Government Response
All children, regardless of circumstance or setting,
must receive a good education and the necessary support to enable
them to overcome barriers, thrive in their school and community,
and succeed in later life. The Government welcomes the House
of Commons Defence Committee's inquiry into The Armed Forces
Covenant in Action? Part 3: Educating the Children of Service
Personnel and the findings set out in the Committee's report
published on 23 July 2013. The Government recognises the importance
of its commitment which states that Service children should have
the same standard of and access to education as other children
in the UK, in the area in which they live. We welcome the Committee's
identification of the considerable challenges presented as a result
of the mobility required of Armed Forces personnel and their children.
We also welcome the acknowledgement that the meeting of the obligations
made in the Armed Forces Covenant is dependent on the voluntary
agreement of numerous bodies that have a part to play in providing
education for Service children.
The Government notes the Committee's concerns about
a conflict at the heart of the Armed Forces Covenant caused by
the Government being dependent on the commitment of schools and
others who provide education services—Government
Departments, local authorities and the devolved administrations—to
deliver the same provision to all Service families wherever they
live in the UK.
We also note the Committee's conclusion that the
Government must demonstrate its commitment to the Covenant by
seeking the co-operation of the devolved administrations and local
authorities to ensure the obligations are met.
We are grateful for the opportunity to respond to
the report. Our formal response to the Committee's recommendations
and conclusions is set out below. Where appropriate, we have grouped
together related conclusions and recommendations to respond with
a single coherent narrative that addresses both the specific recommendation
and the wider underpinning arguments. The Committee's findings
are highlighted in bold, with the Government's response in plain
text. For ease of reference, paragraph numbering follows that
in the 'Conclusions and Recommendations' section of the Committee's
Report, including the paragraph reference to the report itself.
Conclusions and Recommendations
1. We note the MoD's commitment to maintaining
high standards in SCE schools. We are satisfied that the procedures
in place, including Ofsted inspections, ensure the standard of
teaching in schools attended by Service children is at least 'good',
or that where weaknesses are identified they are addressed. (Paragraph
16)
We are glad that the Committee has identified and
acknowledged this high level of commitment, and the good work
that SCE do for Service children overseas.
2. It is encouraging to note that Service children's
progress is broadly in line with other pupils even though they
face considerable challenges. However, mobile Service children
do not perform as well as non-mobile Service children. With greater
recognition of their needs and focused additional support, Service
children could do even better. The Government should ensure that
these children are given every opportunity to maximise their potential.
(Paragraph 20)
A key priority in the MoD's Children & Young
People's Strategy & Improvement Plan is the continued development
of a unified and proactive strategy to mitigate the potentially
adverse affects of not only mobility but also deployment, drawdown,
re-basing and transition. To that end MoD has engaged with other
Government Departments, schools, local authorities and the devolved
assemblies to highlight the specific needs of Service children,
particularly in relation to the mobile nature of their lives.
The MoD provides specialist information, advice and support through
Directorate Children & Young People to enable any organisation
to make more informed decisions about the additional support they
can provide to Service children.
Sharing best practice is vital. The DfE promoted
and delivered a national conference in October 2011 on supporting
children from Service families. This is now being followed up
by regional conferences run by the Service Children in State Schools
(SCISS) network scheduled for October 2013 (Swindon), November
2013 (Nottinghamshire) and January 2014 (North Yorks). A similar
event has been held by the Association of Directors of Education
Services in Scotland (May 2013).
3. The nature of Service life means that families
have to be mobile if they are to accompany the Service parent.
That moves can be made at short notice, or during term-time, means
that parents may not have time to research the schools in the
area, and may not get a place in their preferred school, as places
in high performing schools are unlikely to be available either
at short notice or part way through the school year. It is clear
that there is a contradiction at the heart of the Covenant, in
that Service families' mobility makes it difficult for parents
to get places in the schools of their choice. The timescale for
the implementation of the New Employment Model will not help those
children currently in education. The MoD needs to consider further
how it can assist parents to gain access to their preferred choice
of schools. (Paragraph 27)
The MoD will continue to monitor the situation with
regard to school admissions, providing evidence to the DfE and
devolved equivalents where disadvantage is experienced and changes
to the Code(s) are justified, as well as continuing to provide
advice and support to any Service family adversely affected. The
DfE focus on underperformance and coasting schools should mean
that Service families have a wider choice of good schools in future.
4. The Government should explain how it intends
to resolve the conflict between the Armed Forces Covenant, which
says that Service children may need special arrangements to access
school places, and the Schools Admissions Code which sets out
a strict timetable for admissions, to ensure that Service families
can access the schools of their choice when they need them. (Paragraph
31)
The DfE have made a number of changes
to the School Admissions Code to support Service children and
their families. These include introducing provisions intended
to ensure that Service families are not disadvantaged when applying
for a school place outside the normal admissions round. It recognises
that Service families often have to move at times when the normal
round will not work for them. The School Admissions Code is explicit
that an admission authority must not refuse a Service child a
school place just because the family is not yet living in the
area. They can be offered a place as soon as the family
have a confirmed posting.
The MoD will continue to work with the DfE to monitor
the effectiveness of the recent changes to the Code. This will
include identifying potential improvements to mitigate any disadvantage
experienced by Service children.
5. Availability of school places will be a significant
issue as large numbers of Service families are re-located as a
result of re-basing and the withdrawal from Germany. We seek reassurance
that there will be sufficient places for the children moving as
part of major re-basing moves and the withdrawal from Germany.
The Ministry of Defence must provide information promptly to allow
the Department for Education to liaise with Local Authorities
and the Devolved Administrations to ensure that the right number
of places and adequate funding will be provided in advance of
major moves. (Paragraph 37)
6. Schools with significant numbers of Service
children on their roll experience additional challenges, including
a lack of the appropriate level of funding throughout the school
year and difficulties caused by high levels of admissions through
the school year. The Government should work with Local Authorities
to ensure that appropriate funding is available. Where there is
competition for places between Service children and the resident
population, and both have equal merit, we question who will provide
the funding for additional school places. One option may be for
the Ministry of Defence to fund additional buildings, if needed,
and the Local Education Authority to pay for staff and on-going
maintenance costs. (Paragraph 38)
The DfE is working closely with
the MoD and relevant local authorities (LAs) affected by the re-basing
and withdrawal from Germany to ensure a smooth transition between
schools and minimal impact on pupils and their families. DfE has
written to relevant LAs with large military bases in their areas
(June 2013) asking them to consider the impact this may have on
admissions and finding suitable school places in advance, to begin
finance and operational planning now, and begin advising schools
on admissions. MoD will provide DfE and LAs with detailed information
about the number of Service children due to arrive (and when),
to assist those LAs to plan ahead and to ensure that funding levels
reflect the number of additional places needed. Concurrently the
MoD is working with the DfE to make sufficient capital funds available,
and with those same LAs where there will be a known influx of
Service children due to re-basing. In the next year of the MoD
Support Fund, priority will be given to those areas likely to
be affected. The MoD has recent examples of best practice when
undertaking such moves and these are being shared to ensure that
education departments and LAs affected should be able to plan
for any additional spaces required.
The MoD has worked with the DfE on the recent reform
of revenue funding arrangements for schools, which secured the
retention of the ability of LAs to provide a mobility factor to
schools experiencing such turbulence; further analysis of how
this is working will be undertaken with DfE to ensure that schools
with Service children are not being disadvantaged. Moreover the
MoD Support Fund can provide grants to schools experiencing a
short-term funding shortfall due to a temporary reduction in the
number of Service pupils. Whilst the responsibility for resourcing
additional school capacity remains with the DfE and devolved equivalents,
the MoD is currently looking at whether we could assist in this
process.
To ensure that we can address such issues in a structured
way, the MoD has established the Education of Service Children
Change Programme[1].
7. While we acknowledge the challenges facing
Service children we must not forget the advantages of Service
life for children of Service families. (Paragraph 40)
We agree, and the MoD's Education of Service Children
Change Programme will ensure that this unique benefit is preserved.
12. We are dismayed that no appreciable progress
has been made on the transfer of pupils' records since our predecessors'
2006 report. Service children and their families deserve better.
Only now is work being undertaken to develop a Service children's
transition document. We are pleased that the Devolved Administrations
are broadly supportive of a common approach to the transfer of
information. We recommend that the Government liaise with the
Devolved Administrations, local authorities and others to reach
a UK-wide agreement on a transfer document for Service children
and a process for ensuring it is used, to resolve this issue once
and for all. (Paragraph 59)
The challenge has been to develop a resource for
schools which transcends the different legislations across England
and the Devolved Administrations, and which does not add significantly
to the workload when schools transfer the information on children
required by local legislation. The development of such a document
has required funding and research. The research, development
and consultation is now complete and the resource, now titled
the Pupil Information Profile (PIP) for Service Children, should
be available to schools from Autumn 2013. Importantly, the PIP
allows for specific details of Special Educational Needs (SEN)
to be included. The MoD is already working closely with DfE and
the Devolved Administrations to encourage the use of the PIP by
all schools with Service children across the UK and overseas.
8. The lack of clarity about the number of Service
children with Special Educational Needs is disturbing. The Ministry
of Defence and the Department of Education should liaise with
the Devolved Administrations to establish how many Service children
have Special Educational Needs across the UK so that the scale
of the problem is known. (Paragraph 43)
9. Service children with Special Educational Needs
are spread across the English local authorities, the Devolved
Administrations and SCE schools overseas. The number in any one
local authority or administration is likely to be small. We consider
that, with the will and support of Government and engagement with
the Devolved Administrations, it must be possible to make things
easier for those families in this difficult situation. It is unacceptable
that no progress has been made on our predecessor Committee's
2006 recommendation that Service children with a Special Educational
Needs should be given a statement which would be accepted by all
schools. We welcome the Minister's commitment to resolving the
issue, and expect to see prompt action. (Paragraph 49)
10. The Children and Families Bill has no specific
clauses relating to the needs of those children of Service personnel
who have Special Educational Needs. It is disappointing that the
Government has not taken this opportunity to incorporate the commitments
made in the Armed Forces Covenant into this new legislation.
However, we hope that the provisions of this Bill will ease some
of the difficulties faced by Service families who have children
with Special Educational Needs.
(Paragraph 51)
The MoD and DfE will continue to engage with the
Devolved Administrations on all aspects of Service children's
education including SEN issues noting that, although Northern
Ireland tracks Service children in State schools, Scotland does
not, and Wales has yet to decide.
Whilst Service personnel cannot be compelled to register
children with SEN with the MoD, we are aware of those that register
with CEAS, and CEAS provide comprehensive advice and support to
these children both in the UK and overseas. The effective meeting
of a child's SEN requires identification and resolution of those
needs to take place at the lowest practicable level of administration.
That is why the responsibility falls to LAs (and the MoD where
it acts in lieu of LAs overseas), and it is at that level that
accurate figures are maintained. However, LAs would not necessarily
categorise Service children separately. The key concern of the
MoD, as identified at Paragraph 49 of the Report, is maintaining
support when children with SEN move to new locations.
LAs are under a statutory duty to transfer statements
within England and, currently, between England and Wales. The
receiving LA is under a statutory duty to maintain the statement
and arrange the special educational provision. The receiving
LA must tell the parents within six weeks of the transfer when
they will review the statement and whether they propose to re-assess
the child. We amended the Children and Families Bill, currently
going through Parliament, to ensure that individual Education,
Health and Care plans will transfer within England. DfE has also
worked successfully with SCE to improve the transfer of information
about these children's needs during moves out of the SCE area
of responsibility.
DfE is working with the MoD, (mainly
SCE and CEAS), to improve provision for children with SEN from
Service families and to agree wording for the new DfE SEN Code
of Practice so that these children will not be disadvantaged. Following
his appearance before the Committee, Minister (DPWV) met with
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Children &
Families (3 July 2013) to ensure awareness of the issue and MoD
input to the new SEN code.
The Children and Families Bill
will bring benefits to all children with SEN, including those
from Services families; and the MoD will continue to work closely
with the DfE to ensure that the Code of Practice reflects the
needs of Service children with SEN, particularly in regard to
the factors of Service-induced mobility and deployment.
11. We urge the Government to work with local
authorities and the Devolved Administrations to reach agreement
that Service children's SEN statements are recognised by all,
without exception, across the UK, demonstrating the country's
'moral obligation' to this very small number of children and their
families, who deserve our full support. (Paragraph 53)
As highlighted in previous responses the introduction
of the MoD's PIP for Service Children will include specific details
of SEN, and will precede the pupil across national and LA borders
and boundaries.
13. We recognise that as a result of mobility
children encounter difficulties in the consistency of their education.
When moving mid-year pupils can repeat topics, for example. Evidence
also suggests some children may not be academically stretched
as much as they should be. We recommend that under the New Employment
Model, Future Army 2020, and Future Force 2020, the MoD undertakes
to minimise, as far as possible, moves during the school year,
and restricts, wherever possible, the movement of whole units
to an appropriate time in the academic year. (Paragraph 65)
The New Employment Model (NEM) seeks to support greater
domestic stability in a variety of ways including longer postings,
fewer moves, improved accommodation options and more distributed
training, however there will remain a need for some mobility to
underpin operational capability. As a result some families may
choose to remain mobile to avoid separated service. This issue
forms part of a NEM consultation exercise, which began in June
2013, involving Service personnel and their families on the modernisation
of terms and conditions of service. Phase one of the consultation,
(which has included road shows, focus groups and interviews with
personnel and families), is followed by a second phase involving
more targeted evidence gathering through surveys. Once concluded
there will be a period of detailed analysis of the information
gathered. The outcome of this analysis will be communicated towards
the end of the year. Further consultation will take place in early
2014 on the detail of some of the components of the NEM and their
implementation.
14. Maintaining continuity in their children's
education is a major concern for parents. We support the principle
of paying Continuity of Education Allowance (CEA) to those families
who choose to send their children to boarding school to provide
continuity. The MoD should clarify the rules on CEA and reassure
Service personnel that entitlement to CEA is not under further
review and will not change at short notice. (Paragraph 75)
The re-write of CEA regulations is complete and the
principal changes have been promulgated to all Service personnel.
JSP752 has been updated with effect from 1 Aug 13 (Version 18.1).
While we cannot rule out any further future changes to
CEA regulations, no further fundamental changes to CEA policy
are currently planned.
15. The Ministry of Defence should ensure that
all Service personnel are aware of the availability of the CEA.
It should also advertise more effectively the existence of the
state boarding schools. (Paragraph 83)
The availability of CEA to eligible Service personnel
is widely advertised and their attention is specifically drawn
to the State Boarding sector. Moreover, as part of their application
for CEA, individuals have to certify that they have specifically
considered the State Boarding sector.
16. The safety and well-being of children is paramount
and the rules should not hinder movement of pupils in cases where,
for example, there have been suggestions of abuse. The MoD should
clarify the rules on CEA and its role in the decision-making process
when parents wish to move their children to another school during
a key stage of education. We recommend that in principle the MoD
should be more prepared to leave to parents the difficult judgement
of when to move a child; while it is axiomatic that a "Continuity
of Education Allowance" is designed to provide continuity,
the name of the allowance should not be a major barrier to the
parents deciding what is best for their child. (Paragraph 88)
The MoD agrees that the safety of Service
children - indeed all children - is paramount. The CEA regulations
do not hinder movement of pupils but the advice to Service parents
about what to do if they have a safeguarding concern has been
revised and strengthened. Now, if a parent suspects that their
child may be at risk they are entitled to withdraw their child
immediately and seek authority through casework subsequently.
17. We support the payment of the Service Pupil
Premium to support Service children. However, we are not convinced
that this expenditure is adequately monitored for value for money
for the taxpayer, and to ensure that it is used to the best possible
advantage to the Service children themselves. The Government should
introduce guidelines on how the Service Pupil Premium should be
spent. It should also require schools to make more transparent
how this money is spent. The Government should monitor and publish
this information and share examples of best practice. (Paragraph
95)
18. Ofsted should be asked to report in more detail
on the results achieved by use of the Service Pupil Premium to
ensure that the funding is meeting the particular needs of Service
children. The DfE and the MoD should also report on the overall
level of expenditure on the Service Pupil Premium. (Paragraph
96)
The Government agrees that the
Service Pupil Premium (SPP) should be spent on securing the maximum
benefit for Service children and value for money for taxpayers.
Schools are best placed to decide how to use the SPP to meet
the needs of their pupils. It is right that they continue to make
decisions based on a pupil's individual needs. The School Information
(England) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 require schools to publish
on their website the amount of the school's allocation from the
Pupil Premium grant, including the SPP, in respect of the current
academic year; details of how it is intended that the allocation
will be spent; details of how the previous academic year's allocation
was spent, and the effect of this expenditure on the educational
attainment of those pupils at the school in respect of whom grant
funding was allocated.
DfE currently publish Pupil Premium
allocation tables on their website each year which include SPP
allocations at national, local authority and parliamentary constituency
level. They do not publish information at school level as there
are data sensitivities (small numbers mean that it might be possible
to identify individual pupils).
19. The anomalies in the payment of a Service
Pupil Premium across the Devolved Administrations indicates a
contradiction between the Armed Forces Covenant and the practice
across the UK. The Government should liaise with the Devolved
Administrations to encourage the same level of support for all
Service children across the UK in line with the Covenant. In its
response to this report the Government should set out why the
Service Pupil Premium can at the same time represent good value
for money in those areas which have it and be unnecessary in those
areas which do not. (Paragraph 100)
Education is a devolved matter, and it must remain
for the Devolved Administrations to make their own decisions on
spend. The MoD will continue to work closely with them in the
interests of Service children across the UK, largely through the
national networks facilitated by CEAS. Although Scotland has
already determined that funding is adequate without a pupil premium,
and the debate continues in Wales, the MoD will continue to champion
the benefits of a distinct and separate pupil premium for Service
children. It should not be forgotten that Northern Ireland's
equivalent of the SPP predates England's by some years.
20. We are concerned that the introduction of
the Service Pupil Premium has replaced other forms of funding,
so that schools with a significant number of Service children
may not benefit as much as was intended. The Government should
ensure that Local Authorities do not use the Service Pupil Premium
to replace other funding. (Paragraph 102)
The Government notes this concern and shares the
Committee's view, that if this is happening it needs to be looked
into and corrected. MoD officials will engage with their DfE counterparts
on this point.
21. The Government should publish figures showing
the distribution of the Support Fund for Schools across all parts
of the UK, and encourage applications from Welsh schools to ensure
all regions get their fair share. (Paragraph 105)
DCYP published details of the distribution of the
Support Fund across the UK on their website. Currently these details
are being updated and the information is due to migrate to the
'gov.uk' website soon. DCYP are working with the Welsh Assembly
to assist them in encouraging applications from Welsh schools,
this includes a standing MoD presence on the Welsh Government's
Standing Committee for Service Children in Schools in Wales.
22. The Government should publish details of the
ways in which the Support Fund for Schools money is spent in support
of Service children, and give examples of good practice so that
best use is made of this limited resource. We agree with the Scottish
Government, that the Government should maintain this Fund after
the planned four years to provide pastoral and other support to
individual schools where needed. The need will rise as significant
numbers of Service children move during re-basing and the withdrawal
from Germany. (Paragraph 108)
DCYP is currently undertaking an audit of the successful
applicants from the 2012 application round and will publish this
information on the DCYP website as well as sharing information
with the Education Departments throughout the UK. Meanwhile, the
MoD is looking at the feasibility of extending this Fund for a
further four years with priority concentrating on those areas
most affected by the geographical changes in the Armed Forces
footprint.
23. We are reassured that a range of funding is
available to support the education of children of a parent killed
in the service of their country, though such payments need to
be made promptly to avoid unnecessary hardship or worry for bereaved
families. (Paragraph 113)
We will continue to prioritise the support provided
to bereaved families and strive to process Armed Forces Bereaved
Scholarship Scheme applications as quickly as possible.
Conclusion
24. We support the aims of the Armed Forces Covenant,
in that:
Children of members of the Armed Forces should
have the same standard of, and access to, education (including
early years services) as any other UK citizen in the area in which
they live. (Paragraph 114)
We welcome the Committee's conclusion.
25. In this inquiry, we have identified that the
mobility required of Armed Forces personnel means their children
face considerable challenges in achieving the same access to education
as the rest of the UK population. During the inquiry it has also
become clear that in order to meet the obligations made in the
Armed Forces Covenant, the Government is dependent on the voluntary
agreement of the numerous bodies who all play a part in providing
education for the children of Service personnel. (Paragraph 115)
The Government acknowledges the conclusion of the
Committee, and is taking steps to address it as set out against
the conclusion below.
26. In our view there is a conflict at the heart
of the Armed Forces Covenant because the Government is dependent
on the commitment of those who provide education services—Government
Departments, Local Authorities and the devolved administrations—offering
the same provision to all Service families wherever they live
in the UK. The Government must demonstrate its commitment to the
Armed Forces Covenant by seeking the co-operation of the Devolved
Administrations and Local Authorities to ensure that its obligations
are met. (Paragraph 116)
The Government notes the Committee's view but would
suggest that the issue is one of complexity rather than conflict.
DfE are working across boundaries in synergy with other parts
of government to ensure that these challenges are resolved and
do not negatively impact upon Service children.
The Armed Forces Covenant belongs to the whole Nation,
and it is not just for the Government to deliver. LAs, local communities,
public services, businesses and charities all have a role to play.
It is an obligation for the whole of society.
The MOD works closely with the Devolved Administrations
to ensure that equitable provision, with the local civilian community,
is offered to all Service families wherever they live. Representatives
from the Devolved Administrations are invited to attend the Covenant
Reference Group, which oversees delivery of the Armed Forces Covenant.
The MOD established the Community Covenant to encourage
local communities to support the Armed Forces community and to
encourage LAs to take actions to ensure that Service families
are not disadvantaged in the provision of services. To date over
370 communities across England, Scotland and Wales (more than
90% of LAs) have now signed Community Covenants, and the Government
will continue to work closely with LAs to ensure that the obligations
of the Armed Force Covenant continue to be met.
1 The MoD Education of Service Children Change Programme
is a series of four separate, but interlinked, projects each focused
on particular aspects of the provision of education to Service
children. This programme of work is being taken forward under
the leadership of DCYP and is in recognition of the changes being
introduced in Defence which carry implications for that education.
They are:
Project 1 - Improving Education Provision
for Service Children in the UK - this is about strengthening partnerships
with local schools and relevant authorities with the aim of improving
education provision for the children of Service families in the
UK State sector.
Project 2 - Managing the Closure of
SCE Schools in Germany - SCE will be closing schools in Germany
while maintaining educational standards throughout the process.
Project 3 - Meeting the Educational
Needs of Service Children Returning from Germany - an estimated
5,000 children are currently educated in Service schools in Germany.
The vast majority will be looking to be placed in the maintained
sector when their families return. There will be a need for close
liaison between DfE, Devolved Administrations and LAs to ensure
a smooth transition.
Project 4 - Defining the SCE Future
Operating Model - Germany drawdown will change SCE fundamentally
with the centre of gravity shifting to Cyprus. Much work needs
to be done to determine the most appropriate business model (or
models) for these schools in the future.
Back
| 
