|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
21 Jan 2008 : Column 1730Wcontinued
Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the amount of guaranteed funding per school pupil in Hendon is from the (a) dedicated schools grant and (b) other specific grants in (i) 2007-08 and (ii) 2008-09. 
Jim Knight: The Department allocates education so funding to local authorities the requested information for the Hendon constituency is not available. The guaranteed unit of funding per pupil for Barnet local authority for 2007-08 was £4,344 and for 2008-09 it will be £4,559. We do not apply a guaranteed unit of funding to specific grants.
Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many schools in Hendon were inspected by Ofsted in the last 12 months; what the outcome was of each inspection; and if he will make a statement. 
Jim Knight: This is a matter for Ofsted. Her Majestys chief inspector of schools, Christine Gilbert, has written to my hon. Friend and a copy of her reply has been placed in the Library.
Letter from Christine Gilbert, dated 14 January 2008:
Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as Her Majestys Chief Inspector, for a response.
Ofsted has inspected 18 schools in Hendon constituency in the last 12 months from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2007. The grades and the date on which they were inspected are shown in the table below.
|URN||Inspection date||Grade||School name|
Ofsted has four categories for grading school inspection: grade 1 is outstanding, grade 2 good, grade 3 satisfactory, and grade 4 inadequate. Grade 1 is exceptionally and consistently high, grade 2 is generally above average with no criteria significantly below average, grade 3 is broadly average, and grade 4 is exceptionally low. Grade 4 schools can either be placed in special measures or be given a notice to improve.
A copy of this reply has been sent to Jim Knight MP, Minister of State for Schools and Learners and will be placed in the library of both Houses.
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what discussions he has had with officials on changes to numbers of teaching staff resulting from the reorganisation of schools on the Isle of Wight. 
Jim Knight: I have had no discussions with officials on changes to numbers of teaching staff resulting from the reorganisation of schools on the Isle of Wight. This is entirely a matter for the local authority.
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families who would be responsible for funding for redundancies arising from the reorganisation of schools on the Isle of Wight. 
Jim Knight: It will be the responsibility of Isle of Wight council to fund any redundancy payments that may result from the reorganisation of schools on the island for which the council is responsible.
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what estimate he has made of the cost of redundancy payments brought about by the reorganisation of schools on the Isle of Wight. 
Jim Knight: No estimates have been made in respect of any redundancies that may result from the reorganisation of schools on the Isle of Wight, as these decisions are a matter for local determination.
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether his Department has conducted a study of the effect of the reorganisation of schools on the Isle of Wight on the number of road miles driven and car journeys made to travel to schools. 
Jim Knight: No such study has been undertaken by the Department. It is for local authorities to decide how best to organise the schools in their areas in the light of local circumstances. Concerns about the proposal should therefore be directed to Isle of Wight council.
In making proposals, authorities must consider the implications for school travel and transport, and the Departments statutory guidance to decision-makers makes clear that they should bear in mind that proposals should not unreasonably extend journey times or increase transport costs. In addition, the proposals should not result in too many children being prevented from walking or cycling to school because routes are unsuitable.
Mr. Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many educational establishments in receipt of funding from his Department are accommodated in listed buildings; and how many of these have been designated as in need of significant repair. 
Jim Knight: The Department does not hold information on which educational buildings are listed.
The bulk of schools capital is allocated by formula to authorities and schools, so that they can address their local asset management planning priorities, including any necessary repairs to listed buildings. Schools decide on the amount of revenue funding to allocate to building repairs and maintenance.
Central Government capital support for investment in schools has increased from under £700 million in 1996-97 to £6.4 billion in 2007-08, and will rise further to £8 billion by 2010-11. While reducing maintenance requirements is a long-term aim, the primary objectives for funding are to raise educational standards and tackle local deprivation. A substantial proportion of capital funding is targeted at transformational programmes, such as Building Schools for the Future and the primary capital programmes. Over time, these programmes will significantly reduce future maintenance requirements.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of funding arrangements outside centralised programmes for the allocation of resources to ensure that schools are properly maintained; and if he will make a statement. 
Jim Knight: The Department does not collect the information requested from schools or local authorities. It is the responsibility for each local authority and its schools to make decisions locally on repairs and maintenance.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much funding was allocated to each local authority to support small rural schools in the latest year for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. 
Jim Knight: The allocation formula for dedicated schools grant (DSG) does not separately allocate money to support small rural schools; it starts from local authorities spending on schools for 2005-06, which is closely related to the formula for schools formula spending shares in use that year. That formula took account of the needs of sparsely populated authorities to keep open small rural primary schools, using an indicator of sparsity. The following table sets out estimated amounts within 2007-08 allocations of DSG, derived from the amounts allocated through the schools FSS formula in 2005-06 on the basis of sparsity, updated appropriately.
|Authority||Estimated amount for sparsity (£ million)|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|