Heather Loveridge (Director for Education and Skills), Sarah Bass (Commissioning, Procurement and Brokerage), Liz Smith (School Performance and Development), and Simon Wellman (SEND 0-25) will be in attendance for this item.
The associated Cabinet report can be viewed at https://democracy.telford.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=1134&MId=1179&Ver=4
Minutes:
Members received an overview of the Council’s proposed travel assistance policies and its transport review consultation. Officers described the consultation process and informed the Members of the consultation timetable. The Commissioning, Procurement & Brokerage Service Delivery Manager set out the rationale behind timetabling of the two consultations; explaining the split of school and post-16 SEND. Both phases of the consultation were to follow the same process with the addition of an ‘easy read’ version of the consultation for the second phase. The ‘easy read’ version was aimed specifically at My Options clients.
The Commissioning, Procurement & Brokerage Service Delivery Manager subsequently laid out the next steps for the policies once the consultation had closed. Feedback for both phases would be unified and considered together to create a single proposal to present to Cabinet in the spring.
Members asked a number of questions as follows:-
Page 9 of the policy, stated that the cut-off date for applications for the new school year was 30 June. With there being a lot of movement into the area thanks to new housing developments, how would the policy work for new movers?
This date was for the existing around 1,500 children in the area and if their applications were received on time, their eligibility could be checked and a place on the routes could be sourced in time for the start of the new school year in September. After that deadline, no guarantee to get transport in place could be made although efforts would be made to provide transport assistance.
What about children who move in year? What was the process?
Applications were accepted throughout the year outside of the normal admissions round but it was acknowledged that this could be better clarified in the policy.
The new policy specifically removed the application of assistance, for parents who opted to send their children to faith schools. Had the Council considered the effect of the policy on the attendance at faith schools and the anticipated reduction in cost to transport provision?
Parents were free to express a preference for any school but the local authority did not have to provide transport if it was not their nearest school. The Council had found that the policy to provide transport to faith schools was advantageous to a specific group of parents over and above others. However, the Council was still obliged to provide support to those on low income.
It was noted that discrimination regulations included religion as a protected characteristic.
There was nothing stopping parents applying to faith schools for a place for their child. A faith school was a preference, and one that they were entitled to, but the responsibility for transport remained with the parent.
It was noted that Holy Trinity Academy was the only secondary faith school in the area but it had a tight catchment area. It also allocated 60% of school places to faith applicants. How many children would be effected by this policy?
In common with other local faith schools, Holy Trinity Academy had a catchment area but was able to accept pupils residing out of that area. As a voluntary aided school it also had its own admissions policy. It was predicted that Holy Trinity Academy would soon see an increase in pupil numbers due to significant housing growth in the area and the bulge that had been seen over the last 5-7 years in primary schools moving through to the secondary schools. The Council would guarantee people who applied this year their places. But, going into next year it was not known how many people would apply.
Was it possible to make an estimate based on this and previous years?
The area had seen some of the greatest housing growth and it was expected that local applications would increase. Combined with the number of children moving through local primary schools it was expected that school numbers would increase significantly.
What happened if a child had a spare seat one year then there was not one available in the next year?
Unfortunately, spare seat would be lost. The parents would receive a full term’s notice and would be offered support finding alternatives. The seats were necessary for those who met the criteria. Additionally, spare seats could be lost in circumstances where reductions in the number of eligible children requiring a seat result in the size of the vehicle required
Could you tell us more about independent travel training?
The Post-16 Offer was part of the Council’s strategy to help with the transition to adulthood. There was a programme of independent travel training with the goal of helping those with SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities]) to be able to use public transport. This was especially targeted at supporting the transition into college and independence.
How would the Council ensure children were adequately matched for taxi-share?
Taxi-share was a last resort but the Council worked closely with providers, providing training, and also had very good drivers. The Council would also work with schools and parents to ensure the children got along and there were no problems during the day. If children didn’t work well together then a travel assistant could be put in place.
Where were the taxis licenced?
Taxis were licenced by Telford & Wrekin and Shropshire. There were robust contracts and regulations in place with the companies and drivers.
Recommended – that the final policy provides greater clarity regarding transport applications for in-year admissions.