Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families with reference to the answer of 19 February 2008, Official Report, column 511W, on home education, and the subsequent establishment of the Elective Home Education Review, if he will collect information centrally on the number of children home educated in each local authority area. 
Jim Knight: There are no current plans to collect information centrally about the number of home educated children. We will consider this and other aspects of our approach to home education after receiving the report of the recently commissioned review of home education.
Jim Knight: The Department has announced an independent review of home education. The review will assess the effectiveness of the current arrangements to ensure that any concerns about the safety, welfare or education of home educated children are addressed quickly and effectively. It will also investigate whether local authorities are providing the right type, level and balance of support to home educating families to ensure that they are undertaking their duties to provide a suitable full-time education to their children. Where necessary, the review will also make recommendations for improvements. The review will conclude with a published report in May 2009.
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Improving Information Sharing and Management Programme; and if he will make a statement; 
Beverley Hughes: The first IISaM survey which will establish the baseline is planned to take place later this year. It will include a section on ContactPoint, eCAF and ICS to be completed as appropriate by practitioners. Views will be sought from practitioners that use the system, based on their experiences of working with children, young people and families. The survey will be carried out annually and used with management information from the system to identify trends and track progress towards realising the benefits of each of the systems. The results of the survey will be collated at both national and local authority level.
ContactPoint has not yet been deployed. In August 2008, we announced that ContactPoint deployment would begin in January 2009. That remains the position and we are on track to deploy the first phase of ContactPoint before the end of January.
The full implementation of the Integrated Childrens System (ICS) is not yet complete. 12 local authorities have not yet implemented phase 1B of ICS, and no authority has yet implemented the final component, which deals primarily with looked-after children and family court processes. This work is due to take place during 2009-10. We will also take account of any recommendations relevant to the operation of ICS that may arise from Lord Lamings report.
The effectiveness of the Client Caseload Information System (CCIS) was assessed by the National Audit Office in its study of the Connexions Service in 2004. The tracking capability of the CCIS system and its capability to generate robust management information was explored and subsequently commended as a key lever in the national strategy to tackle the issue of 16 to 18-year-olds in England not in education, employment or training.
Sir Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families when he plans to reply to the letter of 17 November 2008 from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton on Mrs. R. Campion. 
Beverley Hughes: The Department for Children, Schools and Families has received a great deal of correspondence since November when the Baby P case was widely publicised and there has inevitably been a delay in responding to some letters. The correspondence referred to was answered on 15 January 2009.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) what risks the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority has identified in Key Stage 2 test delivery in 2009; and if he will make a statement; 
The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) is responsible for the administration of the key stage 2 (KS2) national curriculum tests. The QCA has assessed the overall risks for the delivery in
2009. The QCA has engaged additional support to identify, categorise and mitigate as much as possible, operational risks as they arise. In line with Lord Sutherlands recommendations on risk management, the QCA has reviewed and strengthened its risk management and escalation processes to provide greater visibility not only of the cause and effect of risks, but active monitoring of the planning, implementation and effect of mitigations and contingencies.
The Department has also further strengthened its existing governance arrangements and will closely monitor delivery arrangements for the 2009 test cycle, ensuring that the Department is able to both challenge and support the QCA to secure successful delivery of the 2009 test cycle. The new supplier, Edexcel, has a strong track record in delivery of tests and exams. The Department will be publishing a full response to Lord Sutherlands report later this month.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of schools will be taking the Key Stage 3 tests in 2009; and on what date a communication was sent to schools asking them about their participation in the tests; and if he will make a statement. 
Jim Knight: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families announced on 14 October 2008, Official Report, column 673, that Key Stage 3 (KS3) national curriculum tests would no longer be a statutory obligation. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) is responsible for the administration of the Key Stage 2 (KS2) national curriculum tests and for fulfilling orders for optional KS3 national curriculum tests.
At 19 January 2009, a total of 3,346 schools had ordered one or more KS3 national curriculum tests for 2009. A total of 4,158 schools ordered KS3 tests in 2008. The QCA has communicated the new arrangements to schools on five separate occasions from 17 October 2008 to 9 December 2008 via its test updates.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what discussions (a) he and (b) his Department has had with the Performing Right Society (PRS) on (i) the way in which they contact organisations who may need a PRS licence and (ii) the effect on very small businesses of having to pay for PRS licences; and if he will bring forward proposals to establish an independent complaints procedure to govern the PRS's activities. 
As the Minister for Intellectual Property I have met the PRS, and my officials have frequent exchanges with the PRS, in which these matters have been covered. The PRS have confirmed that by the end of January they will publish a draft Code of Practice governing customer relations, and establishing an independent complaints procedure. I will continue to follow this closely, and will want to see how stakeholders respond to that draft. As regards small businesses, as explained on 12 November
2008, Official Report, column. 917, it was suggested to the PRS that they reflect on the range and type of business which they licence.
Jim Knight: There is strong evidence to show significant wage and employment benefits for young people achieving well at school, compared to young people who do not attain. These benefits persist throughout people's lifetimes. There are also clear benefits of higher skill levels to the economy and to society. There are a number of studies looking at wage and employment benefits of qualifications. For example, research by the Centre for the Economics of Education found that people with five or more GCSEs at A*-C earn on average around 9-11 per cent. more than those without and are around 3 percentage points more likely to be employed. People achieving one to four GCSEs at A*-C earn a positive wage return of around 5 per cent. and are around 1-2 percentage points more likely to be employed than those without.
The Department is committed to enabling as many young people as possible to achieve their potential. Raising the participation age (RPA) from 2013 will be a key lever to improve the attainment of young people as they enter the labour market. Independently verified research estimates the economic benefits of raising the participation age to be around £2.4 billion per year group over the course of their lifetime. This research was published alongside the introduction of the Education and Skills Bill to the House in November 2007.
For further details of the methodology and data sources used to estimate the economic benefits of RPA (and the magnitude of the benefits under alternative scenarios), the full report is accessible at:
Mrs. Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) how frequently early years settings must apply for exemption from the early years foundation stage to sustain exempted status; 
Beverley Hughes: Providers can only apply for exemptions from the learning and development requirements of the EYFS (not the welfare requirements). Exemptions are time limited and vary between one and two years depending on the type of exemption granted. Further guidance on the exemption process and types of exemptions that can be applied are available on the QCA website. Since the introduction of the process in September 2008, one application for exemption has recently been received by the QCA.
Mr. Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what research his Department has evaluated into factors which contribute to disparities in achievement and attainment between primary school children. 
Jim Knight: The Department has commissioned and reviewed a wide range of evidence on the factors contributing to disparities in achievement and attainment at primary school. The main factors identified by research can be summarised as follows:
Family circumstances: Low family income has been shown to have an impact on childrens outcomes at school, even when controlling for the effect of other factors associated with deprivation(1). Similarly, family socioeconomic status is known to have a significant impact on cognitive outcomes(2). The level of education achieved by parents is also strongly associated with their childrens outcomes(3), as is parental involvement in education: in particular, the quality of the home learning environment varies between families(4) and has persistent effects during primary school(5).
The school effect: There is strong and robust evidence to suggest that regardless of the influence of family circumstances outlined above, schools are independently important for childrens outcomes. However, some schools are more effective than others, or effective in different ways(6). Analysis suggests that 17 per cent. of the unexplained variation in pupil value added scores between Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 can be explained by differences between schools(7). The school effect is multifaceted and complex, but we know that both teaching quality and leadership are two key components(8).
Long-term impact of early learning experiences: children who attend higher quality pre-school settings perform better at primary school than similar pupils who attend a lower quality pre-school or no pre-school(9).
Health: low birth weight and early health or developmental problems can be a significant influence on cognitive outcomes(10).
English as an additional language: performance at primary school has been shown to vary according to whether children are eligible for support with English as an additional language(11).
Special educational needs: children identified as having special educational needs (SEN) or who are registered as School Action Plus during Key Stage 2 demonstrate lower Key Stage 2 performance compared to similar pupils with no identified SEN, even when prior attainment and other characteristics are taken into account(12). Raw figures show that they are 52 percentage points behind children with no identified SEN on the national indicator of achieving Level 4 in both English and maths at Key Stage 2(13).
Mobility: on average, children who change school during Year 6 demonstrate lower Key Stage 2 performance compared to similar pupils who remain at the same school(14), even when accounting for prior attainment.
(1) Hobbs (2003); Feinstein et al (2004)
(2) Sammons et al (2007)
(3) Hobbs (2003)
(4) Sylva et al (2004)
(5) Sammons et al (2007)
(6) Feinstein et al (2004); Sammons et al (1995)
(7 )DfES (2004)
(8) Sammons et al. (2008); Leithwood et al (2006)
(9) Sammons et al (2007)
(10) Sammons et al (2007)
(11) Sammons et al (2007)
(12) From DCSF contextualised value-added modelling for 2007
(13) SFR38/2007 National Curriculum Assessment, GCSE and Equivalent Attainment and Post-16 Attainment by Pupil Characteristics, in England 2006/07
(14 )From DCSF contextualised value-added modelling for 2007
DfES (2004) Variations in Pupil Progress 2003. Statistical Bulletin.
Feinstein, L. Duckworth, K, and Sabates, R (2004) A Model of the Intergenerational Transmission of Educational Success. Wider Benefits of Learning Research Report 10. London: Institute of Education.
Hobbs (2003) Understanding socioeconomic group differences in educational achievement: a literature review. Background paper for the Department for Education and Skills/HM Treasury seminar on child poverty and education outcomes, 24 November 2003.
Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A., and Hopkins, D. (2006) Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. School Leadership and Management, Volume 28, Issue 1 February 2008, pages 27-42
Sammons, P., Hillman, J. and Mortimore, P. (1995). Key Characteristics of Effective Schools: A review of school effectiveness research. London: Ofsted
Sammons et al (2007) Summary Report: Influences on Childrens Attainment and Progress in Key Stage 2: Cognitive Outcomes in Year 5. DCSF Research Report 828.
Sammons, P., Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Siraj-Blatchford, I., Taggart, B., Barreau, S. and Grabbe, Y. (2008) Effective Pre-school and Primary Education 3-11 Project (EPPE 3-11) The Influence of School and Teaching Quality on Childrens Progress in Primary School. DCSF Research Report RR028
1. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I. and Taggart, B. (2004) The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project: Final Report.
Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many (a) male and (b) female pupils receiving free school meals received (i) one or more, (ii) five or more and (iii) 10 or more fixed period exclusions in each of the last 10 years. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: Data on the numbers of pupils with fixed period exclusions was collected for the first time for the school year 2003/04. However data linked to free school meal eligibility is only available for the school years 2005/06 and 2006/07.
|Primary, secondary and special schools( 1,2,3) P upils eligible to receive free school meals with one or more episodes of fixed period exclusion by gender( 4) , 2006/07 England
|Pupils eligible for free schools meals
|who received 1 to 4 fixed period exclusions
|who received 5 to 9 fixed period exclusions
|who received 10 or more fixed period exclusions
|who received 1 to 4 fixed period exclusions
|who received 5 to 9 fixed period exclusions
|who received 10 or more fixed period exclusions