Defence CommitteeFurther written evidence from the Ministry of Defence

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOLLOWING THE ORAL EVIDENCE SESSION WITH RT HON MARK FRANCOIS MP,
LIEUTENANT GENERAL BERRAGAN, MARTIN BULL AND GAVIN BARLOW ON 23 APRIL 2013

Questions 460–463: Please provide detail about a DfE record system which can track the performance of schools on a daily, weekly and monthly basis

The DfE has no facility to monitor school performance on a daily, weekly or monthly basis. School-level test and examination results at the end KS2, KS4 and KS5 are published annually in the School & College Performance Tables at www.education.gov.uk/schools/performance . These include breakdowns of performance of particular groups such as Disadvantaged Pupils.

However, we do have the National Pupil Database (NPD), a pupil level database which matches pupil and school characteristic data to pupil level attainment. The School Census completed by state schools is the key source of data held on the NPD for pupil characteristics such as ethnicity, a low-income marker, information on Special Education Needs, and a history of schools attended.

There is also the RAISE online system, which can be accessed securely by local authorities, schools and Ofsted inspectors. It uses the underlying data found on Performance Tables which can be presented in a variety of reports and analyses. Schools can also use their own internal management information systems to carry out regular reviews of progress being made by individual pupils, specific pupil groups (such as those receiving Service Premium).

Question 475: The Committee was told that there are about 2,000 Service children with Special Educational Needs. Please confirm the actual figure

The figure of 2000 reflected only those registered with CEAS; RN and RAF parents are not required to register their children, and some Army parents elect not to do so. CEAS/SCE track SEN numbers accurately overseas, where MOD has statutory responsibility for doing so, but within the UK this responsibility remains with the DfE and devolved equivalents.

The most recent DfE Census identified 925 Service Children registered with a statement (1.6% of the total number of Service Children), and a further 7,240 with SEN but without a statement (11.2% of the total number of Service Children).

In Question 356 (of the 16 April session): The Committee was told in that the number of Service children is 64,500, therefore do you agree that 3.1% of Service children have Special Educational Needs.

The DfE answer to Q475 above provides the agreed percentage.

Question 477: Please provide figures on the percentage of children with Special Educational Needs in the UK population as a whole

Only data for England can be provided. In 2012, 226,125 children were registered with a statement of SEN (2.8% of the school population). A further 1,392,215 pupils have SEN without statements (17.0% of the school population) (Statistical First Release 14/2012, Special Educational Needs in England, January 2012). The majority (53.7%) of children with statements were taught in mainstream schools and 39% were taught in maintained special schools (SFR 14/2012):

“It may be helpful in that process if you could do us a note. Earlier, I think Mr Bull said that there were 2,000 children on the register. Will you let us know what percentage of the total number of services children that represents? Is that proportionately higher or lower than the national average, including the devolved Administrations? With that, would you include a time scale of how, after six or seven years of inactivity, we could measure activity?” Ms Stuart.

DfE data shows an upward trend in the number of Service children in maintained education between 2008 and 2012. It also provides information on the number of Service children registered with a statement and those Service children with SEN and without a statement. The trend since 2008 indicates an increase in numbers with SEN but one that is matched by a general increase in the overall number of Service children being registered by Service families with schools. The increase is linked to activities to promote the need for Service families to register their children with schools, so that the school can receive Service Premium funding. This data provided excludes Service children being educated overseas by Service Children Education and Service children in the devolved Administrations, which the department does not hold data on.

In terms of SEN, Service children are below the national average consistently since we started collecting data in 2008. Nevertheless, to fulfil our commitment, clauses in a forthcoming Special Educational Needs Bill will bring about radical changes to special educational needs provision, which will benefit children from Service families with special educational needs together with their peers. The clauses will aim to bring in a properly joined up assessment process, involving education, health and social care. The draft clauses have been the subject of pre-legislative scrutiny.

Question 494: Please provide a copy of the clarified set of rules that Gavin Barlow offered

See Annex.

Question 495: What advice does MoD provide to families where children have been abused

This question was couched with reference to advice and guidance on criminal injuries compensation for the child. This is a personal and private issue for the parents and as such advice may be sought by them. This advice may be given through unit and formation welfare and legal procedures, as any other legal advice is provided, but it is not a Ministry of Defence issue.

In addition please provide the following information for the Committee:

1.The total annual expenditure on the Service Pupil Premium since its introduction:

Service Premium financial year 2011–12: 45,070 children—£9,014,000 (rate of £200 per service child).

Service Premium financial year 2012–13: 52,370 children—£15,712,000 (introduced ever measure and increased rate to £250 per service child).

TOTAL for 2011–12 and 2012–13: £24,726,000.

Service Premium financial year 2013–14 rate increased to £300 per service child. However, the timing of data means we do not yet have final pupil numbers for this year.

In its written evidence, Ofsted said that from February 2013 it will report specifically on the performance in English and maths of pupils supported through the pupil premium compared to all other pupils in the school. Was Ofsted tasked to monitor just English and maths performance or does Ofsted intend to report on any other issues in regard to the use by schools of the Service Pupil Premium, for example pupil’s behaviour or the provision of emotional support?

On this matter the DfE was referring to Sir Michael Wilshaw letter dated February 2013 to Headteachers and Chairs of Governors entitled “A Good Education for All”. In this letter Sir Wilshaw explains the inspectorate’s plan to look closely at the use of the pupil premium. He advises that Ofsted plans to report specifically on the performance in English and Mathematics of those children who are supported through the pupil premium, including the Service premium and, in particular, on any average point score differences between these and other children in the school.

Whilst it is right and proper for Inspectors to look at the use of the pupil premium funding, they may wish to look beyond the raw data of average point scores in this instance. The impact of the Service pupil premium can also be evaluated through other means to support an Ofsted judgment. Other measures could include parental questionnaires, NEET (Not in Education Employment or Training) figures, exclusion data, attendance, punctuality, and specific case studies.

However, the measures in which Ofsted use in their inspections is something for Ofsted to decide upon, not for DfE. Clarification can be sought from Michael Cladingbowl, Director of Schools at Ofsted. Michael.Cladingbowl@ofsted.gov.uk

2.When does the MoD expect that the last families will leave Germany?

During the course of 2020.

Annex

The CEA regulations are currently being re-written in line with the outcome of the Ministerial Review of CEA conducted in 2011 and the following wording is included:

“09.0107. Changing School Within A Stage of Education. A claimant wishing to move their child to another eligible school other than at the end of a stage of education or in the circumstances as outlined at Paragraph 09.0125 must seek advice at the earliest opportunity from the CEAS and their Unit HR concerning the effect of such action on the education of their child and their entitlement to claim CEA. Circumstances where the early change of school for a child may be acceptable are outlined at Annex D to this section. In such circumstances, a claimant should submit casework in accordance with Paragraph 09.0104 including any independent evidence as required by Annex D. If the child is in immediate danger or there is a safeguarding issue, the child may be withdrawn immediately and advice may be sought from CEAS and casework submitted as soon as possible retrospectively.”

N.B. Paragraph 09.0125 refers to the ability of CEA claimants to withdraw from CEA without financial penalty. Paragraph 09.0104 explains where the casework process is outlined.

Annex D

OUTLINES THE CIRCUMSTANCES (INCLUDING THOSE WHERE THERE ARE ISSUES OF SAFEGUARDING) AS FOLLOWS

“Reasons for Changing School During a Stage of Education

Which may be Acceptable in Certain Circumstances

1.This policy applies only in circumstances where the claimant wishes to move their child to a different eligible school and continue claiming CEA. The claimant must contact CEAS for advice before taking any action and casework must be submitted in accordance with Paragraph 09.0104 as soon as possible after the circumstances that may lead to a change of school emerge. However, if the child is in immediate danger or there is a safeguarding issue, the child may be withdrawn immediately and advice sought from CEAS and casework submitted as soon as possible retrospectively. Each case should be supported by a completed Annex C to this section, a letter from the Head Teacher and any applicable independent evidence or advice as required by this Annex. Where the advice of an Educational or Clinical Psychologist, Psychiatrist or any other suitably qualified individual or organisation endorsed by CEAS is required, the costs will be borne by the claimant.

Claimants Not Satisfied With Standards of Tuition or Conditions of Accommodation or Supervision at a Particular School

2.In cases under this heading it may be difficult to decide whether the circumstances leading to an intended break of educational continuity are genuinely outside the parent’s control, on the grounds that it is the claimant’s personal responsibility to satisfy themselves as to the suitability of the school before enrolling a child. It is recognised, however, that not all schools measure up to the claims made in their prospectus and it may be difficult for a Service parent to make an accurate assessment by merely visiting the school to inspect it before deciding to enrol a child. Claimants considering sending a child to a school need to take particular care to ensure that the school is in every way satisfactory.

3.If evidence can be supplied to show clearly that the claimant could not reasonably have foreseen the grounds for dissatisfaction, then consideration will be given as to whether a change of school for the child is justified. If evidence cannot be obtained, the request will be considered on its merits bearing in mind the previous reputation of the school and the weight of information available.

Children Unhappy at a Particular School

4.If independent evidence can be supplied from an Educational or Clinical Psychologist, Psychiatrist or suitably qualified individual or organisation endorsed by CEAS clearly showing that it would be intolerable for a child to remain at the present school, it will be possible to regard a change of school as justifiable under the regulations. Eligibility will, however, usually be retained only if it can be established that the child’s unhappiness was clearly connected with that particular school, and that there are no grounds for supposing that another school would not prove entirely suitable.

5.It is possible that a child may become unhappy at a particular school following the departure of a sibling. Consideration will be given to allow a child to accompany the sibling to another school without affecting the claimant’s eligibility to CEA. Such cases will be based on a comparison of the personal stability of the sibling with the continuity of their education and will require supporting independent advice from an Educational or Clinical Psychologist, Psychiatrist or any other suitably qualified individual or organisation endorsed by CEAS. Any costs incurred in this process will be the responsibility of the claimant.

Poor Progress

6.There may be cases when a boarding school is found to be unsuitable for a particular child, and the child’s progress at the school is adversely affected. Where independent evidence can be produced from an Educational or Clinical Psychologist, Psychiatrist or any other suitably qualified individual or organisation endorsed by CEAS that a change of boarding school is desirable, a transfer of school will be considered acceptable.

Closure of School or Boarding House

7.Where documentary evidence is provided that the school or boarding facilities at the school are to close, a change of school will be authorised.

Permanent Exclusion

8.Where independent evidence from the school or other appropriate authority is provided as part of the case, permanent exclusion of a child from school will be regarded as a justifiable reason for a change of school. The new school must provide documentary evidence that they are aware of the circumstances leading to the expulsion. However, there must be no doubt that the permanent exclusion was irrevocable and entirely beyond the control of the claimant. A withdrawal instigated by the claimant, even at the express suggestion of the school authorities and with their consent, will not be acceptable under this heading.

Significant Alterations in School Fees

9.Provided that documentary evidence of significant alterations in fees is supplied, it will be possible to regard a change of school as justifiable. Details of the proposed school fees and an indication of the Service person’s financial circumstances are to be included with the request.

Alteration of School’s Curriculum or Standards

10.Alteration of Curriculum. Provided that documentary evidence from the present school authorities or an independent education consultant is supplied showing that the new curriculum is unsuitable for the child concerned, withdrawal of the child from the school will be considered.

11.Alteration in Standards. Applications under this heading may be difficult to substantiate, since a school may well be reluctant to admit that a fall in its standards has taken place, and it is not always possible or indeed desirable to seek independent corroboration of this. Where evidence exists of an alteration in standards that now make the school unsuitable for the child in question, the claimant must present it to the CEAS and seek their advice prior to the submission of casework. If it is not possible to obtain such evidence, an application will be decided on its merits, based on the weight of information available. Claimants must inform CEAS of the alteration in standards and seek advice in all cases.

Change of School on moving from Preparatory to Secondary School

12.Where a preparatory school ends at year 8 (age 12/13), it will be admissible to remove a child at the end of year 6 (age 10/11) in order to start another school covering years 7 to 11 inclusive (ages 11 to 16) with the express intent of providing a greater continuity of education at secondary school. There will be no allowance made for a further move at the end of year 8 (age 13) if this option is taken and CEA eligibility may be forfeited.