Agenda item

Please introduce yourself and outline your role and responsibilities.

I am the Extended Services Lead Manager in CFE, and also have responsibility for Healthy Schools.  I was recently the project lead of the Community Use of Schools (CUS) project. Members have a copy of the project report. 

The project arose out of a desire to review the community use element of the core offer and the impact that extended services had had in increasing the use of secondary school sites for community use. The project focussed on structured community use of school premises.  It links to Total Place, as the project suggests that the appropriate way forward, and the way that the Extended Services team has worked to date, is to work with the community and local partners to assess the facilities which are needed in a community and asks how local schools might be able to help meet them. The aim is not to endanger other providers of community activities, such as village halls, but to identify gaps and assess the ability of schools to fill these gaps.  As part of the project, survey work was undertaken with schools and was overseen by a steering group, with representatives from schools, CFE and other KCC directorates.

What could the CUS project achieve in terms of ES?

The aim was to explore greater structured and organised use of school sites, working with partners, and to highlight the opportunities and challenges for developing areas of the premises that the school could use in the day and the community could use outside school hours.

Have academies embraced community use?

Some have. The historic relationship which exists between a school and its community affects the way both parties might view any kind of link, like ES.

In its options for moving forward, the CUS document recommends identifying the facilities which are available at a school and how these can be marketed for ES use, and the need to lease facilities at a market rate.

For some schools we do not have complete information about the full range of facilities available.  Some work needs to be done on this, and on the issue of tracking the level of lettings happening on school sites at any point in time.  I don’t know how feasible this work will be with the resources I have available.

Some facilities and organisations promote using the letting fee paid by one user, perhaps a commercial enterprise, to cover or reduce the costs to other users, perhaps volunteer bodies.  Is there anything to stop a school adopting this model?

No, as long as community use of the school does not deplete the school’s own funds.  A commercial hirer could pay a commercial rate to hire the premises, and this would cover the initial costs of opening up the building and employing the caretaker. While the premises are open, other users who are not able to pay such a rate can use other parts of the premises at a ‘subsidised’, reduced rate.  It is possible to learn much from the arrangements which have been trialled in various premises, eg PFI schools such as Swan Valley. I have discussed this with KCC Commercial Services to see if this model can be used to encourage community use of school sites.

Herne Bay High School PFI has developed its sports facilities for community use.  Please could you supply the SC with a briefing of other examples of best practice and what can be achieved?

Yes.  I am happy to arrange for this to be done and brought back to the select committee.

What are the challenges and barriers to increased community use of school premises?

Much school building stock was not built with wider community use in mind, and its layout and facilities, eg toilets and changing rooms, are not suitable for public use. In Building Schools for the Future (BSF), a key part of the plans has to cover how the premises would lend themselves to community use.  For primary schools, some funding is available to address small issues, such as increasing the security of a school site or changing the access point.  Many district and borough councils do marketing to promote their facilities to the community, often by using a database of community facilities.  One option could be about making schools aware of the opportunities to link into this.  The information available is not necessarily new, but could just be combined or used differently.  The quality of some school facilities remains an obstacle and would need some investment.

What investment is available?  Is there some funding that schools are not aware of?

There has been Extended Services capital funding for primary school for a few years, but this is only £600,000 this financial year for the whole county.  Schools have benefitted from investment to increase disabled access, for example, or to make small improvements such as adding a sink.  Under BSF, these improvements will be built in from the start.

The CUS report is concerned only with secondary schools. Are there plans to do the same for primary schools? We should not ignore the resources available in our primary schools.

There is a piece of work to be done in the future about primary schools.  We did involve some primary school colleagues in the forums for the CUS project, and we found that many of the issues in secondary schools are shared by primary schools.

How does the level of KCC control over secondary schools and primary schools differ?

We do not have any more control over primary schools than we do over secondary, as the authority to run a school is delegated to the governing body.

Can we lobby Ofsted to make ‘community engagement’ a more prominent part of a school’s inspection?

In Ofsted inspections, schools are asked questions about ‘community cohesion’. 

As part of the planning process for BSF, is there any template for community use?

No. Funding for BSF is calculated in terms of classroom space.  To benefit community use, designed space would need to be more flexible and capable of being used for classroom teaching as well as other activities.

Is the KCC pushing, or could it puch, for specific space/features in BSF plans to allow future community use?

Yes.

Could SC Members attend a Governors’ meeting at which BSF plans are being discussed, to see the issues involved at the planning stage?

Yes, this is feasible. It would help if other local partners were involved in this process at an earlier stage.

We have been told that Head Teachers have power in a school but it is the governing body which runs it.  So should those wishing to introduce ES/Community use of the school talk to the governing body instead?

This would have to be by the invitation of the governing body.

In new school provision under BSF, we could think bigger. Partners could work with KCC, and regeneration colleagues could link in to the BSF agenda. It would be helpful for the SC to have a briefing paper on best practice and the KCC’s role.

A good example of what can be done is at Canterbury High School, where a community space has been designed in a new building. The school also has a Community Youth Tutor scheme.

How can KCC ensure sustainable and effective ES into the future, given that government finding is due to end in March 2011?

To date, we have had the core offer from the government and had our ability to meet it measured. This core offer gives the framework for discussions between schools and partner organisations, including other schools, to optimise the scope for working together.  I feel that there is now a clear opportunity for KCC to identify its own Kent version of the core offer to give schools clear direction and vision for the future, to achieve the best progress for the benefit of children, young people and the community with the resources available. 

Much of the work done on ES has been about working in partnership and contributing funding to work with partners and other KCC directorates and teams, eg Bookstart and Y2Crew jointly with ES and Libraries and ES and the Youth Service, respectively.  ES is key, but with my team in an enabler role, linking with others.