|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
the quality of leadership is generally very good.
Mr. Olner: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether local authorities are required to submit proposals that include an academy as part of the bid process for capital funding under the Building Schools for the Future programme. 
Jim Knight: Authorities do not have to have academies or submit further proposals for academies in order to access Building Schools for the Future (BSF) funding. They must demonstrate how they will use BSF to raise standards in schools. Strategy for Change guidance makes clear that local authorities should undertake a proper and objective evaluation of academy options when developing their plans. Where an authority does not propose an academy as replacement for a poorly performing maintained school, it must be demonstrated that an equally strong alternative, innovative strategy is in place for raising standards at the school.
Jim Knight: £100,000 of capital grant has been paid to Coventry local authority in respect of project support funding for Building Schools for the Future (BSF). The total capital investment for the Coventry BSF programme will be agreed when the project reaches financial close.
Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families with reference to the answer of 22 July 2008, Official Report, column 1275W, on children: employment, what plans he has to amend regulations relating to the employment of children; and if he will make a statement. 
Beverley Hughes: We do not currently have plans to amend the regulations relating to the employment of children. The Department for Children, Schools and Families has however issued guidance, in December 2008, on the existing law regulating child employment.
Beverley Hughes: The Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (2000) is used for the assessment of all children in need, including cases where there are concerns that a child may be suffering significant harm. The framework provides a systematic basis for collecting and analysing information to support professional judgments about how to help children and families in the best interests of the child. Practitioners should use the framework to gain an understanding of the impact of wider family and environmental factors including adequate housing on the parents and child.
Judgments taken by practitioners should take careful account of a number of issues on housing, such as: does the accommodation have basic amenities and facilities appropriate to the age and development of the child and other resident members and is the housing accessible and suitable to the needs of disabled family members? They should consider the interior and exterior of the accommodation and immediate surroundings and the provision of basic amenities including water, heating, sanitation, cooking facilities, sleeping arrangements and cleanliness, hygiene and safety and their impact on the child's upbringing.
If the family are social tenants, or on the housing register, the issues practitioners should take into account may contribute to the family being awarded preference in a local authority's allocation scheme. The circumstances in which households need to be given "reasonable preference" include where people:
occupy unsanitary, overcrowded, or unsatisfactory housing conditions;
need to move for medical or welfare reasons, including grounds relating to a disability; or
need to move to avoid hardship
Helen Southworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families when he plans to publish the results of the review on the availability of emergency accommodation for children and young people at risk. 
Beverley Hughes: Since the publication of the Young Runaways Action Plan in June last year, the Department has been conducting a review of emergency accommodation provision for young runaways. A review of existing literature has been completed, and we have commissioned The Children's Society to conduct new research about the demand for emergency accommodation, and the most effective ways of providing it. As part of their research, the Children's Society have interviewed local authority officials, police officers, third sector partners and young people themselves. The evidence gathering phase is due to be completed in early May, and I anticipate that my officials will receive a draft of the report in early July. We will publish the findings of the report as soon as possible after that.
Jenny Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of IT products in each category procured for each division of his Department were compliant with the Governments Buy Sustainable-Quick Win standard in the latest year for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: The information as requested is not held centrally within the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF). To respond accurately and to establish how many and what proportion of IT products in each category procured for each division of the Department were compliant with the Governments Buy Sustainable-Quick Win standard in the latest year would involve an extensive information collection exercise which would exceed the recommended disproportionate cost threshold. However, to be helpful, the following information has been provided.
For all core and commonly purchased IT products the Department informs potential suppliers that they must first provide details of their compliance or otherwise with the Governments Buy Sustainable-Quick Win standard detailed at
Mr. Graham Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families which officials from his Department were present at the meeting of 17 June 2008 between the Minister for Schools and David Gee; who took the minutes of that meeting; and if he will make a statement. 
[holding answer 28 April 2009]: I met with David Gee on 17 June 2008 to discuss National Curriculum testing. Also present at the meeting were
the Chief Adviser for School Standards, the assessment team leader, and my Private Secretary, who took a note of the meeting.
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: It is crucial that all young people leave school with the skills and confidence to manage their money well. The revised curriculum for secondary schools introduced in September 2008, includes a new dedicated programme of study for Economic Well Being and Financial Capability as part of a revised Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education. We have also said that, subject to consultation, we will make PSHE, which is currently non-statutory, part of the statutory national curriculum. Elements of financial capability are also delivered through other curriculum subjects. For example, Citizenship education, which is statutory at Key Stage 3 and 4, requires that 14 to 16-year-olds be taught how the economy functions, including the role of business and financial services. We are also introducing functional mathematics to the maths GCSE, which means that from 2010, all pupils who achieve a grade C or above will have mastered the basics.
We are spending £11.5 million over three years to support delivery of financial education in schools. This money has been used to update and publish the curriculum guidance for financial capability in November 2008. It is funding the My Money programme, which delivers high quality training and support for local authorities and teachers so that they have the skills and confidence to teach effectively about personal finance. It also funds provision for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) in financial capability for teachers.
Jon Cruddas: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) what mechanism exists for the reappraisal of eligibility for education maintenance allowance as a result of changes in household income; 
(2) what effect the redundancy of a family member in a household has on a young person's eligibility for education maintenance allowance if the redundancy occurs (a) at the start of the academic year and (b) later in the academic year; 
(3) what mechanism is in place for the assistance of young people in households where income changes significantly in the course of an academic year as a result of (a) bereavement and (b) redundancy within the household; 
(5) how many representations his Department has received on the reassessment of the eligibility for education maintenance allowance following the redundancy of a family member in the last 12 months. 
Jim Knight: For most young people, eligibility for education maintenance allowance (EMA) is subject to an assessment of their household income based on the financial year prior to the academic year in which they start their course. A successful assessment provides a young person with a guaranteed entitlement of up to three years of EMA on the same rate, plus a guaranteed minimum level of non-repayable student support should they progress into higher education within three years.
If there is a drop in income from one year to the next then a young person may apply to be reassessed for the subsequent academic year. They could be assessed as eligible for EMA where they were not previously, or an increased rate of it. They would receive the EMA guarantee based on the rate awarded following the most recent assessment.
(i) someone whose income was taken into account in determining financial eligibility has died;
(ii) a person whose income was taken into account in determining financial eligibility has experienced a reduction in income due to their own disability, or the disability of any other person for whom he or she has responsibility as primary carer (disability means as defined in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995);
(iii) Since the assessment of income was made, the young person has become estranged from their parents, guardians or someone else whose income was taken into account in determining financial eligibility;
(iv) The young person has become a parent with responsibility for their own child.
The financial needs of young people can be affected by a range of circumstances, including reductions in household income due to redundancy, or reduced working hours. EMA is not designed or intended to meet all of a learner's financial needs or to respond to in year fluctuations to household income. Other mechanisms exist to help with the costs of supporting young people aged 16 to 19 in learning. Recent increases to child benefit will provide additional support for parents regardless of income, and the increase to the child element of the child tax credit, a measure brought forward in the Budget, will provide substantial additional support to families. Tax credits are designed to tailor support to current circumstances and to be responsive to changing needs.
In addition to the support provided to families, discretionary learner support funds are made available via the Learning and Skills Council to colleges and Local Authorities. This funding is provided to enable schools and colleges, using their discretion, to help individual learners facing hardship and financial barriers to learning that are not addressed through other mechanisms. This funding can be used to respond to any hardship needs of learners that may arise through sudden changes in circumstance.
In the last 12 months the Department has responded to 21 pieces of correspondence and one telephone inquiry concerning reassessment for EMA following redundancy in the learner's household. The Learning and Skills Council (LSC) are responsible for the delivery of the scheme and estimate that, between 1 March 2008 and 1 March 2009, approximately 10 per cent. of the correspondence they have received about EMA (including that sent on via the Department) concerned income assessment policya proportion of these will have been in regard to in-year reassessment following a redundancy.
Jim Knight: This is a matter for the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) who operate the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) for the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF). Geoffrey Russell, the LSC's Acting Chief Executive, will write to the hon. Member for Coventry South with the information requested and a copy of his reply will be placed in the House Libraries.
Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what steps he is taking to ensure that schools and sixth form colleges in Torridge and West Devon constituency will be able to accept the number of pupils foreseen under the original budget allocation for 2009-10; and if he will make a statement. 
Jim Knight: We have been working across Government to identify additional funding for the recent unanticipated surge in demand for education and training in part due to these exceptional economic times. Thanks to the £655 million funding announcement in the Budget, we will be able to deliver this and more, and fund learning for an additional 54,500 young people this year and next. The funding is split, £251 million in 2009-10 and £404 million in 2010-11, and will fund an additional 54,500 learners each year. This will mean that we have funding for at least 1,550,000 for 2009/10 and 2010/11.
This will mean we can quickly reassure school and college leaders who had previously feared their financial allocations would not fund their growth in the number of young people wanting to continue learning. It will also mean that we can fund a further 20,000 young people who have yet to make their choice of learning place.
Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families if he will make an assessment of the (a) effectiveness and (b) availability of the provision by local authorities of family information services under the Childcare Act 2006. 
Beverley Hughes: The Department for Children, Schools and Families recently published an evaluation of Family Information Services (FIS) in England. The evaluation included a user satisfaction survey, a survey of FIS managers and some case studies. It was commissioned to gauge the progress local authorities were making in implementing their statutory duty, set out in section 12 of the Childcare Act 2006, to provide information to parents about child care and other services to support their children up to age 19. This broader duty came into force in April 2008 and the field work for the evaluation was carried out between June and November 2008.
97 per cent. of those who contacted the service said they were satisfied with the advice they received.
85 per cent. of those who had previously gone to another organisation with similar queries said the advice they received from the FIS was better or as good.
All offered a telephone helpline (100 per cent.) and email helpline (100 per cent.).
The vast majority offered a website for information (99 per cent.) and access through Children's Centres (95 per cent.).
97 per cent. of managers said their FIS provided outreach services of some kind and 50 per cent. said they had increased outreach to assist in the delivery of the extended information duty. Outreach was mainly conducted through Children's Centres (82 per cent.), events in the community (56 per cent.), health centres (51 per cent.) and schools (48 per cent.).
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|