school then it would be around twice that size, i.e over 1,500 pupils, and the catchment area would be about a quarter of the size of Cambridge.

@romseyroo - I suspect there are secret contingency plans. One year they added an extra class at Kings Hedges at the last minute. There may well be space for temporary buildings at Abbey Meadows or Queen Emma, but I can't say because I've never visited either school. They'll already have detailed information about children in local nurseries and their home addresses so ought to be planning various scenarios. As I already mentioned, Ridgefield will have a spare classroom from 2016. Perhaps that's their backup plan if Abbey Meadows is full.

I think there are schools in London and elsewhere that are really very large indeed.

But having had children at Abbey Meadows where all the teachers know all the children's names (and the children all know each other too), I would not be rushing to condemn 'mega-schools'. People have fixed ideas about how much better smaller schools are that are not, in my view, necessarily borne out by the reality.

Certainly, if your child has any kind of additional needs then they are far, far better off in a larger school which has a fighting chance of having the expertise to support them. Having seen some shocking things first hand in an extremely small (and very over-subscribed) school in Cambridge I would never send my children there.

@CambridgeDavid -- Abbey Meadows was full this year. There were no spaces left after the first round allocation.

I agree about small schools. From what I hear of both schools, I think I'd prefer Abbey Meadows over St Philips in all respects except distance!

But mainly I would prefer the same school for all my children. I feel pretty aggrieved at the lack of out-of-catchment sibling priority in Cambridge. If you have people getting their eldest a place in a popular school then moving miles out, I totally see the issue, but if you live 20m outside a catchment, get in to its school when it has plenty of space, and have no intention of ever moving, it seems pretty harsh that altered demographics and increased school popularity then conspire to deny your younger children a place.

But then I can see that some people on this thread would probably prefer no sibling priority at all, let alone out of catchment priority! I guess it illustrates how dramatically people's priorities change as their family situation evolves.

I have read this debate with interest... There is a problem with admissions in Cambridge this year with schools "South" of the river being full while there are places spare in schools "North" of the river... What doesn't seem to have been mentioned here though, apart from the slight acknowledgement that finding large sites suitable for building new primary schools in Cambridge is extremely difficult, is the length of time it takes to get a new school built...

First you have to find some land... In Cambridge (mega premium cost at Housing development value) plus the competing demand of Cambridge City not having hit their new housing growth national requirements...

Assuming you have now managed to find a site... You have to a. design a school (the easy'ish part)... b. Submit the design to planning. Hereby lies the problem !!! you see in Cambridge there is a struggle between the planning great and good that says all local authorities in Cambridgeshire (particularly Cambridge City and SCDC) should have their say in the type and form of the building that is required. Most of the elite Joint Development Control Committee (JDCC) don't care that little Johnny needs a school place in a year or two years time they are quite happy to sit and control and design and redesign and tinker and put quite extraordinary conditions in place in order to try and get a school that they think is worthy of the great design that is Cambridge. Worsened by the fact that the University School (and the unlimited Resources of the Universities) used all known construction techniques to add vast cost and quality to the building they are providing making it nigh on impossible for the County Council on limited budgets (quite rightly so as its mine and yours taxes building their schools... but remembering it also has a duty to build and extend schools for the whole of Cambridgeshire...) to compete.

You cannot spend more resources (money) on schools in Cambridge compared to what you spend on other parts of the county... this is not fair and is not reasonable, so the average £/m2 for a new build school in Cambridge is the same as for any part of the entire County. This leads to protracted arguments, discussions, endless rounds of consultation, before it is realised that the need for the school places is looming, the County is in an increasingly dire situation as the children are coming and there is still no resolution because, frustratingly, there is no stepping down by the JDCC.

So what does this result in? CCC trying to build and extend on schools that already exist in Cambridge where a. there is limited site available, b. an architectural form exists on the site so new development type architecture doesn't matter quite so much (although, believe me, the good old JDCC still try to meddle) c. schools being extended where perhaps it is the only way that CCC can provide a surplus of places to offer to parents whose otherwise first choice school is full.

What I haven't mentioned is alongside the 'getting a school built' type discussions there is also the requirement for the LEA to run a competition in order to get a sponsor of the new school on board (Academy / Academy Trust etc.) as all new schools have to be an Academy (as stated earlier in this discussion) or free school. With the cost / pupil place being low in Cambridgeshire compared to most of the country the attractiveness of this isn't seen by large multi national Academy chains and is so often only looked at by schools that exist in Cambridge already.

I guess what I am really saying is by all means start your campaign against CCC but what you have to realise is that it is not necessarily CCCs doing. Considerable time and effort is being spent in the background... (oh and BTW... new schools are planned on the development of NIAB, Huntingdon Road and Clay Farm, Trumpington... so all the new large developments are already being planned for in terms of housing and school places)

Oh and I forgot to add that the LEA have no right or ability to force an Academy to extend their PAN... and indeed they are entitled to reduce their PAN regardless of the problems in catchment or in neighbouring catchment. So the LEAs hands are tied here also

Thanks Cambslass, that's really interesting. I know a bit about school expansion from having been a governor and all the issues are exactly as you say.

One factor which has not been discussed on this thread is the rule about religious places which allows churchgoers to 'jump the queue' and land a place at St Philips despite living further away than the cut-off distance which applies for everyone else.

At the moment 4 of the 45 places are reserved for this purpose, up from 3 places a few years ago. The places are handed out based on a 9 point scale:

1. At the heart of their church - St Philip's Church; the Parish Church.
2. At the heart of their church - other Church of England Churches
3. At the heart of their church - other Christian Churches.
4. Attached to their church - St Philip's Church; the Parish Church.
5. Attached to their church - other Church of England Churches
6. Attached to their church - other Christian Churches.
7. Known to their church - St Philip's Church; the Parish Church.
8. Known to their church - other Church of England Churches
9. Known to their church - other Christian Churches.

Precise definitions of what each term means are available on the supplementary information form. Being at the heart of a church requires attendance roughly twice a month. A vicar has to sign the form, and affiliation is considered over a two year period.

In 2011 and 2013 there were only 2 religious applicants so even devout atheists could have got in that way. In 2012 there were more religious applicants but the school was undersubscribed anyway, so anyone attending church purely to get their child in would have been wasting their time (with the benefit of hindsight).

In 2014 the religious applicants only got down to the third criterion, which means a family at the heart of a Christian church in outer Mongolia would have got in ahead of those attending St Philips often enough to be 'attached' to that church but not quite at its heart. The Mongolians also took a place from children living in catchment but more than 0.42 miles from the school, such as Julie Finney's son:
www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Urgent-problems-looming-lack-funding-new-school/story-23458565-detail/story.html

For 2015 all 4 religious places were taken, but I haven't asked the Admissions Team which criterion they reached. It wouldn't surprise me if all the places went to very regular churchgoers, given the shortage of places generally.

I've often wondered if St Philips will increase the number of religious places further, seeing as they are in charge of their own admission criteria. It's fairly common in other Cities for there to be some highly sought after Church of England schools which demand religious attendance before handing out places. In Cambridge we really only have that in Shelford and at the Catholic schools. It does seem to be the case for secondary, however, as St Bedes appears more popular with many parents than Coleridge or Netherhall.

If St Philips ever became a Christians only primary we'd have another kind of problem entirely.

Ridgeons Builders Merchants and their team of consultants, along with Cambridge City Council, are again inviting local people to get involved in shaping the redevelopment of the Cromwell Road site to provide new housing:
cromwellroad-ridgeonsspd.co.uk/

Notes from the previous stages can be found here:
cromwellroad-ridgeonsspd.co.uk/previous-stages/
These include lots of comments about the shortage of primary school places, including the suggestion of doing a "land swap" with Vinery Road allotments to allow St Philips to expand. However, I understand that allotment land is protected by special legislation and involves an application to the Secretary of State, so it's very complicated as well as politically controversial as I mentioned earlier on this thread.

Interesting thread this.

Not sure if anyone has mentioned it or not but St Philip's have autonomy over whether they expand or not as they are a church school. Or at least I think this is the case.

I was always against church schools, but now I live next door to one (though not next door enough it seems!) I am really, really, really against church schools!! The main reason we picked an out of catchment school in the first place was strong objections to the religious atmosphere at st ps. The fact that out of catchment children could potentially get priority over those living right next door, and that they get to determine admissions arrangements despite being state-funded, is really outrageous.

Cambore it isn't the case that a voluntary controlled or voluntary aided church school can increase places if they want to. These are LEA schools (the church contributes 10% of capital costs in addition to the land/buildings) and admissions numbers (the Published Admissions Number) is determined by the school and the LEA.

At present St Philips has only 4 places out of 60(?) in each year that are allocated under the religious criteria, so that really doesn't make that much difference. Also it is not clear whether those admitted under the religious criteria would have been admitted anyway because of proximity or the sibling rule.

In any case CambridgeDavid's speculation that St Philip's might increase the number of religious places - even make all places religious - is baseless. There's no evidence of that.

And romseyroo, please don't forget that any new school will be an academy, and thus will determine its own admissions arrangements, whether it is religious or determinedly atheist.

@ niminypiminy

St Philips has 4 church places out of 45 so it does make a difference. In 2014 when 4 in-catchment children missed out this was up to 100% due to church places, and for 2015 when 14 in-catchment children missed out it was still up to 29% due to church places.

You can tell if they would have got in anyway based on whether places are allocated under the school's 3rd or 5th criterion (I'm referring to the overall criteria, not the 9 point religious sub-criteria).

Speculation about increasing religious places isn't baseless because they have already been increased by 33% from 3 to 4 places in recent years. The level of church places is ultimately decided by the governing body, of which a majority are foundation governors (i.e church appointed). If children who go to the parish church of St Philips start getting denied places at their linked school then it's not unreasonable to suppose the governors might want to take action.

Changing the subject back to something raised earlier on the thread, some posters have expressed concern about multiple school runs due to siblings attending different schools.

I came across a document on the Council's website called "In Year Admission Arrangements" which mentions "an out of catchment child whose older sibling was allocated a place at the school due to oversubscription at the catchment area school".

This is within an appendix entitled "In-Year over-admission protocol which gives guidelines on when it may be appropriate for a Cambridgeshire admission authority to admit beyond a school’s PAN."

I don't understand the context to this - does it mean there's a way for younger children to jump the queue into the non-catchment school that their elder sibling got into, IF the first child ended up there due to St Philips being oversubscribed?

Source:
www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/downloads/file/3351/determined_in_year_admission_arrangements_for_all_maintained_and_academy_schools_2016-2017

If you have been allocated different schools for your children and it will be very difficult for you to take/collect them you can appeal to the fair access panel, which can force a school to admit above its PAN.

I must say, CambridgeDavid, you view school governors (even foundation governors) as a petty lot, motivated entirely by sectarian interests. My experience is that this is an unjust caricature.