The Malorees Orchard - the freehold was donated to the junior school by Network Housing
A week into the school summer holiday the Brent Cabinet will decide to go ahead with the amalgamation of Malorees Infant and Junior Schools at Mondays Cabinet despite opposition from the majority of respondents to the statutory consultation and the NEU group at the schools.
The Cabinet report outlines consultation responses:
There were 89 individual responses to the formal consultation, compared to 115 during the informal consultation. Three respondents sent two separate responses and for the purposes of this analysis their comments have been grouped together and will be considered as a single response from each.
In addition, a bulk submission was received in the post of a duplicate letter that had been signed by 46 respondents, 5 of whom also submitted an individual response.
Of the individual responses, 18 (20.2%) indicated support for the proposal which was more than in the informal consultation and one from staff included12 signatories. 61 individual responses (68.5%) indicated an objection to the proposal and 10 (11.3%) commented on the proposal without indicating either support or objection.
- Of the individual respondents indicating an objection to the proposal:
- 43 expressed concern over the financial impact resulting from the amalgamation.
- 38 suggested that the consultation was either flawed or lacked clarity or transparency.
- 33 expressed concern over the uncertainty of the rebuild project.
- 32 suggested that an amalgamation had no benefit or was not in the school or children’s best interests.
- 24 expressed concern over the transfer of Malorees Junior School land to the council.
- 8 suggested that the assumptions presented in the statutory proposal were either wrong or optimistic.
- One suggested that the amalgamation would result in redundancies.
- Five respondents indicated an objection without including additional comments.
- In a letter to the Governing Board, 30 of the 67 staff at the school stated their objection to the proposal due to the loss of circa £180K of funding from the school budget because of the amalgamation, despite support for the whole school building project. This view was shared with the Local Authority outside of the consultation time frame by the school’s NEU representative.
The Authority admits to a mistake at the informal consultation stage (my emphasis):
The Q&A section of the informal consultation document stated in error that if the majority of respondents did not support the proposal, then it would not proceed. The document should have made it clear that the merits of any concerns or arguments would also be taken into account. This was raised as a concern at the Cabinet meeting on 7 April, when the decision was taken to proceed to statutory consultation.
They argue that they went above and beyond what was legally required at the formal stage:
The formal consultation has been carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and by following the statutory process set out in Department for Education guidance Making Significant Changes to Maintained Schools and Opening and Closing Maintained Schools. During the formal consultation process, the Local Authority and the Governing Board did more than is required under the statutory process to listen to views and provide reassurance to stakeholders to address concerns that information had not been shared openly and transparently during the informal consultation. This includes a meeting with parent representatives and providing parents with a detailed Q&A document on 19 May 2025.
They admit that there may be refurbishment, rather than a completely new building for the amalgamated school;
Uncertainty over the capital investment proposals: The Governing Board and Brent Council acknowledge the responses that raise concerns about the certainty of the capital investment proposals, including whether the schools will be rebuilt or significantly refurbished. Whilst a new school building will always be a preference, and one that will be advocated by the Governing Board and the Local Authority, a significant refurbishment will also provide a vast improvement to the current buildings and the learning and working environment.
They rely on undertakings from the DfE although despite current very tight budgets and escalating building costs:
The Governing Board and the Local Authority have a written commitment from the DfE to the delivery of a single capital investment solution for both Malorees Infant and Junior schools as part of the School Rebuilding Programme if the schools are amalgamated as one school by April 2026. While the full details of the project are not yet known, the DfE is already progressing a one-school solution which has involved to date undertaking significant survey work of both school buildings and sites. The DfE has provided an indicative project timeline that anticipates the project scope to be determined in the autumn term, for planning permission to be submitted by June 2026, for construction works to start in September 2026 and project completion to take place by December 2027. The DfE is being proactive in ensuring the capital build project moves forwards swiftly with the full involvement of school leaders and governors in the decision-making process. As more information on the project becomes available this will be shared with children, parents and staff on a regular basis.
There has been confusion over the financial loss to the schools of amalgamation, tha basis of the NEU's fears, and the details are set out:
Financial Impact: Upon amalgamation the combined school will only be eligible for one lump sum (an allocation from the Dedicated Schools Grant provided to individual schools to support fixed costs that is currently £170,000 a year) and one sports premium allocation (£16,600 a year). The lump sum reduction will be tapered over 3 years starting at the earliest in the 2026/27 financial year. From the financial year after amalgamation, as one school there would be a reduction of 30% of the lump sum currently allocated to the Junior School plus the whole of the sports premium lump sum, equating to circa £67,000 based on the current funding allocation. In the following year, the school would lose 60% of the one lump sum (£102,000) and by 2028/9 the whole of one lump sum.
Again the Council is confident that this can be handled:
Alongside potential savings from reduced administrative and subscription costs, a significant reduction in maintenance costs is expected following capital investment in the school’s buildings through a single capital investment solution within the DfE’s School Rebuilding Programme. The school currently incurs a minimum of £50,000 general maintenance costs a year linked to the poor condition of the buildings that will not be required going forward, with the current financial outturn confirming over £100,000 of spend. These costs would continue to increase given the condition of current school buildings. Capital investment will also make the school’s accommodation more energy efficient, saving expenditure on energy costs (estimated as up to £5000 a year).
The Cabinet paper argues that an amalgamated school will be more popular with parents and that pupil numbers would increase when Islamia (if?) moves out of the area to the Leopold site (consultation in progress).
The Council states that they have no plans for the additional land, including the orchard that they would take over and promise it would remain educational land, needing permission of the DfE to dispose of for any other purpose.
Cllr Gwen Grahl, lead member for schools, summarises the local authority's perspective:
Where infant and junior schools choose to amalgamate, this is supported by the Local Authority for the many benefits for children, staff and the school,including consistent leadership and teaching practices, a single overarching identity for the school and the wider community and strengthened sustainability through economies of scale.
No comments:
Post a Comment