The Future Development of
Access Responsibilities (Section
19) and Alternative Provision in
Somerset
PRU Management Committee
Update & Consultation
The Need for a service review (Agents for Change)
Local needs & impacts
•Govt. Legislation - impacts 2012 - 2013
Move away from LA’s delivering services
Move towards schools owning, finding and
funding Alternative Provision
PRU’s - freedom to gain academy status
Management Committees to gain delegated
powers/budgets
Freedom for PRU’s to innovate without LA
intervention
Impact of increasing voluntary and private
sector (inc free schools) in the Alternative
provision market
The development of the Somerset Compact
and its influence of service development
The influence of the academy programme
Need to improve educational outcomes for
C&YP across Somerset.
Need for more even distribution of provision
of PRUs in Somerset (currently there are big
gaps in certain age ranges and in certain
geographical areas
Increased of diversity and level of provision
required as identified by schools
LA (not school) Financial savings will continue
to have an indirect impact
Option 1 – Don’t Change
All existing PRUs remain as 13 separate units managed within a LA area structure.
Reallocate funding to support enhanced satellite provision
All Section 19 responsibilities remain with the LA. (Option Rejected)
Option 2 – Trading within an open market
All existing PRU would become fully traded units for those pupils at risk of permanent exclusion as referred
by schools. Section 19 for, Medical Tuition, Fair Access, Day 6 would continue to be delivered by the LA
for monitoring & safeguarding purposes. (Option Rejected)
Option 3 – Internal Commissioning
All existing PRU units would become schools in their own right jointly commissioned by the Compact and the
LA to meet Section 19 responsibilities and provide alternative provision for all of the compact schools.
(Identified as the Preferred Option)
Option 4 – External Commissioning
All existing PRU units would become schools in their own right. The contract to run and provide
alternative provision could be put out to tender by the Compact and the LA. This could be bid for by
private organisations, individual schools or groups of schools.
Alternatively externalisation may provide the opportunity for PRUs to become academies under new
Government legislation (Cabinet and Compact wish Management Committees to consider at a later
date)
Option 5 – Reduce the Service
Reduce the service to provide Section 19 responsibilities only. School and academies find and
fund their own alternative provision (Option Rejected)
Through Consultation with all partners
Recommendation for a delivery model
1.
To develop four integrated (cross phase and function) PRUs three of which would ‘support’
smaller, satellite provision in Frome, West Somerset and Chard
Each of the four main PRUs would exist as a school within its own right and be self managing,
but work closely as a partner with defined clusters of schools, retaining the ability to offer provision and
support outside the defined area.
•
Each PRU school would have a delegated budget, a newly formed statutory management
committee body and a single management structure under a Headteacher. Partner members and
agencies would take an active role in the governance of the school and the Headteacher would belong
to the same professional bodies as other Heads.
•
The PRU school could ‘potentially’ act as both commissioner and provider through partnership
working with schools and the voluntary and private sector.
•
Each PRU school could provide in-reach and out-reach programmes for schools within their
cluster through the management and deployment of specialist support staff.
•
Key Stage 1 support; SEN provision for pupils with statements and support for vulnerable learners
within the integrated PRU schools need to be considered in close relation to other service reviews for
these areas. (Developing through service reviews)
PRU coverage by September 2013
Increases
capacity in
the centre
3
‘Compact’
Commission
/invest in
Satellite
‘provision’
1
a
b
2
Develop four
stand alone
PRU Schools
4
PRU schools can
offer
support/knowledge
/outreach to
satellites
KS4 Provision
KS2/3 Provision and Outreach
LEC Medical Tuition
Funding for Nurture Groups/other AP
Alternative Provision Centre (APC)
c
Process of Restructuring
Project Team: 5 Workstreams
Finance and Governance – building the budgets and accountability
protocols
Provision – Including, satellite developments, Outreach, In-reach
Commissioning Section 19 – hard to place pupils, area budgets, referral
processes and panels
Transfers – HR, Finance, Legal, Buildings
APC – Virtual Classroon (Social Inclusion, Medical and SEN)
Communication - Website
Website on SLP by Sept 2012
High level page open to all
Tabs on 5 workstreams – finance and transfers will be
protected
Project Officer Support
FAQs section
Pre-April 2013
July
• Compact and Cabinet Approval
• Staff, Management Committee and Partners Consultation
• Meetings
• Budget
model approved by Compact and Schools Forum (9th /
12th )
• Establish Website
Sept - April
• Revisit the constitution of the Management Committees
• Determine any training requirements for Management
Committees and deliver.
• Establish new governance structures/timetables
• Establish area structure and communicate with schools
• Design staffing structures for the inclusion of SEBBS/T4
• Realign APC and Tone Education within new PRU structures
• Appoint to Headteachers posts
• Develop 4 delegated budget structures
• Design and implement new business support model
• Design new satellite arrangements and accountability structures
Executive Headteachers
It is planned that the Executive Headteachers will be in post by the end of October
Process
•Has to adhere to SCC HR Protocols
•A generic JD has been written and will be released before the end of the Summer term
•An ISR (Individual School Range) is being developed determined by pupil numbers on a
Special School Model
Round 1
•Expressions on Interest will be taken from Access Managers
•Competency based interviews will take place
Round 2
•JD and ISR info will be released to the resource pool
•Expressions of interest will be taken from eligible candidates
•Interviews will take place
•Round 3
•JD and ISR will be released to current Heads of Centre
•Expressions of interest will be taken from eligible candidates
•Interviews will take place
NB: Once in post the Executive heads will take on the responsibility for next phase of the
restructuring linking to the LA & schools as members of the Compact and other professional
0rganisations
Transfers (Most staff and centres will transfer in April as per current structures)
Name of Centre
Names to be confirmed once transfers
have been made
The Deane Discovery Centre
KS2/3
The Taunton Centre
KS4
Northfields Education Centre
KS1-4 (Medical)
The Bridgwater Centre
KS2/3
The Sedgemoor Centre
KS4
Link Education Centre (Sedgemoor)
KS1-4 (Medical)
The Mendip Inclusion Project
KS2/3
The Mendip Centre
KS4
Link Education Centre (Mendip)
KS1-4 (Medical)
The Yeovil Centre
KS2/3
The Horizon Centre
KS4
Link Education Centre (South Somerset)
KS1-4 (Medical)
The STEPS Centre
KS3/4
To initially transfer as part of the area
provision. Consideration as a satellite
to be given at next phase of the
restructuring
Alternative Provision Centre (APC)
KS1-4
Day 6/Hard to place
SI Element KS2 of APC to transfer to areas
Taunton Area PRU
Sedgemoor Area PRU
Mendip Area PRU
South Somerset Area PRU
Funding model for the first year
SLA linking to work of
Satellites
1 year buffer
zone
Commissioned places
£8000
Specified Commissioned
work non place led
Panel
Top up
Place led funding
Standard PRU
Top up based
on
Expected ave.
Occupancy and
Provider costs
Emergency
short term
funding
for section 19
inc hard to
place
Post April 2013 - Transfer
•Heads will carry out area analyses as per setting up any new school.
•The process below is only illustrative to indicate a move towards new structures for September 2013
•Heads will continue to work as a project team with Compact and LA to ensure PRU schools operate as an
integrated service
April 2013
Existing processes and protocols continue to operate during this period
New budgets,
governance and
business support
processes in place
April 2013
Area Visioning with
Staff and Partners
(LA & Schools)
May 2013
Area Self Evaluation
and Development
Planning
May/June 2013
Area Consultation on
any potential new
structures
July 2013
Establishing and
refining new
structures, protocols
and procedures
Developing Links, QA and lines of accountability to LA and Compact
Developing Links, QA and lines of accountability of satellite provision
PRU Academies
Cabinet and Compact have requested that Management Committees
consider Academy Conversion at a later date.
Certain elements of the new schools operations must be secure before
consideration is given:
•Budget Model - must work and be sustainable
•Business Support – must be in place
•Governance Structures – must be secure
•Buildings and Premises – issues with buildings must be resolved
•Pupil Referral Service – ensure all areas are working in a coordinated and
coherent way
There are different models of academy trusts that give a wide range of
flexibility
Collaborative Partnerships
Multi-Academy Trusts
Umbrella Trusts
Illustration 1 – Multi Academy Trust
Multi Academy Trust
Operates at a strategic
level with a board of
directors. The Multi
Academy Trust is a single
legal entity.
Academy 1 AP
Academy
The Academy
Trust could
establish a local
governing body
for the Academy,
appoint the
members of it and
decide what
powers to
delegate to it. It
However, control
always remains
with the central
Academy Trust.
Academy 2 AP
Academy
The Academy
Trust could
establish a local
governing body
for the Academy,
appoint the
members of it and
decide what
powers to
delegate to it. It
However, control
always remains
with the central
Academy Trust.
Academy 3 AP
Academy
The Academy
Trust could
establish a local
governing body
for the Academy,
appoint the
members of it and
decide what
powers to
delegate to it. It
However, control
always remains
with the central
Academy Trust.
Secretary of State Has a
master Funding Agreement
with the Multi Academy
Trust; and a separate
supplementary Funding
Agreement with the Multi
Academy Trust for each
Academy.
Academy 4 AP
Academy
The Academy Trust
could establish a
local governing
body for the
Academy, appoint
the members of it
and decide what
powers to delegate
to it. It However,
control always
remains with the
central Academy
Trust.
Illustration 2 – Umbrella Trust
Secretary of State Has an
individual funding agreement
with each academy trust
UmbrellaTrust
Established and
controlled at member and
governor level by the key
stakeholders – For eg
Could be the Compact.
School 1
AP School
The AP School
would have a
delegated budget
in agreement with
the Trust and
could establish a
local governing
body
School 2
AP School
The AP School
would have a
delegated budget
in agreement with
the Trust and
could establish a
local governing
body
Academy 1
AP Academy
Is a single legal
entity with an
individual funding
agreement with
the Secretary of
State. Members
and governors
appointed by
umbrella trust.
Agrees the governance
model with each academy
laid our in their articles
Academy 2
AP Academy
Is a single legal
entity with an
individual funding
agreement with the
Secretary of State.
Members and
governors
appointed by
umbrella trust.