|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) what plans his Department has to review the rules on the transferability of Criminal Records Bureau checks on teachers; 
(2) what assessment his Department has made of the effects of the rules relating to the transferability of Criminal Records Bureau checks on the (a) ability of schools to recruit suitable teachers on temporary contracts and (b) cost of recruitment of such teachers. 
Beverley Hughes: The Department has no plans to review the rules on the transferability of Enhanced Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) Disclosures. We are not aware of any adverse effects arising from the rules relating to transferability. We are aware of the fact that there are often extra costs relating to temporary teachers if their employers insist on new disclosures every time they change post or agency. This is, however, the decision of individual employers and not a result of our guidance to schools and teaching supply agencies. We issued our principal guidance document on safeguarding for schools, Safeguarding Children and Safer Recruitment in Education in 2006. In that guidance we clearly set out that CRB Enhanced Disclosure certificates could be reused by teachers moving schools, local authorities or further education colleges, provided that all other recommended safer recruitment checks had been carried out satisfactorily and that the gap between their leaving their old employment and taking up their new post was not more than three months. The CRB has produced a comprehensive Portability Framework document which sets out the issues relating to the reuse of Disclosure certificates, which can obtained from the CRB website at
The Departments Educational Procurement Centre (EPC) is currently undertaking a Temporary Workers in Education project. it aims to provide schools (initially in London) with an accessible, quality-driven electronic one stop shop for their temporary support staff requirements. All participating agencies will hold the DCSF Recruitment Employment Confederation (REC) Quality Mark, thereby meeting the requirements of the Safeguarding Children and Safer Recruitment in Education guidance. All London boroughs will be able to benefit from a safe and value- adding central service, reducing their own resourcing requirement in relation to temporary staff.
Mr. Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many plasma television screens have been purchased by his Department and its predecessor and its agencies, and at what cost, in the last 24 months. 
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families for what reasons the bid by the Warriner School, Bloxham, to run a diploma in environmental and land-based studies for 2009 was turned down. 
Jim Knight: The Gateway process aims to ensure high-quality delivery of the new, innovative diploma qualifications from the outset, creating sound foundations of good practice and delivery experience for the wider drive towards the 2013 entitlement.
The application for Environmental and Land Based Studies from the North Oxfordshire 14-19 Partnership was not approved because the consortiums did not provide sufficient information to show that it understood the full requirements of the new diploma, or that it had arrangements across the consortium to deliver the full range of the diploma. Employer engagement across the breadth of the diploma line also needed significant strengthening.
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families when he will answer parliamentary question (a) 17956 tabled on 14 November 2007, (b) 176819 tabled on 18 December 2007, (c) 174262 174261 and (d) 174260 tabled on 11 December 2007, (e) 173245 tabled on 6 December 2007, (f) 172551 tabled on 4 December 2007, (g) 172102 tabled on 3 December 2007, (h) 170786 tabled on 28 November 2007, (i) 169794 tabled on 27 November 2007, (j) 165755 tabled on 14 November 2007, (k) 163325, 163541 163208 and 163099 tabled on
7 November 2007 by the hon. Member for Yeovil; and what the reason is for the time taken in answering them. 
Kevin Brennan: The Department has responded to all the aforementioned parliamentary questions. We were informed that PQ 165755 had been withdrawn, as the text of the PQ was identical to PQ 163222 which has received a full reply.
Mr. Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families when he expects to answer questions (a) 181521 and (b) 181612 on departmental travel, tabled on 21 January 2008 by the hon. Member for Taunton; and what the reason is for the time taken to respond. 
Following the Machinery of Government Changes on 28 June 2007 the Department relies on management information supplied by the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills to answer parliamentary questions relating to departmental matters. This has an impact on the time taken to respond to parliamentary questions.
Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many of the proposed intensive intervention projects in the Youth Taskforce Action Plan will be based in rural areas. 
Beverley Hughes: The areas in which intensive intervention projects will be based have not yet been selected. In order to establish these areas the Department for Children, Schools and Families will use an open competition selection process in which all top-tier local authorities will be eligible to submit a bid to apply for funding to set up an intensive intervention project in their area. The Department hopes to see strong bids for intensive intervention projects coming from local authorities across the country.
David T.C. Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much his Department and its predecessors paid to Zurich Financial Services in each year since 1997; and what the purpose of the payment was in each case. 
Ed Balls: I can confirm that the Department for Children, Schools and Families and its predecessor the Department for Education and Skills have no record of any payments to a supplier Zurich Financial Services during the last nine years. The Department does not hold data prior to the financial year 1999-2000.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many children were reported missing from social services care in each of the last five years; how many were missing for over one month, how many were missing for more than three months and how many were missing for more than six months. 
Kevin Brennan: The number of children looked after who were reported missing from care in each of the last five years for over one month (more than 30 days), more than three months (more than 90 days) and more than six months (more than 180 days) is shown in the following table. Where a child was reported missing from his or her agreed placement on more than one occasion during the same year, he or she has been counted only once.
|Children looked after who were reported missing during the years ending 31 March 2003 to 2007( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) England|
|Children missing from placement during the year ending 31 March:||2003( 5)||2004( 6)||2005( 6)||2006( 6)||2007( 6)|
|(1) Source: SSDA903 return on children looked after.|
(2) Children looked after at any time during the year ending 31 March.
(3) Figures exclude children looked after under an agreed series of short term placements.
(4) A child is recorded with a missing placement if he/she is absent for more than 24-hours from his/her agreed placement. Children who are missing from care are categorised in three types of missing placements:
(a) In Refuge for children at risk, as defined in Section 51 of Children Act 1989, (b) Whereabouts of young people know to social services (but not in refuge) excluding agreed absences from placement such as holidays or planned breaks, (c) Whereabouts unknown.
(5) Figures are taken from the SSDA903 one-third sample survey.
(6) Figures are taken from the SSDA903 return which since 2004 covered all looked after children.
(7) Historical figures may differ from older publications. This is mainly due to the implementation of amendments and corrections sent by some local authorities after the publication date of previous materials.
(8) To maintain the confidentiality of each individual child, data at national level are rounded to the nearest 100 if they exceed 1,000 or to the nearest 10 otherwise, placement.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what promotional items bearing the departmental logo have been commissioned by his Department since its establishment. 
Kevin Brennan [holding answer 20 March 2008]: The Department has commissioned ballpoint pens with its corporate logo printed on the barrel. These were for promotional use, primarily at the Education Show 2008 in Birmingham. It has commissioned 'Post-it Notes', A4 and A5 paper pads, and cotton carry bags with its logo to support the launch of the Parent Know-How initiative. It has also commissioned ballpoint pens, mugs and cotton carry bags with its logo to promote Sure Start Children's Centres.
Mr. Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what estimate he has made of the number of breakfast clubs in Bexley schools; and what steps his Department is taking to encourage their creation. 
Providing access to activities before school, including breakfast clubs, is a part of the extended schools core offer. In the London borough of Bexley there are 57 schools providing access to the core offer of extended services, which may be through a cluster of local schools or other providers.
|Full day care providers( 1)|
|(1) Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10 if under 100, and to the nearest 100 if over 100.|
Ofsted data on closures include registered places in settings which are transferring ownership, and in settings which move from one Ofsted category to another, not just in those which are ceasing trading. For example, if a full day care provider moved to offering sessional provision, this would be recorded as a closed full day care setting and an opened sessional day care setting. The Ofsted data therefore exaggerates the true extent of turnover.
Ofsted has produced figures on the numbers of registered child care providers and places on a quarterly basis from March 2003. Its latest figures were published in its report Registered Childcare Providers and Places, December 2007, which is available on its website,
A copy of this SFR is in the Library. Information on the number of places in PRUs is not collected centrally so information on the number of pupils on roll in PRUs, excluding dually registered pupils, has been provided instead.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|