Children Families & Education SC

Minutes CHILDREN, FAMILIES & EDUCATION SELECT COMMITTEE 05 February 2026 Meeting held at Committee Room 6 – Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW Committee Members Present: Councillor Heena Makwana (Chair), Councillor Ekta Gohil (Vice-Chair), Councillor Peter Smallwood OBE, Councillor Kishan Bhatt, Councillor Jan Sweeting (Opposition Lead), and Councillor Tony Gill Co-Opted Member Present: Mr Tony Little Officers Present: Alex Coman (Director of Children’s Safeguarding and Care) Debbie Scarborough (Service Manager, Learn Hillingdon Adult Community Education), Kudakwashe Kurashwa (Head of Service, Youth and Adolescent Services), Antony Madden (Assistant Director, Stronger Families & Protection), Ryan Dell (Democratic Services Officer) 59. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (Agenda Item 1) Apologies had been received from Councillor Narinder Garg and Councillor Kishan Bhatt. 60. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST IN MATTERS COMING BEFORE THIS MEETING (Agenda Item 2) None. 61. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING (Agenda Item 3) RESOLVED: That the minutes of the previous meeting be agreed 62. TO CONFIRM THAT THE ITEMS OF BUSINESS MARKED AS PART I WILL BE CONSIDERED IN PUBLIC AND THAT THE ITEMS MARKED AS PART II WILL BE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE (Agenda Item 4) 63. LEARN HILLINGDON SELF-ASSESSMENT REPORT, 2024-25 (Agenda Item 5) The Chair introduced the item and moved straight to questions. Members referenced the gender imbalance, noting that 80% of learners were female, and asked why this was the case; whether it reflected local or national patterns; and whether additional actions could encourage greater male participation. The gender split was broadly consistent with national patterns, particularly for courses aimed at lower - skilled adults re -entering education. Historically, more men had attended due to evening classes, but demand fell sharply post COVID and had not recovered, resulting in reduced male participation. Many learners came from communities where there was a cultural expectation that men work during the day and women attend classes while children are at school. Male learners now tended to be older, oft en carers or widowers, and many attended cookery and healthy eating classes to develop life skills. There had been some improvement in the gender split over time, now approximately 76% female/ 24% male. Members asked whether the service had explored recru itment through existing learners, such as encouraging learners’ partners to attend or considering flexible timings. Word of mouth remained the primary recruitment method in adult learning. Couples did sometimes attend, often in different subjects. Despite longstanding efforts, attracting male learners had been a persistent challenge for a number of years. Officers remained open to suggestions to improve reach and engagement and further added that the imbalance was not unique to Hillingdon, but common across regions and nationally. The adult learning offer remained open and accessible to all residents. Members commended the service and asked what would make it even better. Additional funding would enhance provision. The service had to regularly adapt to changing national and local priorities, particularly with the new government’s emerging policies. A strong focus continued on supporting residents toward employment. Education journeys for adults may take up to five years before individuals reach employment or higher-level study, making impact less immediately visible. Stronger links with employers and workplaces would support clearer pathways into work, though learners’ financial pressures often prevented them from progressing to higher level qualifications. Economic challenges increasingly resulted in learners taking immediate employment rather than continuing their studies. Officers further added that recent performance indicators were very strong, highlighting 95% retention, 97% pass rate, and almost 93% ach ievement. These outcomes reflected the commitment of staff and the strength of the service. A recent Ofsted visit had commended the service. Members asked how funding from the GLA was progressing; how much funding the Council provided; and whether any other funding avenues were being pursued. Officers advised that the service aimed to break even, and the Council contributed approximately £50,000–£60,000 annually. The GLA had been a strong and supportive funder, with clear guidance and good understanding of London’s regional needs. GLA flexibility such as free courses for those earning at or below the London Living Wage had been beneficial. The GLA had mitigated national cuts by spreading reductions over two years, enabling more manageable planning. Despite good partnership working, overall funding was decreasing nationally. Members asked if any research existed on the gender imbalance, and whether offering manual or technical skills courses might attract more male learners. Officers were not aware of any si gnificant research on the issue, likely due to limited national resources. Some subjects attracted more men (e.g., IT, digital skills, English, ESOL, mental health related provision). However, male participation remained low in areas such as childcare or h ealth & social care. The service avoided duplicating provision offered by the neighbouring college, which already delivered many technical and vocational subjects, as this would not be an efficient use of resources. Planning of provision always considers the local educational landscape. Skills such as IT, English and employability were essential for supporting independence and progression. Members asked about engagement with the Traveller community. Engagement varied considerably and can be inconsistent, w ith fluctuating attendance. Officers delivered learning in community settings, including past work at Bell Farm, though projects depended on current demand. A recent successful project involved flower arranging as an engagement tool, run jointly with the N HS, who used the sessions to discuss health topics such as vaccinations. The service hoped to repeat this model but has not yet been able to due to variable participation. Officers added that engagement required cultural sensitivity and persistence. Differ ent groups needed different approaches and so adaptability is key. Members also asked about engagement with those who lived in temporary accommodation. Services were delivered in schools and libraries. Engagement challenges were similar to those experienc ed with Traveller communities. Many residents in temporary accommodation faced mental health challenges, which impacted their ability to attend. Despite initial enthusiasm, sustained attendance was often low. Officers were exploring indirect engagement rou tes, such as mental health awareness, art therapy or other creative activities, to build confidence before progressing to English or skills -based learning. Practical constraints existed around delivering classes with very low attendance. RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the report 64. YOUTH JUSTICE SERVICE STRATEGY 2024-2029 UPDATE (Agenda Item 6) Officers introduced the item, outlining the recommendations to note the progress and strategic direction in delivering the Youth Justice Service’s five -year strategic plan; and to note the key priority areas guiding current and future work. Officers outlined the five strategic priority areas, aligned to the five-year strategic plan: 1. Over-representation and disproportionality A significant issue within the Youth Justice Service, with a co -produced disproportionality action plan now in place across the partnership. 2. Child first practice Ensuring children are central to service design, implementation and evaluation, and emphasis on co-production and embedding the voice of the child throughout all interventions. 3. Victims and restorative justice Offending occurred within broader community harms. Work aligned with the Council’s strategic commitments to safe and strong communities, and thriving, healthy households. There was a focus on victims as well as children. 4. Prevention and early intervention Strengthening work prior to the age of criminal responsibility (10 years old), and aligning with wider Council transformation work, including Family First and early help. Work was also ongoing to reduce stigma on families when accessing help, particularly children who come through the Youth Justice Service. 5. Reducing reoffending This was a core mission of the service. There had been significant reductions in first-time en trants to the Youth Justice Service, and children entering custody due to offending. There was also an increased engagement in Education, Training and Employment (ETE) for children within the Youth Justice Service. Members highlighted that funding for Project Turnaround had ended in March 2025 and asked if there was any update with regard to future funding. Officers advised that funding would progress into the coming year and details of the funding model were awaited. Members asked for examples of effecti ve multi-agency practice and its impact on re - offending. Officers highlighted strong collaboration with health partners (CNWL) who support children with speech and language needs, neurodiversity, and chronic conditions. All children who come through the Yo uth Justice Service received a speech and language screening, enabling holistic assessment and tailored interventions. This had contributed to the reduction in numbers. Officers also highlighted the disproportionality action plan that had been co -produced with health, education, police, probation, with governance through the Youth Justice Strategic Partnership Board. This looked to address the over -representation of young people from the global majority within the Youth Justice Service. Officers further add ed that multi -agency activity was monitored via a High -Risk Panel and a Strategic High -Risk Group, and through reporting to the Children’s Safeguarding Board. Young people directly participated in multi-agency work, including Stop and Search reviews, and t hrough Walking in Our Shoes training. Officers added that strong leadership by the Youth Justice Strategic Board drives accountability and change. Reoffending rates had fallen from 40.5% to 37.5% (Ministry of Justice figures), with a local estimate of 32.8 %, below the London average. The AXIS Service (soft intelligence early intervention model) has contributed to a reduction in first-time entrants (from 64 in 2019–20 to 46 in 2023–24). Members commended the report and asked whether reductions in youth offe nding corresponded with police data, particularly amid increases in shoplifting reported by residents. Officers advised that no such correlation could be confirmed. Focus remained on early intervention, diversionary pathways and preventing entry into the Youth Justice Service. Community -facing interventions and programmes such as Project Turnaround and Project Engage broadened opportunities to support young people at teachable moments, including following arrest. It was emphasised that early intervention was central to all children’s services. Work focused on reaching children before offending occurs, through engagement, diversion and understanding community needs. The aim was to balance reducing youth offending with minimising impact on communities. High le vels of restorative justice participation (around 90%) supported victims effectively. Preventing offences remained the central goal. Members referenced the good practice from the Making Hayes Safer project which had been discussed at the recent Corporate Parenting Panel. Members asked whether young people across the borough had equal access, given that children preferred interventions in familiar surroundings. Youth Justice work was referral-driven, supporting children from any part of the borough. The You th Offer operated as a mobile service, increasingly flexible in reaching areas of identified need. Deployment was guided by local data and intelligence. Members asked about engagement with schools. Officers noted that there was strong partnership working with schools, supported through a dedicated ETE Officer (education, training, and employment) co -located within Education and a new designated social care officer; close collaboration with the Skills Hub and Alternative Provision providers; and involvement in operational high -risk panels and strategic groups. There were particularly strong links with SEN teams. Members asked whether the service tracked children after leaving the Youth Justice Service to ensure sustained engagement in education, employment or training. Officers noted that this would be taken forward for consideration. Officers added that current data showed 87% engagement in full -time education at end of intervention, and improvement in engagement for non -school-aged children from 56% to 67% in education, employment and training. Work with post -18 partners aimed to maintain positive transitions into adulthood. RESOLVED: That the Committee: 1. Noted the progress and strategic direction outlined in the Hillingdon Youth Justice Five-Year Strategy; and 2. Noted the continued focus on prevention, early intervention and restorative justice as key priorities for youth justice in Hillingdon 51. FOSTERING REVIEW: FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS (Agenda Item 7) The Chair opened the item, notin g that a set of draft recommendations had been produced and shared with officers. Officer feedback on these had then been shared with Members. The Chair proposed a set of final recommendations, based on the officer feedback: 1. Develop an introduction pack for children that provides Cared For Children with all essential information to help them feel prepared and supported when starting a new placement and, where possible, during placement moves. 2. Include a 'Voice of the Child' section in the 'All About Me' profiles. 3. Include 'Where Are They Now' stories on the Council's website, where Cared Experienced Young People share their experiences, if they are comfortable and willing to do so. 4. Review and develop the training programme to introduce specialist Foster Carer pathways, including pathways for carers specialising in supporting young people with complex needs. 5. Review existing peer supp ort initiatives and develop opportunities to strengthen engagement. Members supported this summary, and noted that peer sup port (number 5) should extend to both foster carers and young people. Members highlighted witness feedback regarding information on the website, that it could be clearer, more accessible and more informative. Members supported the recommendation around e nhanced training, noting repeated referenced in the witness sessions, and the need for specialist and ongoing development. Officers noted that there was an existing comprehensive training offer to foster carers. While training was regularly reviewed, offic ers remained open to further improvements. The training programme was designed to remain an ongoing, evolving area, responsive to emerging needs. Members referred to national data suggesting that large numbers of expressions of interest translated to rela tively low approvals of foster carers. Members asked if national proposals to broaden eligibility criteria may affect Hillingdon, an d if local assessments were ‘too picky’. Officers noted that a national consultation was underway on the future of fostering , aimed at increasing recruitment of foster carers. While the Council welcomed national efforts to strengthen the foster care system, fostering involved ‘parenting plus plus’, supporting children with significant needs, complex needs and trauma. Safety, sk ills, and motivation of prospective carers remain critical. Hillingdon’s assessment process was robust but inclusive, with no exclus ion based on employment status, relationship status, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or similar personal characteristics. The requirement was to approve safe, capable carers. Fostering was not always the first placement option – kinship care, family placements, and residential homes also featured within a broader placement strategy. Officers confirmed that no inappropriate exclusionary criteria were used. Members highlighted the importance of social worker stability, noting that frequent changes could negatively impact both children and foster carers. A recommendation on this had been considered outside the scope of the fosterin g review because it related more broadly to social work workforce organisation rather than fostering service provision. Officers clarified that children’s social workers were allocated through wider Children’s Social Care teams, while supervising Social Wo rkers (supporting foster carers) fell within fostering services. Supervising social worker stability was generally high. It was cl arified that the Committee were happy with the above five recommendations, while final wording could be confirmed later. RESOLVED: That the Committee: 1. Agreed findings, conclusions and draft recommendations in relation to the review; and 2. Delegated final wording of the recommendations to the Democratic Services Officer in conjunction with the Chair and in consultation with the Opposition Lead 52. FORWARD PLAN (Agenda Item 8) Members considered the Forward Plan, noting that an updated version had been shared separately form the agenda. Members referenced the Best Start in Life/ Family Hub Strategy and asked if this would be presented to the Select Committee before it was considered as a Cabinet Member Decision. Officers would follow up. RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the Forward Plan 53. WORK PROGRAMME (Agenda Item 9) Members considered the Work Programme. Members highlighted that there were a large number of items due to be considered at the March meeting and asked if some could be moved back. Officers would follow up. RESOLVED: That the Committee considered the report The meeting, which commenced at 7:00 pm, closed at 8:00 pm. These are the minutes of the above meeting. For more information on any of the resolutions please contact Ryan Dell , Democratic Services Officer on democratic@hillingdon.gov.uk. Circulation of these minutes is to Councillors, officers, the press and members of the public.

Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public BUDGET & SPENDING REPORT – SELECT COMMITTEE MONITORING Committee name Children, Families & Education Select Committee Corporate Director(s) responsible Julie Kelly, Corporate Director of Children’s Services Papers with report Appendix A – Tables 1-4 Ward All RECOMMENDATION That the Committee note the 2025/26 Month 9 budget monitoring position. HEADLINES 1. This monitoring report provides an update on the 2025/26 Month 9 budget position relevant to the Select Committee. The Corporate Director, supported by their Head of Finance, will attend the meeting to provide further details and clarifications. 2. 2025/26 MONTH 9 BUDGET MONITORING POSITION 3. Children, Families & Education – As at Month 9, services within this directorate are reporting a pressure of £6.4m, up from £6.0m in Month 7. The pressure in this area and the increase in forecast overspend since Month 7 is driven by additional demand for Children’s Social Care and an underlying pressure on Asylum due to a previously highlighted budget shortfall. Additional pressure is driven by a reduction in the use of flexible capital receipts to fund transformation costs. 4. Table 1 provides an overview of this Committee’s Month 9 budget monitoring position by portfolio. It includes adjustments made to the forecast for Earmarked Reserves, Provisions and Transformation Capitalisation. 5. Table 2 provides a detailed breakdown of this Committee’s Month 9 budget monitoring position by service area. It includes adjustments made for Earmarked Reserves, Provisions and Transformation Capitalisation. 6. Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) – As of Month 9, the Dedicated School s Grant (DSG) is forecasting an in-year deficit of £9.6m, £2.9m less than the £12.5m budgeted use of reserves, with a £1.0m favourable movement from Month 7. The favourable movement relates to High Needs expenditure and the service’s ongoing work to reduce reliance on costly independent placements through increased local provision and early intervention. This in -year shortfall is entirely driven by continued demand and cost pressures in High Needs placements, which remain significantly underfunded in the DSG allocation from the DfE. These pressures are not unique to the local authority; nationally, local authorities are facing similar challenges. Rising demand for specialist provision, a shortage of maintained special school places, and increasing reliance o n costly independent non -maintained placements are contributing to widespread overspends in the High Needs Block. Despite efficiency targets and mitigation efforts, the structural underfunding of High Needs provision continues to place significant strain on DSG budgets across the country. Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public 7. Whilst the Safety Valve funding with the Department of Education (DfE) is currently suspended, the Council is actively progressing a range of strategic initiatives aimed at improving outcomes for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), while ensuring more sustainable use of resources. These efforts include reducing the overall number of Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), lowering the average top-up funding required per EHCP, and decreasing the average cost of education placements. In parallel, the Council is working to enhance the value for money of commissioned services and to increase financial contributions from partner agencies towards the support of children and yo ung people with SEND. The Council is beginning to see a significant reduction in the in-year deficit as a consequence. 8. A core target for the revised High Needs Safety Valve Plan is to actively reduce unit costs by concentrating SEN support in -borough wit hin our maintained schools and thereby reduce dependence on high cost independent and out -of-borough placements. Trend data shows clear evidence that the approach which has been in place since early 2024/25 is now beginning to have a positive impact. 9. The mounting DSG deficits remain a significant national issue, with projections indicating a substantial funding gap for English councils. Specifically, English councils face a £2.3 billion funding gap in 2025/26, rising to £3.9 billion by 2026/27, creating a £6.2 billion shortfall over two years, according to the Local Government Association (LGA). This deficit is primarily driven by increased demand for services for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). Recent Government announcements on the Local Government Funding Settlement indicate that the Government will cover 90% of the DSG deficit for council, which will land in the form of a grant in the autumn of 2026. 10. Table 3 provides an overview of the Month 9 position for the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). 11. 2025/26 SAVINGS 12. For the services within the remit of this Committee, the savings requirement for 2025/26 is £4.549m, as set out in the Council’s budget strategy. 13. As of Month 9, £4.351m (96%) of the savings and interventions are being recorded as banked or on track for delivery, with a further £ 0.198m (4%) being at initial stages of delivery. There are no savings that are being reported as having potential challenges in delivery. 14. Table 4 provides a detailed breakdown of the 2025/26 Month 9 savings position by portfolio. PERFORMANCE DATA 15. N/A RESIDENT BENEFIT 16. Regular monitoring of financial performance is used to assess whether spending and savings targets are being met, thereby supporting the efficient delivery of services to residents. By closely tracking expenditure and identifying variances, the council can take timely corrective actions to address overspending and mitigate risks. This also enhances public transparency Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public and accountability, providing residents with confidence that their Council is managing finances prudently and prioritising their needs. Overall, regular monitoring supports safeguarding the Council's finances and the delivery of quality services to residents. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 17. This is primarily a finance report and the implications are set out in the main body of the report above. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS 18. There are no direct legal implications arising from regular monitoring of the council’s finances by select committees. 19. Democratic Services advise that effective overview and scrutiny arrangements require access to the information under the committee’s purview and, in accordance with the 2024 Statutory Scrutiny Guidance, such information includes finance a nd risk information from the Council, and its partners where relevant. BACKGROUND PAPERS 20. NIL APPENDICES Appendix A – Tables 1-4 Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Appendix A – Tables 1-4 Table 1 – 2025/26 Month 9 Budget Monitoring Position by Portfolio Service Area Approved Budget Underlying Forecast Earmarked Reserves Provisions Transformation Capitalisation Management Action Forecast Outturn Final Forecast Variance Forecast Variance Prior Month Change in Variance R5: Executive Director Children and Young Peoples Services Expenditure 79,008 87,178 (434) 0 (701) (607) 85,435 6,427 5,438 989 Income (21,777) (21,029) (730) 0 0 0 (21,759) 18 497 (479) Sub-Total 57,231 66,149 (1,164) 0 (701) (607) 63,676 6,445 5,935 510 Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Table 2 – 2025/26 Month 9 Budget Monitoring Position by Service Area Service Area Approved Budget Underlying Forecast Earmarked Reserves Provisions Transformation Capitalisation Management Action Forecast Outturn Final Forecast Variance Forecast Variance Prior Month Change in Variance R5C: Director, Children Social Care A1: Staffing Costs 21,600 21,344 (58) 0 (111) (480) 20,694 (906) (1,132) 226 A2: Non-Staffing Costs 34,737 40,284 0 0 0 (127) 40,157 5,420 4,698 722 A3: Grants Fees & Other Income (15,228) (15,103) (730) 0 0 0 (15,833) (605) (175) (430) Sub-Total 41,109 46,525 (788) 0 (111) (607) 3,910 3,909 3,391 518 R5E: Director Education and SEND A1: Staffing Costs 8,015 9,986 0 0 (353) 0 9,633 1,618 1,745 (127) A2: Non-Staffing Costs 1,370 1,901 (376) 0 0 0 1,525 155 (58) 213 A3: Grants Fees & Other Income (5,137) (4,369) 0 0 0 0 (4,369) 768 815 (47) Sub-Total 4,248 7,518 (376) 0 (353) 0 6,789 2,541 2,502 39 R5S: Director SPQR A1: Staffing Costs 8,114 8,525 0 0 (237) 0 8,288 174 67 107 A2: Non-Staffing Costs 5,172 5,138 0 0 0 0 5,138 (34) 118 (152) A3: Grants Fees & Other Income (1,412) (1,557) 0 0 0 0 (1,557) (145) (143) (2) Sub-Total 11,875 12,106 (1,164) 0 (237) 0 11,869 (5) 42 (47) R5: Executive Director Children and Young Peoples Services A1: Staffing Costs 37,729 39,855 (58) 0 (701) (480) 38,615 886 680 206 A2: Non-Staffing Costs 41,279 47,323 (376) 0 0 (127) 46,820 5,541 4,758 783 A3: Grants Fees & Other Income (21,777) (21,029) (730) 0 0 0 (21,759) 18 497 (479) Sub-Total 57,231 66,149 (1,164) 0 (701) (607) 63,676 6,445 5,935 510 Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Table 3: Month 9 DSG Income and Expenditure Summary Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) Blocks Budget 2025/26 Forecast Month 9 Variance Month 7 Change DSG Settlement Academy Recoupment LBH Maintained £m £m £m £m £m £m £m Schools Block 297.9 (187.0) 110.9 110.9 0 0 0 Early Years Block 48.3 0 48.3 48.3 0 0 0 Central Schools Block 2.5 0 2.5 2.5 0 0 0 High Needs Block 86.8 (13.1) 73.7 70.8 (2.9) (1.9) (1.0) Budgeted Use of Reserves (12.5) 0 (12.5) (12.5) 0 0 0 Total 423.0 (200.1) 222.9 220.0 (2.9) (1.9) (1.0) Balance Brought Forward 1 April 2025 65.9 Budgeted Use of Reserves 12.5 Pressure/(Reduction) (2.9) Total Deficit at 31 March 2026 75.5 Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Table 4 – 2025/26 Month 9 Savings Position by Directorate Directorate Description RAG Rating 2025/26 & B/fwd savings Total 2025/26 B/fwd 2025/26 Total B G A1 A2 R W/O £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Children, Families & Education Improving and Modernising the Fostering Offer (462) (462) (438) (24) (462) Children, Families & Education Increase MVF by 1% (267) (267) (267) (267) Children, Families & Education New Care Offer - (Operating Model) (273) (273) (75) (198) (273) Children, Families & Education Semi / Shared Accommodation (2,156) (2,156) (2,029) (127) (2,156) Children, Families & Education Social Care Delivery Model - Social Care Delivery Model (495) (495) (495) (495) Children, Families & Education Social Care Delivery Model - Repeat Pregnancies (600) (600) (450) (150) (600) Children, Families & Education Social Care Delivery Model - Special Guardianship Orders (296) (296) (296) (296) Grand Total (462) (4,087) (4,549) (4,050) (301) 0 (198) 0 0 (4,549)

Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public SCHOOL PLACE PLANNING: SCHOOL ORGANISATION PLAN – UPDATE – MARCH 2026 Committee name Children, Families & Education Select Committee Officer reporting Abi Preston – Director of Education & SEND Gary Binstead – Head of Education & SEND Commissioning Papers with report School Organisation Plan 2025/26 Ward All HEADLINES School place planning is a statutory function of the Council as a local authority (LA) and involves liaison with all schools and Trusts in the borough, and with neighbouring LAs. The duty is to have a sufficiency of school places to meet parent demand across the borough. School place planning sets a s trategic framework in which the LA and every school can operate, requiring an annual review and decisions to be agreed with individual schools and Trusts to adjust supply, and to inform timely capital investment and building decisions and negotiations with the DfE. The School Organisation Plan was approved for publication by Cabinet, 18th April 2024 and it was agreed that it would be updated and presented to the Cabinet Portfolio Member, relevant Select Committee and schools annually with the latest data and forecasts. This report presents to Committee the updated School Organisation Plan for Hillingdon which will provide the following:  An overview of the education landscape in Hillingdon  A summary of current pupil numbers and projected demand in primary and secondary phases, including specialist provision  Options for the Local Authority (LA) to consider when determining the need to increase or reduce school places. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Children, Families & Education Select Committee: 1. Consider the updated School Organisation Plan with the latest data and forecasts; and 2. Provide comments to be included in the Cabinet Member report SUPPORTING INFORMATION The Council is responsible for planning, organising, and commissioning places for all state-funded schools in Hillingdon. This ensures that high standards are maintained and that fluctuating pupil numbers are managed efficiently, leading to the best outcomes for our children and young people, as well as the sustainability of schools. Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Local Authorities were previously required to publish a plan setting out how they would provide sufficient school places for the children within their borough which was a requirement of the School Standards and Frameworks Act 1998 but has since been repealed by the Children and Families Act 2004. The Education Act 1996, Education and Inspections Act 2006 and School Standards and Framework Act 1998 no longer require local authorities to provide this. Howe ver, strategic planning remains an invaluable tool. It assists Local Authorities in fulfilling their statutory obligations and ensures that schools are kept informed of data projections, facilitating effective long-term planning. The Plan is presented in 3 Sections; Introduction, Context and Strategy with the following 13 sub sections . The data provided in these sections will be updated annually, with changes highlighted in this report:  Purpose and scope  Government Regulations, Guidance and Policies Highlights the statutory duty of the council to provide sufficient school places for its residents. Until 2018, the number of children admitted into Hillingdon schools from other Councils (‘imports') was equal to the number of Hillingdon children attending schools outside of the Borough (‘exports’). Since then, ‘imports’ have decreased to 9.2% on National Offer Day 2025 and ‘exports’ of resident pupils to schools in other LAs have increased to 1 2.2% of residents. Therefore, Hillingdon is currently a net exporter. There has been a 0. 3% reduction of imports since National Offer Day 2024 (from 9.5%) and further 2.8% reduction (from 15.0%) of exports.  Hillingdon Demographics Provides an understanding of the resident population of Hillingdon and housing development which must be taken into consideration and incorporated into school place planning projections. According to the Office of National Statistics Mid -Year Population Estimates June 2024, the current population of Hillingdon is 329,185 of which 21,132 (6.4%) are aged 0-4 years, 21,244 (6.5%) are aged 5 -9 years, 24,764 (7.5) are aged 10 - 15 years and 16,279 (4.9%) are aged 16-19 years; in total 25.3% of the Borough population is aged 0-19.  Hillingdon Schools Provides a review of the types of schools within Hillingdon, an inspection summary and a breakdown of pupils on roll since 2014/2015 in N ursery, Primary, Secondary, Sixth Form and Special Schools There has been a gradual increase in pupil numbers between 2014/15 and 2025/26, rising from 49,384 to 5 1,364, an increase of 4%. A reduction of 2.3% from presented in the School Organisation Plan 2025 (which was 6.5%). However, the increase has not been across all ages, and there has been 28.7% reduction in Nursery aged children (23.8% last year) Significant growth in pupils attending a special school, where we have seen growth of 119% since 2014. This is an increase of 9.0% from the School Organisation Plan 2025. Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Oct 2014 = 569 Oct 2024 = 1194 (+625 or +110% since 2014) Oct 2025 = 1246 (+677 or +119% since 2014 // +52 or +9% since 2024)  Pupil Forecasting Shares factors taken into consideration when creating projections, such as development, birth rates and migration. Since September 2021, we have had 1081 applications from asylum -seeking families residing in temporary Home Office accommodation – a further 122 applications since the 959 that was presented in the School Organisation Plan 2025.  Place Planning Outlines options available to the Local Authority to ensure the sufficiency of high quality school places at the right time to meet future need. The forecasts used in this Plan suggest the following:  By the 2031/32 academic year, the number of primary pupils (Reception to Year 6) is projected to be 24,838, a 2.7% decrease compared with the October 2025 census. (For comparison, the 2025 School Orga nisation Plan reported a larger projected reduction of 5.8%).  By the 20231/32 academic year, the number of secondary pupils (Year 7 to Year 11) is projected to be 17,346, a 3.3% decrease compared with the October 2025 census. (For comparison, the 2025 School Organisation Plan reported a smaller reduction of 2.5%).  By the 2031/32 academic year, the number of sixth form pupils (Year 12 to Year 13) is projected to be 4,358, a 0.1% increase compared with the October 2025 Census. (For comparison, the 2025 School Organisation Plan reported a reduction of 0.9%). For the academic year 2027/28, the LA has approved a reduction in the PAN of 1 community infant school. Additionally, 3 non -community school admissions authorities have proposed a similar reduction of 30 places each (1 Form of Entry) in their PAN. A proposal to amalgamate a n additional infant and Junior School is being presented to Cabinet in April 202 6, and other Infant and Junior schools will be recommended for amalgamation in line with the Council Amalgamation policy, where appropriate.  Childcare and Early Education The current provision of early learning and childcare places in Hillingdon and the planned growth, taking into consideration the change in parents' entitlement to funded childcare that took effect from April 2024 and was rolled out further in September 2024. This entitlement will broaden further in September 2025, with eligible parents being able to receive up to 30 hours of funded child care, from the term after their child is nine months old. There are currently:  174 registered childminders – 6 less than presented in the School Organisation Plan 2025 - (181)  58 school-based nurseries – 1 more than presented in the School Organisation Plan 2025 - (57)  151 Private Voluntary and Independent (PVI) settings 7 more than presented in the School Organisation Plan 2025 (144) Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public  1 Council-maintained nursery school - no change Since September 2024, f ive schools have changed their age range to be able to offer funded places to eligible children from the term after their second birthday (2 from September 2024, 3 from September 2025) . A further primary school has completed a consultation recently to lower their age range, and another school is also considering making this change. The priority for place planning is ensuring that there are sufficient places for children aged under two who will be eligible for up to 30 hours of funded childcare. Wraparound childcare Currently 21 providers have accessed funding to set up Wraparound provision for school aged children across the LA, creating 521 additional places across Hillingdon.  Primary Place Planning A breakdown of all settings in the 14 primary Pupil Planning Areas (PPAs) of Hillingdon as well as the school place forecasts by planning area from the School Capacity Survey (SCAP) submission 2025. PPA Headlines PPA 1, 11 and 12 in the next 7 years is projected to show the most growth, at 20.5%, 15.8% and 42.0% respectively of their current Reception Roll (+8, +89 and +108 places respectively) PPA 1 - This area is predominantly rural and very isolated from the rest of the borough, it is surrounded by Hertfordshire with one lone village served by an infant and junior school which must have sufficient capacity to meet local demand. The year groups fluctuate, and this has caused challenges for both schools in relation to budget and class management. PPA 11 – This PPA is central to the largest concentration of population in the borough and the largest developments and is adjacent to PPAs 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12. It is also close to Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Heathrow so parents are affected by the changes due to the pandemic in perman ent and more casual employment, and borders with Eal ing where there may be future housing development affective cross border flows. Even with this projected increase over the next 7 years, there is sufficient capacity within the PPA. PPA 12 - This area has experienced volatility in rolls due to changes of housing tenure linked to Covid and Heathrow uncertainty, leading to housing previously leased by the airport being used by families and increasingly by government agencies for temporary rehousing of vulnerable families . PPA 12 borders PPAs 11, 13, and 14, as well as the London Borough of Hounslow. These neighbouring PPAs currently have sufficient capacity to absorb any surplus demand from PPA 12. This situation will continue to be monitored, but no further action is planned at this time. PPA 7 and 14 show a projected decrease in pupil numbers of 7.9% and 7.8% of their current Reception Roll (-25 and - 20 places respectively). PPA 7 - The recent pattern of household moves, and of pupils travelling to schools outside their planning area across PPA 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 is being carefully monitored PPA 14 - This PPA borders with PPA 10, 12 and 13 as well as South Bucks.  Secondary Place Planning A breakdown of all settings in the 2 secondary Pupil Planning Areas (PPAs) of Hillingdon as well as the school place forecasts by planning area from the School Capacity Survey (SCAP) submission 2025. The October 2025 census shows a year-on-year fall in secondary numbers to 17,934 (not including 6th form) for the second consecutive year (190 less than October 2024). Year 7 roll in the October 2025 Census stabilising at 3,479 (1 more than October 2024). PPA Headlines The North of the borough in the next 7 years is projected to show a decrease of 1.8%, (5.94% previously reported in 2024) compared to the current total Year 7 Roll (- 27 places). The South of the borough in the next 7 years is projected to show a decrease of 8.8%, (10.1% previously reported in 2024) compared to the current total Year 7 Roll (-175 places). Rolls have stabilised at a high level, and revised projections show Year 7 intake have passed their peak, while the total secondary roll is expected to peak in September 2026. There is significant movement of pupils living to the south of the A40 travelling to schools north of the A40. 23% (2025) of pupils offered a place in a school in the north are resident in the south of the borough (5% less than in 2024) , compared to only 1% (2025) in the opposite direction (1% less than in 2024). The operation of the different admission criteria Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public and parental preferences creates unpredictab le outcomes and changing sibling links sometimes. This fluctuates and requires a margin of spaces both north and south of the Borough to absorb any movement.  Special Education Needs (SEN) - Special Schools & Alternative Provision (AP) A breakdown of the specialist provision in the borough as well as the projected demand for additional places and the current projects in place to meet demand. Within mainstream schools - In Autumn 2024, 12.2% of children are on SEND Support and 2.8% with EHCPs. In Autumn 2025, 12.7% of children are on SEN Support and 3.1% with EHCPs showing additional growth. There is also a change from last year’s projections, for residents with EHCPs now expected to be 3947 in 2031 / 32 compared to 4055 presented in the School Organisation Plan 2025 (a drop of 108). Given the release of the recent SEND reforms, it should be noted that this could change substantially given the proposed legislative changes the government is consulting on. There are currently 2 9 AP providers (2 more than presented in the School Organisation Plan 2025) signed up to the Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS), providing officers with a broad range of provisions to consider when seeking Alternative Provision for a Hillingdon child.  Next Steps Acknowledges that we must continue to monitor the data and update the relevant committee as well as stakeholders via strategic groups such as Schools Strategic Partnership Board (SSPB) and Head Teachers Termly to help manage demand. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no direct financial implications to the Council’s General Fund arising from the updated School Organisation Plan. The Plan provides a strategic overview of current and projected pupil numbers but does not commit the Local Authority to any financial expenditure. Any future decisions relating to changes in school capacity —such as adjustments to Published Admission Numbers (PAN), temporary measures, or organisational changes—will be considered individually and funded through the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG), primarily via the Schools Block Growth Fund, as determined through the Schools Forum. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS There are no specific legal implications arising from this report. BACKGROUND PAPERS NIL. APPENDICES School Organisation Plan 2025/26

Plan page 1 London Borough of Hillingdon School Organisation Plan Plan page 2 Contents Section 1 Introduction 4 1.1 Purpose and scope 4 Section 2 Context 5 2.1 Government Regulations, Guidance and Policies 5 2.2 Funding and Delivery 6 2.3 Hillingdon Demographics 7 2.4 Hillingdon School 8 2.5 Pupil Forecasting 12 Section 3 Strategy 14 3.1 Place Planning 14 3.2 Childcare and Early Education 17 3.3 Primary Place Planning 19 3.4 Secondary Place Planning 21 3.5 Post 16 Planning 23 3.6 Special Education Needs and Disabilities (SEND) - Special Schools & Alternative Provision Planning 24 3.7 Next Steps 32 Plan page 3 Foreword from the Director of Education & SEND One of the Council’s core commitments to residents is to provide thriving, healthy households where children, young people, their families and vulnerable adults and older people live healthy, active, and independent lives. The School Organisation Plan is crucial to meeting this ambition, as it sets out the approach as to how we will manage surplus capacity in our schools, whilst ensuring sufficiency of places in all sectors of education, to ensure the best outcomes for our children and young people and sustainability of schools. “Hillingdon's children and young peo ple are the future of Hillingdon. We are just as ambitious for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), and those who access alternative provision, as we are for every other child.” Hillingdon Local Area SEND and Alternative Provision Strategy for Children and Young People 0-25 years. We are keen to continue to strengthen our partnership working with Headteachers, governors and families as part of our strategic planning of education provision, working together to review the education landscape to manage the increases and decreases in demand for school places. Abi Preston Director of Education & SEND Plan page 4 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose and Scope The Council has a statutory duty to ensure there are sufficient places for every resident pupil (Education Act 1996, Section 14). The Council continues to invest in education capacity and quality through the provision of school support and monitoring, and the expansion of schools where needed to meet demand. The Council’s investment in new and modern education buildings and facilities continues to provide the high-quality learning environment that Hillingdon children need. The mixed economy of Council maintained schools and academ ies/free schools in the Borough gives the Council a dynamic but central role in securing the best educational outcomes for children and young people in the Borough. Working in partnership with schoo l leaders, multi -academy trusts and other relevant responsible authorities, the Council continues to promote high standards for all learners and to challenge underperformance where this occurs. The Council must plan, organise, and commission places for all state -funded schools in Hillingdon to ensure high standards are maintained, diverse school communities supported, and sufficient places are available. The demand for school places changes over time - this document is ‘live’ and, as such, will be updated annually. It sets out the Council’s current projections over the next 7 years in order to understand where there will be a need to provide more school places and if there may be a need to provide fewer places. Increases in demand can lead to the creation of a new school or the expansion of existing schools, whereas decreases in demand can lead to a reduction in school provision. We strive to communicate effectively with schools and school communities about the pressure for places in each area. However, the Council also endeavour s to manage expectations regarding school organisation proposals. This document does not seek to definitively set out all the actions the Council intends to take in the future but rather is intended to provide an overview and outline our strategy to manage any changes effectively. This document aims to present schools, governing bodies, and residents with the following:  An overview of the education landscape in Hillingdon  A summary of current pupil numbers and projected demand in primary and secondary phases, including specialist provision  Options in place for the Council to consider when determining the need to increase or reduce school places Plan page 5 The School Organisation Plan will be updated annually with the latest census and School Capacity Survey (SCAP) data and forecasts. This may result in changes to existing proposals as the Council responds to the latest demographic changes in the Borough. 2. Context 2.1 Government Regulations, Guidance and Policies The Council has a statutory duty to provide sufficient school places, oversee a fair admissions process and ensur e that children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) have access to appropriate quality provision. This is to ensure that all pupils can access a school place if they apply. These duties are for all of the pupils who are resident in the Borough - including children attending schools in other Local Authority (LA) areas or independent schools. The Council also has a range of responsibilities for the schools in the Borough, and the pupils and staff in them, depending on their legal status. Each type of school has different powers and governance, and a different relationship with the Council and the Department for Education (DfE), and each Council is different. All pupils have the flexibility to choose to go to school anywhere, as long as they meet the admissions criteria for the relevant school. Due to this, the Council must review the flow of children across the 7 neighbouring Councils as well as Hillingdon pupils educated in Hillingdon schools. Until 2018, the number of children admitted into Hillingdon schools from other Councils ( ‘imports') was equal to the number of Hillingdon children attending schools outside of the Borough (‘exports’). Since then, ‘imports’ have decreased to 9.2% on National Offer Day 2025 and ‘exports’ of resident pupils to schools in other LAs have increased to 12.2% of residents. Therefore, Hillingdon is currently a net exporter. Map 1. Hillingdon Secondary Pupil Import Export Data – National Offer Day 2025 Plan page 6 From 2010, the Council changed the way it funds schools, and now delegates most of the schools block funding directly to schools, rather than retaining a percentage of funding for central Council services to provide support to schools. This means that Hillingdon community schools have greater autonomy than the average. Generally, schools are financially strong and resilient, and this was a benefit during the pandemic. The London Borough of Hillingdon aims to offer every child a primary and secondary school place, either on national offer day for Reception and year 7 applicants , or within 15 school days of applying for a place for in-year applications. The Admissions team aim to offer places within a reasonable distance from the home address and , where possible, at one of the schools preferred by the parent. For further information about School Admissions please refer to the School Admissions 2026 brochure. 2.2 Funding and Delivery The London Borough of Hillingdon uses a mixture of funding sources to finance additional school places. Funding sources available include basic need grant from central government, Free School Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) funding (when available) and potentially Section 106 and Community I nfrastructure Levy (CIL) contributions from developers. The London Borough of Hillingdon has a Capital Programme Works Service to help assist in the development of school expansions and new schools. Through the work of this team, school building projects are delivered t o required standards and at good value, ensuring the best outcome from the investment of public funds. For further information please refer to the School Capital Projects and building maintenance guidance for schools. Schools Forum Plan page 7 The Schools Forum is a requirement under the Department for Education (DfE) regulations and is governed by the Schools Forums (England) Regulations 2012 , effective from 1st October 2012. Representatives from schools and academies make up the schools forum. There is also some representation from non-school organisations, such as nursery and 16-19 education providers. Please see the list of Schools forum operational and good practice guide - GOV.UK The Schools Forum acts as a consultative body on some issues, and a decision-making body on others. One such area on which Schools Forums can make decisions on is whether to create a fund for significant pupil growth in order to support the Council’s duty for place planning and agree the criteria for maintained schools and Academies to access this fund. Proposals can be made to the Schools Forum which must meet at least four times a ye ar. Regular updates on the delivery of new provision are provided to the High Needs subgroup of Schools Forum. The Council cannot distribute extra funding to specific schools outside the funding formula and Schools Forum process. 2.3 Hillingdon Demographic The London Borough of Hillingdon is the second largest of London's 32 boroughs, situated to the west of the capital. It has a unique location, bordering three neighbouring London Local Authorities (Ealing, Harrow, and Hounslow) as well as three Authorities outside of London (Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire, and Surrey). According to the Census 2021, the population was 305,900 of which 19,882 (6.5%) were aged 0-4 years, 20,469 (6.7%) were aged 5-9 years, 23,681 (7.7%) were aged 10-15 years and 14,871 (4.9%) were aged 16-19; in total, 25.8% of the Borough population was aged 0-19. According to the Office of National Statistics Mid-Year Population Estimates June 2024, the current population of Hillingdon is 329,185 of which 21,132 (6.4%) are aged 0-4 years, 21,244 (6.5%) are aged 5-9 years, 24,764 (7.5) are aged 10-15 years and 16,279 (4.9%) are aged 16-19 years; in total 25.3% of the Borough population is aged 0-19. New Housing The London Borough of Hillingdon currently has a housing target of delivering 10,830 self - contained homes between 2019/20 and 2028/29. Along with this, there are further plans to deliver other types of housing, such as student accommodation, older persons’ housing, and shared accommodation, although many of these accommodation types are less likely to impact pupil numbers. The Mayor of London has committed to reviewing the adopted London Plan (2021) and has published a timeline to adopt this in 2027 /28. This will contain a new housing target for the London Borough of Hillingdon. The Government’s prescribed housing need for London is 88,000 homes per annum and, if translated into borough housing targets, would likely lead to a significantly higher target for Hillingdon. New housing will be delivered in every ward over this period, with a higher concentration of housing in areas with more available brownfield land and higher public transport access. This includes the areas in and surrounding Uxbridge and Hayes town centres. The latest five-year projections of where housing will be built are shared annually by the Planning Policy Team with Education colleagues and incorporated within school place planning projections. Beyond this five-year period, the growth area for new housing will be set out in the Council’s emerging Local Plan. Developer Contributions Plan page 8 The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a charge which can be levied by local authorities on new development in their area. It is an important tool for local authorities to use to help them deliver the infrastructure needed to support development in their area. Since 2014, this is a mechanism that the Council has used to support capital programmes across the Borough , including any education related projects . This funding is accessed through an internal capital process where projects will be assessed and prioritised in line with the Council’s priorities. However, t here are some historic agreements with developers still paying Section 106 education contributions from before the CIL regime was a dopted in 2014. Section 106 agreements may also exist with neighbouring local planning authorities , but these will be infrequent. 2.4 Hillingdon Schools The schools' landscape in Hillingdon consists of ninety-seven (please note that Guru Nanak Sikh Academy is 1 all through school but in some reports counted twice for primary and secondary) state-funded settings which include a mixture of Council maintained schools and a range of other types of settings including academies, non-maintained special schools, and University Technical Colleges (UTCs)/studio colleges . Approximately 3 3% of all primar y schools in Hillingdon are academies, with 67% remaining as maintained schools. In the secondary school sector, approximately 90% of all schools are academie s with only 10% remaining as maintained settings. In the special school sector, approximately 70% of schools are academies whilst 30% are maintained by the Council. Following the Academies Act 2010, schools have been able to convert from maintained to academy status and under current legislation states that all new schools must be free schools. There are currently forty-nine academy schools in Hillingdon (14 multi -academy Trusts who operate more than one school, and seven standalone academy Trusts). Please refer to Appendix 2 for breakdown. Free Schools and Academies Section 6A of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 requires local authorities to seek proposals for a new academy if it believes a new school needs to be established in its local area. As part of inviting proposals, the Council would be expected to identify a site and funding for any building works. Hillingdon is not able to determine where and when free schools open, although the ESFA, who manage the Free School programme, work closely with Council Officers to time openings to meet local demand. Free Schools, once opened, are also academies. There are certain exceptions to the requirement to seek proposals for a new academy and these are set out in the legislation and expanded on in the statutory guidance “March 2025”. With the opening of the Grand Union Village and Pinn River in January 2026. Types of Hillingdon State funded Schools The range and number of state funded schools in Hillingdon is shown in Table 1 below. Place planning for independent schools is not undertaken by the Council. These schools sit outside the maintained sector. Table 1. Total number of schools in Hillingdon based on type of provision – January 2026 Plan page 9 Appendix 3 explains the definition for each type of provision. Demand for education places Hillingdon has the seventh highest number of pupils of the 32 London boroughs (DfE statistics June 2025). As you will see from the graph below, there was a gradual increase in pupil numbers between Oct 2014 and Oct 2019 totalling 6.3%, followed by a period of relative stability up to Oct 2024 (within +/- 0.7% each year), with the latest Oct 2025 data showing a drop of 2.3% from the previous year. Graph 1 - Pupils in Hillingdon schools, October School Census 2014 - 2025 Plan page 10 (Please note that the slight discrepancy between the individual figures by phase, and the total figures for pupil numbers, is a result of those who are dual registered in both mainstream and special schools) However, the trend has not been the same across all ages , and there has been a 28.7% reduction in Nursery aged children across this period. There are many factors that can affect the decision of a family when deciding if their child will attend an early years setting, so it is difficult to establish exactly the cause of the decline, but certainly some of the reduct ion is linked to the reducing birth rate which has fallen around 7% between 2016/17 and 2022/23 (see graph 2). Table 2. Pupils in Hillingdon schools, October School Census 2014 - 2025 The table above summarises the pupil on roll data from Graph 1, to show the movement in pupil numbers between 2014 and 2025, taken from the October school census each year, for each phase of education. As you can see, the impact of reducing pupil numbers in Nursery, is filtering through to the Primary sector where the previous trend of growth has now reversed, and this impact will also affect the Secondary sector as pupils get older and continue to move through our schools. Plan page 11 Also apparent is the significant growth in pupils attending a special school over the last 1 1 years, where we have seen growth of 119% since 2014 (569 on roll in October 2014 school census, 1,246 in October 2025). There is significant work under way to support children, young people and schools to provide sufficient places to meet this increasing demand within our SEND and Alternative Provision Strategy 2023-28. This work has included additional special school places , and an increase in the number of specialist provision places within our mainstream schools (Specialist Resourced Provision (SRP), and Designated Units (DU). The Local Authority are working with Bishop Ramsey Church of England School to open a 24 place SRP for pupils with ASD in September 2026, subject to DfE approval. Officers are continuing to liaise with Secondary school colleagues to explore further possibilities of creating additional SRPs or DUs. Available capacity in schools Based on the Published Admission Number for Hillingdon schools detailed in Appendix 4, the table below show s the total number of places available by phase, which are used to meet demand. Table 3. October 2025 -Total number of places available by phase *Secondary PAN excludes bulge classes **UTC/Studio uses Physical Capacity in place of PAN ***Special Schools use LBH Commissioned Places in place of PAN As you can see, there are sufficient places in both the primary and secondary phase in mainstream however, there is a high demand for special school places . There are projects already underway to close this gap and ensure that sufficient and appropriate provision will be in place to meet the needs of the children and young people of Hillingdon. A greater challenge relates to the over-capacity in the Primary sector, where there are more places than required. Conversations continue with schools about ways to reduce the impact of th is challenge, resulting in a range of options to consider, including reducing the PAN, alternative use of any space, and amalgamation for example. There is also an excess of capacity in sixth form and in UTC / Studio College schools at the secondary phase. This is largely out of the control of the Council as all 18 sixth forms and all 4 UTC / Studio Colleges have their own admission policies. Plan page 12 Ofsted Inspection Outcomes Hillingdon's Ofsted inspection outcomes demonstrate an improving picture when compare d with the previous year. At the end of the 2023/24 academic year 94% of schools were judged as Good or Outstanding. This is 2% higher than 2022/23, and 4% higher than the England average as you can see from the table below. In 2024/25 Ofsted continued their full inspection programme with a change to outcome wording to move away from the one-word overall judgement. Further information on outcomes can be found in the Education Standards Report which is presented annually to Children, Families & Education Select Committee in March and then signed off by the Cabinet Member for Children, Families & Education in April. Table 4. End of 2023-24 Inspection Summary – Hillingdon verses England 2.5 Pupil Forecasting School place planning is the comparison of the projected future demand for school places with current school capacity. This can highlight a projected over-supply or under-supply of places, either of which is managed through a delivery plan. The delivery plan need s to be flexible to cope with changing demographics, so that projects can be accelerated or slowed in response to actual demand. It is best practice to retain additional capacity between 5% - 10% during the year to support any transition and movement of pupil s, therefore the LA aim to provide a surplus margin in line with these parameters, to ensure that the Council can place new arrivals, cope with higher than forecast demand and enable as many parents as possible to secure places at their preferred school. Pupil forecasts are calculated by applying recent trends to current known population data. Hillingdon’s forecasts of future Reception demand are mainly based on the number of births in Hillingdon 5 years before, with 7-year projections provided for secondary school places, based on existing pupils moving through their education. Hillingdon subscribes to the Greater London Authority (GLA)’s school roll projection service, which creates a roll projection based on the GLA population projections of the wards where pupils live. The underlying factors include: Development The amount of development projected in the area will affect that authority’s population projections and, in turn, its school roll projections. More development generally means that the Council will attract more people, and its population will therefore rise. Births The number of births in an area will have a direct impact on the number of children requiring school places four years later. In academic year 2022/23 (the latest available data), there were approximately 4,143 live births. This figure decreased each year from 2015/16 to 2020/21 but Plan page 13 is projected to increase slightly in the short term, stabilising with an average of 4,300 live births per annum. The graph below shows the number of live births each academic year since 2016/17 and projections until 2028/29. This includes the latest available GLA data for the annual Schools Capacity survey (SCAP) 2025. Graph 2. Hillingdon Births Migration Migration, both from other areas within the UK and internationally, can significantly influence population projections. In-year growth is used here to mean new arrivals to Hillingdon applying for school places outside the usual start points of Reception and Year 7, including those starting after September in Reception and Year 7. The level of new arrivals will be influenced by many factors including the number of affordable housing units built and national issues. Historically, Hillingdon had net movement inwards , but this slowed from 2015 onward s and reversed, resulting in net outwards movement from 2019 -2021 which can be attributed to factors such as Brexit and Covid , where we have seen a change in the population within a number of communities. This is not forecast to change at the current time. Another challenge for Hillingdon is due to Heathrow airport being in the Borough , and a subsequent increase in asylum-seeking families and refugees arriving in the UK. This has an impact on schools by increasing the level of mobility of pupils attending Hillingdon schools, as some families are resettled out of the Borough within a short timescale. Between September 2021 and January 202 6, we have received 1081 applications from asylum -seeking families residing in temporary Home Office accommodation in the Borough for Hillingdon schools. Plan page 14 3. Strategy 3.1 Place Planning The Council aims to provide the right number of high-quality school places at the right time to meet the current and future need of children and young people in Hillingdon. In order to ensure the Council is able to meet its statutory duties and maintain an education system that is fit for purpose and financially viable, there is a range of actions required as outlined below. The primary sector faces the most significant challenge with low or declining pupil numbers. This creates significant pressure on schools financially, impacting their capacity to deliver a strong viable curriculum offer, manage staffing within budget, and to be able to manage other commitments. The total number of children attending secondary schools has fallen for the first time in many years, but is projected to stabilise slightly above the current level by 2026/27, and then start to reduce, so there will be the same challenge to address in the secondary sector. Sixth Form projections follow a similar patter n to Secondary and will stabilise in the same year but fall more slowly remaining above current pupil numbers. The forecasts used in this Plan suggest that the total number of:  Primary school pupils (R -Y6) on roll by 20 31/32 will be 2 4,838, down 2.7% from October 2025 Census.  Secondary school pupils (Y7-Y11), on roll by 2031/32 will be 17,346, down 3.3% from October 2025 Census.  Sixth form pupils (Y12 -Y13) on roll by 203 1/32 will be 4,358, up 0.1% from October 2025 Census. Ways to Manage Place Planning PAN Reductions While some surplus school places are required, it needs to be managed and controlled carefully, making sure that there is not an oversupply, which causes inefficiency and is not a good use of resources . This could be destabilising for schools leading to challenges with financial viability and quality issues. It is expected that schools will respond to any significant reductions in applications for places at their school, where appropriate, by consulting with the Council to discuss any potential reductions in their Published Admissions Number (PAN). Table 5. PAN reductions in Hillingdon Plan page 15 For the academic year 2024/25, the LA has agreed a reduction of PAN at 1 community primary school and 2 foundation primary schools. This will reduce the PAN by 30 places for each of the Foundation schools and 21 places for the Community school – a total of 81 places. For the academic year 2025/26 , the LA has formally agreed on the PAN reduction at 2 community primary schools. This will reduce the PAN by 30 places for each scho ol – a total of 60 places. For the academic year 2026/27, the admissions authority for 1 non-community school has formally agreed on a PAN reduction. This will reduce the PAN by 30 places for the school – a total of 30 places. For the academic year 2027/28, the LA has approved a reduction in the PAN of 1 community infant school. Additionally, 3 non-community school admissions authorities have consulted to a similar reduction in their PAN. If approved, each school’s PAN will decrease by 30 places, resulting in a total reduction of 120 places. Gradual Opening When new school places become available either at a new school or as part of an expansion project, not all the classes are open to pupils in the first year. Usually only the lowest year group will open in the first year and these pupils will gradually move up through the school one year at a time. This phased approach ensures the best use of resources and manages the new entrants to the school in an efficient way, safeguarding the school from over-supply. We are not due to open any mainstream schools but are hoping to open additional specialist provision over the next few years to meet growing demand. Capped PANs In addition to the permanent reductions in PANs shown above, in consultation with schools, temporary reductions or ‘caps’ can also be implemented. Capping a school’s PAN is a measure which seeks to alleviate some of the logistical and financial difficultie s associated with low or falling rolls. Capping is undertaken on the understanding that , should there be a sudden influx of pupils that cannot be placed, schools are expected to admit up to the Published Admission Number if needed. Federating a Governing Body At a time of increasing school autonomy, the need for schools to work collaboratively is greater than ever. There are a variety of ways schools can do this, from informal partnerships to more formal arrangements involving shared governance. This provides economies of scale as schools are able to share resources, assets, and best practice across sites. Plan page 16 In England, Council-maintained schools have the option of becoming a federation, in which the separate schools’ governing bodies become a sing le governing body with responsibility for all the schools in the federation. Currently, the London Borough of Hillingdon has two federated governing bodies. Two former federated governing bodies have already successfully merged their Infant and Junior Schools to create Primary Schools. From April 2026, one of the federated governing bod ies will amalgamate to form a Primary school. Amalgamations The Council believes that the amalgamation of linked Infant and Junior schools is a positive way to develop, and this will help to create and maintain successful, sustainable, and viable Schools. The Council recognises that the education landscape is ever -changing, and this needs to be taken into account along with the individual circumstances of schools. As Grange Park Infant and Nursery and Grange Park Junior Schools successfully amalgamated in September 2026, there are currently nine infant schools and nine junior schools, all of which could benefit from amalgamating into primary schools. Harefield Infant and Harefield Junior Schools are scheduled to amalgamate and become a primary school in April 2026. In addition to this, the LA are currently consulting on the amalgamation of Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School. Infant and junior schools can be particularly vulnerable to financial and organisation al pressures as they only have less year groups to deploy their teaching staff , and less opportunity to share resources across the school . The Council is also engaged in conversations with the remaining Infant and Junior schools across the Borough in relation to potential future amalgamations. For more information on the process of school amalgamations within Hillingdon maintained schools please refer to Hillingdon schools’ amalgamation policy. Marketing the school Schools have the ability to influence parental opinions or choice, in a range of matters including Ofsted inspections or other matters unrelated to education. It is important that schools engage with the wider community and publicise the positive news about their provision and achievements to prospective families and others. There are range of ways this can happen, and includes:  Greater social media presence – Twitter/Instagram  School Fairs / Open days / Events  Target and engage with feeder schools or settings across the area to promote the school  Local media  Active engagement with the community, and offer the school premises for events and activities  Opportunities to showcase the school and the pupils to celebrate achievements Vacant Caretaker Properties Hillingdon has already actively identi fied vacant properties across the Borough that are suitable for teaching children and young people. This is often creating additional provision for children with SEND , who require smaller class sizes, and a higher ratio of staff to children, Plan page 17 which is ideal for this type of building. The future of any of these buildings will be considered and reviewed as necessary. Closures The Department for Education guidance on school closures includes a presumption not to close. All options will have been exhausted to avoid school closure although ultimately, where there is no alternative long-term option, this may have to be considered. As a very last resort and in line with population statistics we may have to consider school closures in the future where it is in the best interests of children to do so and by meeting the relevant legislation and statutory guidance. Satellite Provision Satellite provision is needed when a school requires additional space at another site in order to admit more children on their roll. This can support other schools by using their vacant spaces, and supplement their income, and also encourage collaboration and partnership working to improve efficiency and best practice . There are currently 2 examples of this in Hillingdon. Bulge Classes A bulge class is an additional class added to a Primary or Secondary school to cope with additional demand for school places , normally in a particular area . The Council plans for a small oversupply of places in all year groups in order to provide a level of flexibility with in- year places that may be required. This allows for: • growth between January and July • unexpected growth above forecast levels • new arrivals to Hillingdon above those forecast to arrive • some pupil movement between schools to satisfy parental preference, or to meet the needs of children and young people 3.2 Childcare and Early Education The Council has a statutory duty (contained in the Childcare Act 2006 and 2016) to ensure, as far as reasonably practicable, that there are sufficient childcare places to ensure that families can:  access the funded early education entitlements for their child  take up, or remain in work  undertake education or training, which could reasonably lead to work Delivery of early learning and childcare provision in Hillingdon is through a mixed market of private and voluntary providers, including childminders, day nurseries and pre-schools, and through schools, including academies. As of January 2026, Hillingdon has:  174 registered childminders  58 school-based nurseries  151 Private Voluntary and Independent (PVI) settings  1 Council-maintained nursery school Five schools have consulted to change their age range to be able to offer funded places to eligible children from the term after their second birthday. For 2 of the schools this took effect September 2024 and for the other 3 this took effect from September 2025. A further primary school has completed a consultation recently to lower their age range and another school is also considering making this change. Plan page 18 Provision of early education and childcare is vital for the local economy, and for developing stronger communities. The support delivered to early years settings in Hillingdon ensures that children are school ready when they move into statutory education and are best placed to achieve a Good Level of Development at the end of the Early Years Foundation Stage. The Council aims to ensure that all children have access to provision that is ‘Good’ or better, which is the case for 99% of group care settings that have been inspected up to August 2025 (data source: ’Childcare providers and inspections as of 31st August 2025’). Support for settings to improve i s provided by the Early Years Quality Improvement Team, who provide training and support to settings on a range of pedagogical and curriculum -based topics. Ongoing support is focused on settings being confident to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of the EYFS and next steps for children’s learning. Planned Growth The childcare market remains relatively stable, and the Council receives regular enquiries from group childcare providers interested in establishing new or additional provision within the Borough, albeit that the availability of suitable premises remains the biggest hurdle to new providers in establishing their business. Where a provider ceases to operate, a new or alternative provider frequently opens in their place, ensuring the sufficiency of childcare for the local community. However, there are wards in the Borough where sufficiency of early years childcare remains a challenge, and the Families’ Information Service continues to work with group childcare providers, childminders, and school nurseries to increase provision in response to rising demand. This varies according to the age of children and the type of funded entitlement that children are eligible for. For example, the Wards where there are the biggest shortfalls in funded childcare for disadvantaged two-year-olds, are Charville, Harefield Village, Heathrow Villages, Hillingdon East and Wood End. For children whose parents qualify for the working parents entitlement to funded childcare, the Wards with the biggest challenge for insufficient funded childcare are Colham & Cowley, Hayes Town, Harefield Village, Heathrow Villages, Pinkwell, Uxbridge and Wood End. The priority for Early Years place planning is ensuring that there are sufficient places for children aged under two who will be eligible for up to 30 hours of funded childcare. The Council will continue to engage with all new and existing childcare providers, including childminders, schools, and private nursery settings, to ensure we are able to provide sufficient places for all children across Hillingdon. As detailed earlier, the live birth rate in Hillingdon has fallen in the last 5 years and is projected to stabilise at this lower level over the next 2-3 years. However, parents’ entitlement to funded childcare for 2-year-olds increased from April 2024, with working families now entitled to up to 15 funded hours of childcare per week, over 38 weeks a year. This entitlement was extended to children from nine months old, from September 2024. Families must meet eligibility criteria to qualify, and children can only receive funded childcare from the term after they are nine months old. In September 2025, this entitlement expanded to offer up to 30 hours funded childcare a week, for 38 weeks a year, for eligible children. In response to the expected increased demand, additional places will be needed, although it is expected that some existing childcare places will convert from family funded provision, to Plan page 19 provision that is partly paid by the Council and partly paid by families. The Council are working with settings to understand what the full impact of these changes is likely to be and will look for appropriate solutions and additional capacity in response , especially for children aged under two years old. This will include:  working with existing providers to look at expansion or opening new settings  promoting the childcare sector to prospective childminders  supporting the government early years recruitment campaign For more information on Early Years Places please refer to the childcare sufficiency assessment. Wraparound childcare for school aged children. In Hillingdon we have been developing a wraparound offer in schools to provide childcare for children from breakfast to after school. This is aimed at children from five to twelve years of age, giving parents the opportunity to train, be in education or get back into work. We have been working with a range of providers to ensure children attending schools across the Borough have sufficient opportunities to access wraparound care, the programme has been developing over the past year complimenting those settings already offering childcare for school aged children. Currently 21 providers have accessed funding to set up Wraparound provision for school aged children across the LA. This funding grant is still available for providers to access until April 2026. Table 6. Wraparound Provision for Schools in Hillingdon January 2026. Plan page 20 *12 additional places were created in the provision, however based on DfE calculations this equates to 2 full wraparound places Based on increasing demand for places we will continue to work with schools and settings to develop the childcare offer for school aged children through:  Quality of provision  Identifying areas of insufficient childcare  Marketing wraparound within schools to promote parental choice. 3.3 Primary Place Planning In Hillingdon, the statutory duty to plan school places (for Reception to year 11) is undertaken by assessing places in pupil planning areas (PPAs) . The Council has a duty to provide a “reasonable offer” of a school place to all children. In the primary phase, a “reasonable offer” is one that is within 2 miles of home. Hillingdon uses 14 PPAs which are broadly based on Hillingdon’s electoral ward boundaries. By dividing the Borough into 14 primary planning areas, Officers can ensure that places are provided near to where children live. However, children can travel across planning areas to attend school, particularly when they live close to the borders. Plan page 21 The table below outlines the number of schools in each area, and Appendix 5 shows which schools are within each planning area. Table 7. Planning Areas Planning Area Number Number of Schools PPA 1 2 PPA 2 5 PPA 3 6 PPA 4 2 PPA 5 10 PPA 6 7 PPA 7 5 PPA 8 4 PPA 9 4 PPA 10 3 PPA 11 9 PPA 12 3 PPA 13 2 PPA 14 5 The forecast for the Borough of Hillingdon is below, and forecasts are shown by Planning Area and set out in Appendix 6. These planning areas provide the basis for the annual DfE School Capacity (SCAP) return submitted in the Summer term that determines the level of grant funding the Council is allocated. They are groups of schools, defined by geography and admissions patterns, wherein a sufficiency of places across the group will generally ensure every child can access a local school place (even if some schools are oversubscribed). School Place Planning and Admissions Officers liaise with schools individually and collectively to discuss current demand for places, future demand for places and any projects that need to be completed to ensure there are sufficient school places. Officers from the team also engage with planning authorities, local councillors, residen ts and communities, faith groups, developers, and Central Government. Primary Projections Applications to Hillingdon schools on National Offer Day for Reception in 202 5 were 287 places less than projected, although some of this gap is likely to be filled by late applications. Approximately 40% of our primary phase schools are currently full. Surplus places have risen overall but are expected to stabilize over the next few years . Surplus places are often concentrated in a small number of primary schools across the Borough. Officers are working closely with primary schools regarding the large number of surplus places due to PAN reductions and continu e to monitor other schools that may also have surplus capacity in the next few years. These reductions will be managed in line with the options in the strategy outlined above. Plan page 22 Reception Pupil Forecast – The London Borough of Hillingdon Table 8. Reception Pupil Forecast for the London Borough of Hillingdon Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +163 +138 -129 -4 -2 -20 -17 Reception Surplus 532 394 523 527 529 549 566 “Reception Pupil Forecast” shows the year -on-year change in projections e.g., for the whole Borough, 2025/26’s reception projection is 163 pupils higher than the 2024/25 census actuals. “Reception Surplus” show s the expected number of vacant school places against the approved PAN for each year. “Number on Roll” is using January Census actuals for 2024/25, and projections for future years. 3.4 Secondary Place Planning Secondary aged children are expected to travel longer distances to school. A reasonable offer for a secondary place is one that is within 3 miles of home. However, secondary planning areas allow the Council to understand local ised pressures for schools and where additional places would help more children attend a school near to where they live. However, this must be balanced with any resource implications . The October 2025 census shows a year -on-year fall in secondary numbers to 17,934 (not including 6th form) for the second consecutive year (190 less than October 2024). Year 7 roll in the October 2025 Census stabilising at 3,479 (1 more than October 2024), but pressure in this phase still remains as some schools are currently accommodating bulge classes in upper year groups. There is also a higher number of pupils in years 10-11 due to a combination of in-year admissions, and the additional capacity for those year groups in two studio colleges and two UTC schools which attract pupils from out of Borough. The Year 7 roll in October 2025 was 135 above the number of offers made on National Offer Day. This is partially due to 60 pupils at Guru Nanak Sikh Academy (an all -through school) aging through from year 6 to 7 without needing to apply for a place. Plan page 23 Preferences for Year 7 in September 2025 and actions National Offer Day was 3rd March 2025, and although most secondary school pupils attend a school two miles from home or nearer, some pupils choose to travel further including in and out of the Borough. In 2025, 400 Hillingdon residents were offered Out of Borough schools , which is 141 less than 2024. The Council use two different metrics: a. Ensuring every resident pupil has a school place – increasing the supply of places in schools in the Borough if necessary. b. The proportion of resident pupils gaining one of their top preferences – which includes them securing places in out of Borough schools. The council received 3,626 secondary school applications for September 2025, and ninety- four per cent of pupils were offered one of their preferred places. Hillingdon also achieved slightly below than the London average for applicants offered one of their top three preference schools at 88.16 per cent, compared to London's 90.48 per cent. From those, 67.15 per cent of Hillingdon pupils received their first choice. Secondary projections Parental choice fills most secondary schools but leaves capacity in some schools underutilised. Some of this capacity can be further than 3 miles away from the pupils’ homes who require a place and may mean that children need to travel further to access a place. This complicates the process of pupil place planning as projections can assume all places are equally full and popular which is not the case for all schools. This demonstrates the need for analysis at a PPA level to ensure a true reflection of demand, and ensure pupils have a school place close to home where possible. The tables below show the most recent projections, with secondary pupil numbers (including sixth form) continuing to rise to a peak in 202 5/26 before starting to fall. It is best practice to retain additional capacity between 5% - 10% during the year to support any transition and movement of pupils, therefore the LA aim to provide a surplus in line with above parameters. Year 7 Pupil Forecast – The London Borough of Hillingdon Table 9. Year 7 Pupil Forecast for the London Borough of Hillingdon Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 +/- +68 +23 -11 -78 -80 -71 -53 Year 7 Surplus 179 156 167 245 325 396 449 The actual number of offers made to schools in the Borough on 2025 National Offer Day Plan page 24 (including to pupils with EHCPs) was 3,546, slightly below the overall PAN, and the latest projections. Secondary rolls are far less linked to locality than primary, and more to parent’s preferences and perception of the education experience, high standards, faith, and their willingness to travel to a school of choice. Each year, we review the projections, school census data and national offer day data to check and understand where projections are most accurate. Although the current forecast is for a reduction in surplus capacity in the short term, the longer- term forecast is a continued reduction after 2027 / 28 as you can see from the table above . We continue to work with schools to ensure we are able to meet our statutory duties, and the demand for places , and ensure that schools remain financially viable during this time of fluctuating demand. 3.5 Post 16 Planning The Education and Skills Act 2008 applies to any person who has ceased to be of compulsory school age, has not reached the age of 18, and has not attained a level 3 qualification. The Council works in partnership with schools , stakeholders and the local Further Education colleges to ensure young people aged 16-18 (and up to the age of 25 for those who have an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) have access to a range of opportunities to continue their education or training at a wide range of post-16 providers , apprenticeships, and supported internships. The total number of young people aged 16 to 18 are in Education, Employment and Training is 7570. In April 2026, a new provision will be opening at Barr a Hall in Uxbridge, which was acquired by Harrow, Richmond & Uxbridge Colleges (HRUC) and will cater for young people who have Severe or Moderate Learning Difficulties (SLD or MLD) which was identified as a gap in provision in Hillingdon. HRUC’s partnerships with Heathrow will provide great pathways for supported internship opportunities as well as industry insight for young people with SEND. In partnership with HRUC we also saw the launch of the Vocational Carousel which saw 55 young people between the ages of 14 -16 take part i n a 1 day a week 6 week programme , allowing them to experience a post 16 provision, and open up opportunities when they finish Year 11 education. This programme has also been listed in the new (RONI) Risk of NEET indicator guidance by the DfE. In recent times however this has been removed as an offer by HRUC due to the lack of participation from schools. The Council is developing its post 16 offer for young people with 'unique’ needs through a variety of strategies:  A newly created Post 16 transition guidance document with RONI indicator tool which helps schools identify the risk of NEET cohorts.  A Post 16 SEND pathways information sheet created by our very own supported interns working within the Council.  In partnership with Heathrow Airport  A Post 16 prospectus which is now a mobile friendly website which is more affordable for schools, and an opportunity to advertise local businesses to generate funding for the Local Authority.  A preparing for adulthood document whi ch is clear and will alig n with the local offer - along with a young persons version to help with advice for young people at key stages of their life. Plan page 25  A partnership with Elevate Mentoring is in its early stages and is due to deliver workshops and 1:1 mentoring to young people who are at risk of exclusion and known to key services like: Early Help, Youth Justice and LAC. This piece of work will be evaluated and reflected upon to help with ongoing work with the Australian Government. Through the 14–19-year-old steering group, headteachers agreed that NEET prevention and vocational pathways for 14–16-year-olds were directions that the Borough should take. This group will continue to develop solutions during the coming year for this identified priority. Following the success of our 14-19 steering group we have seen the following:  Vocational Carousel  GCSE results hub  ELEVATE mentoring supporting 3 schools (500 students) around employability/behaviour programmes. 3.6 Special Education Needs and Disabilities (SEND) - Special Schools & Alternative Provision There are two community special schools and six academy special schools in Hillingdon, all of which are full, as demand is high. The largest growth in demand is for pupils with Autism Spectrum Conditions, many with additional complex secondary needs. The Council also use Independent Non-Maintained Special Schools (INMSS) to educate a number of pupils, where their needs cannot be met within our own special schools. The majority of these are within the Borough, but some children and young people travel outside the Borough for specialised provision. The Council have been working very hard to reduce the number of chi ldren in INMSS provision and ensure that local state-funded provision is available. This has resulted in additional local capacity being planned and provided to meet the needs of these children and young people, including additional special school places, and specialist provision within mainstream schools. However, it will take time for the current cohort pupils to transition from their current INMSS provision which will remain under review. SEND & AP Strategy 2023-28 The Hillingdon Local Area SEND and Alternative Provision Strategy for CYP with SEND sets out key priorities in developing further new, ambitious, and innovative specialist provision that meets the need of Hillingdon CYP locally . Within the new strategy there are five Ambitions that focus on early intervention, inclusion, SEND sufficiency, post 16 provision and Social, Emotional, and Mental Health ( SEMH) needs, as well as on Alternative Provision. The Council’s SEND governance structure has been redesigned to reflect these, and new Ambition Groups have been created to ensure progress towards outcomes. The Ambition Group 3 has a specific focus on specialist provision and monitors the progress of all new developments as well as managing any changes required in existing specialist provision to make it sustainable and to meet the current and future demand. Plan page 26 The intended outcomes of this group are:  The proportion of children with EHCPs in mainstream and SEND schools is in line with national.  Children who require specialist provision are placed without delay in appropriate local provision.  Children and young people and their families are positive about their experiences of the SEND provision in Hillingdon and tell us the services are meeting their needs.  Review of banding is completed through co -production with stakeholders and a new model created which is fit for purpose long term, ensures equity, and supports children appropriately in all settings.  The number of placements in SRPs increases, developing areas of expertise and outstanding practice across the borough.  Mainstream settings access outreach support from local SEND schools to further develop outstanding inclusive practice.  Alternative Provision in Borough meets nee  ds and is used effectively to improve outcomes by supporting transition back into mainstream at the earliest opportunity.  A reduction in SEND transport demand as more children will be attending their local school As most of the new specialist provision has been created within the primary sector our next step is to develop a continuum of support through to secondary provision, with additional Specialist Resource Provision’s (SRP’s) and Designated Unit’s (DU’s). Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) deficit recovery safety valve agreement Hillingdon Council is one of the many Local Authorities that have successfully secured a Safety Valve agreement with the DfE. This is a result of the deficit in th e Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) High Needs block, which funds SEND provision for children an d young people in Hillingdon. Rising demand and costs have put pressure on the DSG and the LA has developed a DSG Deficit Recovery Programme following the ‘safety valve’ agreement which has supported revenue and capital funding required for the Borough. Ensuring there is appropriate provision to meet Hillingdon’s children and young people’s needs is a key strategic priority for the Council, underpinned by sufficient resource and capability to ensure timely and successful delivery. The purpose of the recovery plan is to:  Put mainstream inclusion and high-quality SEND services at the heart of education in Hillingdon  Reduce total costs of specialist placements  Add more local maintained specialist places in the Borough in line with the needs of our children and young people  Embed financial sustainability Extra specialist places are being developed in Hillingdon in the next few years to meet the rising demand, to minimise use of independent provision and lo nger travel times for children and young people. The aim is to maximise the use of local maintained education spaces and promote integration of pupils into mainstream where possible. Projects selected have been delivered in partnership with schools and academies that have surplus physical capacity and have commitment to inclusion and expertise in managing change. Plan page 27 Hillingdon’s SEND Context Graph 3. SEN Support % and EHCP Support % by Census Return Children with SEND Support and EHCPs in mainstream have increased term on term since we launched the strategy. In Autumn 202 4, 12.2% of our children and young people in mainstream settings were receiving SEND Support , and 2. 8% of our children and young people in mainstream settings were in receipt of an EHCP. In Autumn 202 5, 12.7% were in receipt of SEND Support, up by 0. 5%, and 3.1% were in receipt of an EHCP in mainstream schools, up by 0. 3%. This evidences that more children and young people on SEN Support and with EHCPs are being educated in mainstream schools. There is still a significant difference between primary and secondary SEND children attending mainstream schools across the borough – primary children with EHCPs are currently at 3 .3% and sec ondary is 2.7%. Table 10. Changes in SEN Support and EHCP levels in mainstream schools (based on Autumn census data for each year): Plan page 28 EHCPs Maintained by Hillingdon : As of January 2025, there are 3, 469 EHCPs, a 3 8% increase since January 2020. This number fluctuates due to various factors, including pupils moving in and out of the borough (SEN2 data 2025) EHCPs in Hillingdon Schools : A s of October 202 5, there are 2, 716 pupils with EHCPs attending Hillingdon schools, a 29.5% increase since October 2021. Of these, 4 3.3% are in special schools, and 18.9% of pupils in Hillingdon special schools are from other local authorities. (October 2025 census data) EHCP Growth: There has been a 38% increase in EHCPs maintained by Hillingdon since January 2020, w ith the most recent year showing a -1.0% change in January 2025 (SEN2 data 2025). As of January 2026, there are 3758 EHCPs, an increase of 8.3% from January 2025. SEN Support: As of October 2025, 12.7% of Hillingdon pupils in mainstream schools receive SEN support, below the national average of 14.2% (from DfE publication - “Special educational needs in England”: June 2025). EHCP Prevalence: As of October 2025, 5.3% of pupils in Hillingdon schools have an EHCP, matching the national average but below the London average of 5.4% (from DfE publication - “Special educational needs in England”: June 2025). Primary Need of Autism: The number of pupils with autism as their primary need has almost doubled from 920 in January 2020, to 1,845 in January 202 5, and currently remains the highest need in the borough. (internal SEN data 2020 v SEN2 data 2025) Special vs. Mainstream Schools: As of January 2025, 3 7.9% of total EHCP pupils from Hillingdon attend special schools, higher than the national average of 30.4%. Meanwhile, 54.3% are in mainstream schools, also above the national average of 43.6%. (SEN2 data 2025) Graph 4. Hillingdon Residents with EHCPs – Actuals and 24/25-based Projections (based on January data each year)

Appendices Appendix 1: Glossary of Terms Primary Needs:  ASC/ASD: Autism Spectrum Condition/Disorder/Autism  SEMH: Social, Emotional and Mental Health  HI: Hearing Impairment  MLD: Moderate Learning Difficulties  MSI: Multi-Sensory Impairment  PD: Physical Difficulties  PMLD: Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties  SLD: Severe Learning Difficulties  SLCN: Speech, Language and Communication Needs  VI: Visual Impairment Broad Categories of SEND:  Social, Emotional and Mental Health Difficulties (SEMH): Children and young people may experience a wide range of social and emotional difficulties which manifest themselves in many ways. These may include becoming withdrawn or isolated, as well as displaying challenging, disruptive, or dist urbing behaviour. These behaviours may reflect underlying mental health difficulties such as anxiety or depression, self-harming, substance misuse, eating disorders or physical symptoms that are medically unexplained. Other children and young people may ha ve disorders such as attention deficit disorder, attention deficit hyperactive disorder or attachment disorder.  Sensory and/or physical needs: Some children and young people require special educational provision because they have a disability that prevent s or hinders them from making use of the educational facilities generally provided in a mainstream setting. This includes pupils with visual impairment (VI), hearing impairment (HI) or a multi-sensory impairment (MSI) who are likely to require specialist s upport and/or equipment to access their learning or support. It also includes those with a severe physical disability (PD).  Cognition and Learning: Learning difficulties cover a wide range of needs, including moderate learning difficulties (MLD), severe learning difficulties (SLD) - where children are likely to need support in all areas of the curriculum and have associated difficulties with mobility and communication - through to profound and multiple learning difficulties (PMLD). Children with PMLD are likely to have severe and complex learning difficulties as well as a physical disability or sensory impairment. This range of needs also includes specific learning difficulties (SpLD), which encompasses a range of conditions such as dyslexia, dyscalculia, and dyspraxia.  Communication and Interaction: Children and young people with speech, language, and communication needs (SLCN) have difficulty in communicating with others. They may have difficulty with one, some or all of the different aspects of speech, language, or social communication at different times of their lives. This area includes those children and young people with autism who also are likely to have difficulties with social interaction, and with language, communication, and imagination, which can impact on how they relate to others. Other Terms or Acronyms:  Academy: Schools controlled and funded directly by the Secretary of State for Education and include academies, free schools, UTC schools, studio schools, academy special schools, alternative provision academies and academy boarding schools.  Alternative Provision: Education arranged by Local Authorities for pupils who because of exclusion, illness, or other reasons, would not otherwise receive suitable education; education arranged by pupils on a fixed period exclusion; and pupils being directed by schools to off-site provision to improve behaviour.  DfE: Department for Education is the national body responsible for education, children’s services, higher and further education policy.  EHCP: An EHCP details the education, health and social care support that is to be provided to a child or young person who has SEN or a disability. It is drawn up by the Council after an EHC needs assessment of the child or young person has determined that an EHC plan is necessary, and after consultation with relevant partner agencies.  ESFA: Education and Skills Funding Agency (formerly EFA): national body responsible for school funding, delivering Free Schools and monitoring academies.  EYFSP: Early Years Foundation Stage  EYQT: Early Years Quality Improvement Team  FE: Form of Entry, this describes a Reception class of 30 pupils and the seven classrooms that are needed for the class to work their way through the school  GLA: Greater London Authority  LA: Local Authority  LBH: London Borough of Hillingdon  Mainstream School: School provision other than special schools, hospital schools, alternative provision, i.e., mainstream community schools, voluntary -aided, trust, foundation, or grammar schools.  Maintained School: A school that is funded by a local education authority.  NOR: Number on roll, this is a count of the number of pupils in an educational facility.  PAN: Published Admission Number  PRU: Pupil Referral Unit also known as Alternative Provision for those not willing or able to attend mainstream school for a short period or long term.  RSC: Regional Schools Commissioner acts on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education and is responsible for intervening when academies or sponsors are underperforming, arranging sponsors for new acade mies, and advising on new free schools.  PVI: Private Voluntary and Independent Nurseries  SCAP: School Capacity Survey, is an annual return by SBC to the ESFA to explain projected shortfalls in school places. SEND and PRU places are not captured in this return  SEND: Special Education Needs and Disabilities, refers to pupils with an EHCP, these pupils will attend a mainstream school possibly in a Resourced Unit or a Special School  Specialist Resource Provision (SRP): Are special provisions within a mains tream school where the children are taught mainly within separate classes.  Special School: A school which is specially organised to make special educational provision for pupils with SEND. Appendix 2 – Breakdown of Academy Trusts Appendix 3 – Definitions of Types of School Maintained Schools - overseen by the LA: Community - the Council owns the buildings and determines admission arrangements. Foundation - the governing body owns the school buildings, employs the staff and determines their own admission arrangements. Voluntary Aided - a Trust or diocesan body own the building, employ the staff, and determine their own admission arrangements. Non-maintained schools - independent from the local council: Academies - the Trust owns or has a long lease on their site, they operate under a Funding Agreement with the Government and can follow a different curriculum. Free Schools - schools that have opened as new academies, rather than being converted to an academy from a maintained school. A free school is still an academy and is funded and controlled in the same way as other academies. Other schools Independent - private schools (independent from the local council) where parents pay for the cost of their child’s place. Appendix 4 - School PAN Numbers by Type The tables below give a list of primary, secondary, and special schools respectively, and their Published Admission Numbers (PANs) or Commissioned Places for the academic year 2025/26. Primary and Infant Schools – Published Admissions Number 2025/26 School Published Admissions Number (PAN) Belmore Primary Academy 90 Bishop Winnington-Ingram CofE Primary School 30 Botwell House Catholic Primary School 90 Bourne Primary School 30 Brookside Primary School 60 Charville Academy 60 Cherry Lane Primary School 90 Colham Manor Primary School 90 Coteford Infant School 60 Cowley St Laurence CE Primary School 60 Cranford Park Academy 120 Deanesfield Primary School 90 Dr Triplett's CofE Primary School 60 Field End Infant School 90 Frithwood Primary School 60 Glebe Primary School 90 Grange Park School 90 Guru Nanak Sikh Academy 60 Harefield Infant School* 60 Harlyn Primary School 60 Harmondsworth Primary School 30 Hayes Park School 90 Heathrow Primary School 60 Hermitage Primary School 60 Hewens Primary School 60 Highfield Primary School 60 Hillingdon Primary School 90 Hillside Infant School 60 Holy Trinity CofE Primary School 30 John Locke Academy 90 Lady Bankes Primary School 90 Lake Farm Park Academy 90 Laurel Lane Primary School 60 Minet Nursery and Infant School 120 Nanaksar Primary School 120 Newnham Infant and Nursery School 90 Oak Farm Primary School 90 Pinkwell Primary School 90 Rabbsfarm Primary School 90 Rosedale Primary School 60 Ruislip Gardens Primary School 60 Ryefield Primary School 60 Sacred Heart Catholic Primary School 90 St Andrew's CofE Primary School 30 St Bernadette Catholic Primary School 60 St Catherine Catholic Primary School 30 St Martin's Church of England Primary School 60 St Mary's Catholic Primary School 30 St Matthew's CofE Primary School 60 St Swithun Wells' Catholic Primary School 30 The Breakspear School 90 Warrender Primary School 60 West Drayton Academy 90 Whitehall Infant School 90 Whiteheath Infant and Nursery School 90 William Byrd Academy 90 Wood End Park Academy 120 Yeading Infant and Nursery School 120 TOTAL 4,230 *from 7th April 2026, Harefield Infant School will amalgamate with Harefield Junior School to become Harefield Primary School Junior Schools – Published Admissions Number 2025/26 School Published Admissions Number (PAN) Coteford Junior School 81 Field End Junior School 90 Harefield Junior School* 60 Hillside Junior School 60 Minet Junior School 120 Newnham Junior School 90 Whitehall Junior School 90 Whiteheath Junior School 90 Yeading Junior School 128 TOTAL 809 *from 7th April 2026, Harefield Junior School will amalgamate with Harefield Infant School to become Harefield Primary School Secondary schools – Published Admission Numbers 2025/26 - excluding bulge classes School Published Admissions Number (PAN) Barnhill Community High School 240 Bishop Ramsey Church of England School 186 Bishopshalt School 186 The Douay Martyrs Catholic School 240 Guru Nanak Sikh Academy 180 Harefield School 90 Harlington School 240 Haydon School 300 Hewens College 120 Northwood School 180 Oak Wood School 240 Park Academy West London 180 Queensmead School 240 Rosedale College 180 Ruislip High School 210 Swakeleys School for Girls 240 Uxbridge High School 230 Vyners School 240 Total Places 3,722 Special schools – Planned Place Numbers 2025/26 School School Type Designated Need Commissioned Places Grangewood School * Academy SLD/PMLD/MSI 131 Hedgewood School Community MLD/ASD 190 Meadow High School Community MLD (Complex) 309 Moorcroft School Academy SLD/PMLD/MSI 149 Pentland Field School Academy MLD/ASD 168 Willows School Academy Trust Academy SEMH/MLD/ASD 80 The PRIDE Academy SEMH 117 Total Places 1,144 *from 1st January 2026, Grangewood School became Pinn River School Specialist Resource Provision/Designated Unit – Planned Place Numbers 2025/26 (Commissioned) School School Type Designated Need Commissioned Places Primary Hayes Park School SRP Foundation ASD 13 Coteford Junior School SRP Academy PD 4 Deanesfield Primary School SRP Community SLCN 8 Pinkwell Primary SRP Academy SLCN 10 Glebe Primary SRP Community HI 11 Cherry Lane Primary SRP Community ASD 10 Lake Farm Park Primary SRP Academy ASD 13 St Martin's CE Primary SRP Academy ASD 12 Charville Academy SRP Academy ASD 16 Ruislip Gardens Primary School SRP Community ASD 16 Ruislip Gardens Primary School Assessment Centre Community All 16 Wood End Park Academy DU Academy ASD 24 Secondary Oak Wood School SRP Foundation ASD 12 Harlington School SRP Foundation Physical and Sensory Disabilities 4 Harlington School DU Foundation ASD 16 Northwood SRP Academy SLCN 10 Vyners SRP Academy HI 18 Total Places 210 Appendix 5 – Schools by Planning Area Planning Area Number Schools within Planning Area Number of Schools PPA 1 Harefield Infant and Harefield Junior School 2 PPA 2 Frithwood Primary School, Harlyn Primary School, Hillside Infant School, Hillside Junior School & Holy Trinity CofE Primary School 5 PPA 3 Bishop Winnington-Ingram CofE Primary School, Coteford Infant School, Coteford Junior School, Warrender Primary School, Whiteheath Infant and Nursery School & Whiteheath Junior School 6 PPA 4 Glebe Primary School & The Breakspear School 2 PPA 5 Bourne Primary School, Deanesfield Primary School, Field End Infant School, Field End Junior School, Lady Bankes Primary School, Newnham Infant and Nursery School, Newnham Junior School, Ruislip Gardens Primary School, Sacred Heart Catholic Primary School & St Swithun Wells' Catholic Primary School 10 PPA 6 Cowley St Laurence CE Primary School, Hermitage Primary School, John Locke Academy, St Andrew's CofE Primary School, St Mary's Catholic Primary School, Whitehall Infant School & Whitehall Junior School 7 PPA 7 Highfield Primary School, Hillingdon Primary School, Oak Farm Primary School, Ryefield Primary School & St Bernadette Catholic Primary School 5 PPA 8 Charville Academy, Grange Park School, Hayes Park School & Hewens Primary School 4 PPA 9 Belmore Primary Academy, Brookside Primary School, Yeading Infant and Nursery School & Yeading Junior School 4 PPA 10 Colham Manor Primary School, Rabbsfarm Primary School & St Matthew's CofE Primary School 3 PPA 11 Botwell House Catholic Primary School, Dr Triplett's CofE Primary School, Guru Nanak Sikh Academy, Lake Farm Park Academy, Minet Nursery and Infant School, Minet Junior School, Nanaksar Primary School, Rosedale Primary School & Wood End Park Academy 9 PPA 12 Cranford Park Academy, Pinkwell Primary School & William Byrd Academy 3 PPA 13 Harmondsworth Primary School & Heathrow Primary School 2 PPA 14 Cherry Lane Primary School, Laurel Lane Primary School, St Catherine Catholic Primary School, St Martin's Church of England Primary School & West Drayton Academy 5 Appendix 6 – Forecasting by Planning Area Forecasting by Planning Areas The following sections include the school place forecasts at a planning area level from the SCAP 25 submission. The map illustrates the 14 primary planning areas within the London Borough of Hillingdon followed by forecasts for the North and South of the Borough for secondary schools. “Reception Pupil Forecast” shows the year-on-year change in projections. “Reception Surplus” has been added to show the expected number of vacant school places against the approved PAN for each year. “Number on Roll” is using January Census actuals for 202 4/25, and projections for future years. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 1 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +5 +4 +2 -3 0 0 0 Reception Surplus 16 12 10 13 13 13 13 Harefield Infant School and Harefield Junior School This area is predominantly rural and very isolated from the rest of the borough, it is surrounded by Hertfordshire with one lone village served by an infant and junior school which must have sufficient capacity to meet local demand. The year groups fluctuate, and this has caused both schools budget and class management problems. A PAN reduction to 60 took effect in September 2023 to reflect the size of most year groups. This ensures that all local and sibling demand can be met and give the school and its pupils stability. Some of the current roll are not local but travel in long distances, using the school for convenience as it is near parental work. From 7th April 2026, both Harefield schools will amalgamate to become Harefield Primary School. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 2 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +11 +5 -7 0 +1 -1 0 Reception Surplus 33 28 35 35 34 35 35 Frithwood Primary School, Harlyn Primary School, Hillside Infant School, Hillside Junior School & Holy Trinity CofE Primary School This PPA is affected by fluctuating demand and has experienced a trend of decline in numbers since 2016. PAN reductions in 2 of the 5 schools took place with effect from September 2023. Projections show stable rolls going forward within this revised PAN. All of the schools in PPA2 are close to the boundary with Hertfordshire and Harrow and significantly affected by cross-borough movement. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 3 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +12 -5 -10 -1 0 -1 -1 Reception Surplus 22 27 37 38 38 39 40 Bishop Winnington Ingram CofE, Coteford Infant, Coteford Junior, Warrender, Whiteheath Infant & Nursery & Whiteheath Junior School Previous pressure led to the expansion of one school to 2FE and is full. Numbers have been reviewed with the proposal to reduce the PAN approved for 1 school which took effect in September 2024. There is some pupil movement between PPAs 3, 4 & 5. Therefore, securing sufficient capacity across these areas has been factored into the LA's plans. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 4 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +12 +1 -2 -5 0 -1 -1 Reception Surplus 24 23 25 30 30 31 32 Breakspear Primary School & Glebe Primary School The two schools in this PPA have historically been popular and full as they attract applications from outside the immediate area. This area has some moves between PPA 4 and PPA 5. No changes are proposed at this point. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 5 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +21 -15 -25 -2 -2 -2 0 Reception Surplus 63 78 103 105 107 109 109 Bourne Primary School, Deanesfield Primary School, Field End Infant School, Field End Junior School, Lady Bankes Primary School, Newnham Infant and Nursery School, Newnham Junior School, Ruislip Gardens Primary School, Sacred Heart Catholic Primary School & St Swithun Wells' Catholic Primary School This area has a concentration of residential development, though pupil movement is limited by geographical constraints such as RAF Northolt and major roads. Predicted demand is affected by cross-borough movement as the two largest schools are close to the border with Harrow. One primary, one infant and one junior school have reduced PAN over the last two years. Rolls continue to be monitored for any further necessary changes. The cross-border movements and overlap with PPA 3 have been fully considered. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 6 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +28 +5 -34 +10 0 +1 +1 Reception Surplus 7 2 36 26 26 25 24 Cowley St Laurence CE Primary School, Hermitage Primary School, John Locke Academy, St Andrew's CofE Primary School, St Mary's Catholic Primary School, Whitehall Infant School & Whitehall Junior School This area includes Uxbridge Town Centre and a number of residential areas. One of these is the large development on the former RAF Uxbridge base which will include 1,300 new homes. Demand for places has increased and is expected to grow further as the site is developed. A new 3FE primary school opened in September 2014 but before the housing was occupied. Therefore, the school was temporarily an over-provision that filled with a significant number of applications from outside PPA 6, as Uxbridge is convenient for many parents. This has created some distortion with siblings from miles away, but will correct over time, and led to erratic forecasts. There are sufficient places. The area is closely monitored, as the development and sales of new homes progress. A PAN reduction has been approved for an infant/junior school of 1FE with effect from September 2025. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 7 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- -20 +9 -18 +8 0 -1 -3 Reception Surplus 64 55 73 65 65 66 69 Highfield Primary School, Hillingdon Primary School, Oak Farm Primary School, Ryefield Primary School & St Bernadette Catholic Primary School This is a predominantly residential area, just south of the central Uxbridge area. Demand for places has declined in two schools. The recent pattern of household moves, and of pupils travelling to schools outside their planning area across PPA 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 is being carefully monitored. It is hoped that careful decisions on a few PAN reductions in these areas will have a wider stabilising impact across all the schools in this PPA. A PAN reduction has been approved for a Primary school of 1FE with effect from September 2026. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 8 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +19 -2 -11 -2 -2 -3 0 Reception Surplus 16 18 29 31 33 36 36 Charville Academy, Grange Park School, Hayes Park School & Hewens Primary School Demand has slowed in the area. One Trust school did consult on reducing their PAN which took effect September 2023. The recent pattern of household moves, and of pupils travelling to schools outside their planning area across PPAs 6,7,8,9,11 is being carefully monitored. Numbers have been reviewed and a PAN reduction of an Infant and Junior school by 1FE took effect in September 2024. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 9 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- -2 +7 -9 -4 -3 -2 -1 Reception Surplus 49 42 51 55 58 60 61 Belmore Primary Academy, Brookside Primary School, Yeading Infant and Nursery School & Yeading Junior School Demand for places is being monitored. This area is adjacent to PPA 11 and to the borough of Ealing and therefore can be affected by demand for places from outside the PPA/Borough. The recent pattern of household moves, and of pupils travelling to schools outside their planning area across PPA 6, 7,8, 9,11 is being carefully monitored. It is hoped that careful decisions on a few PAN reductions in these areas will have a wider stabilising impact across all the local schools. One school serving a distinct residential area, bordering Ealing, has had steadily declining rolls and is already operating at 1FE below PAN in all year groups. The school reduced its PAN by 1FE from September 2023 to reflect this. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 10 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +23 +15 -41 +2 -2 -2 -1 Reception Surplus 8 -7 34 32 34 36 37 Colham Manor Primary School, Rabbsfarm Primary School & St Matthew's CofE Primary School The three schools are popular and full. Forecast demand for places is expected to increase due to new housing being built in the area. We expect there are sufficient spaces in neighboring planning areas to compensate. The schools in this PPA are popular and seem insulated from the higher volatility of movements in adjoining areas. No change to the number of places is proposed at this stage but the position will be closely monitored. Offers for September 2024 show that there will be sufficient places to meet demand with a margin of vacancies for in-year fluctuations. If the forecast increase in demand does occur, there are sufficient spaces in neighbouring planning areas to meet this need. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 11 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +35 +63 +21 -23 +5 -6 -6 Reception Surplus 123 60 39 62 57 63 69 Botwell House Catholic Primary School, Dr Triplett's CofE Primary School, Guru Nanak Sikh Academy, Lake Farm Park Academy, Minet Nursery and Infant School, Minet Junior School, Nanaksar Primary School, Rosedale Primary School & Wood End Park Academy PPA 11 is a diverse area of the Borough, with the largest school population than any other. It has seen significant housing development. Nanaksar Primary (Sikh) opened with 4FE Reception entries in 2013 & 2014 but then had to suspend entries until Spring 2021. Demand in the area has remained relatively stable, with Nanaksar reopening at 4FE in Sept 2022 but struggling to attract more than 1FE of pupils. There are still external uncertainties in the size and timing of housing developments and likely child yield of new housing given the increasing business profile of the area near the Hayes Crossrail station. This PPA is central to the largest concentration of population in the borough and the largest developments and is adjacent to PPAs 7,8, 9, 10 and 12. It is also close to Heathrow so parents are affected by the changes due to the pandemic in permanent and more casual employment, and borders with Ealing where there may be future housing development affecting cross border flows. Over two miles away from Nanaksar, serving a specific neighbourhood another school has had a reduction in its operating roll in the lower year groups from 5FE to 4FE. The proposal to reduce the PAN of the school took effect in September 2023. It is still the largest primary school roll, and higher than 4 secondaries.  Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 12 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +33 +41 +16 +13 +6 +1 -2 Reception Surplus 10 -31 -47 -60 -66 -67 -65 Cranford Park Academy, Pinkwell Primary School & William Byrd Academy This area has experienced volatility in rolls due to changes of housing tenure linked to Covid and Heathrow uncertainty, leading to housing previously leased by the airport being used by families and increasingly by government agencies for temporary rehousing of vulnerable families. PPA 12 borders PPAs 11, 13, and 14, as well as the London Borough of Hounslow. These neighbouring PPAs currently have sufficient capacity to absorb any surplus demand from PPA 12. This situation will continue to be monitored, but no further action is planned at this time. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 13 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- -4 +3 0 +1 -2 -1 0 Reception Surplus 12 9 9 8 10 11 11 Harmondsworth Primary School & Heathrow Primary School The two schools in this PPA serve distinct villages and communities, though there has been a change in the pupil population as more housing has been vacated and taken over by agencies for temporary housing. The Heathrow Airport Expansion plan could resurface in the long term. There are currently no plans for changes, but close monitoring will be maintained. Reception Pupil Forecast – PPA 14 Reception Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- -10 +7 -11 +2 -3 -2 -3 Reception Surplus 85 78 89 87 90 92 95 Cherry Lane Primary School, Laurel Lane Primary School, St Catherine Catholic Primary School, St Martin's Church of England Primary School & West Drayton Academy This PPA contains a Crossrail station and has significant new housing and most of the local schools are full. A reasonable margin of capacity is needed but two schools have had declining and low rolls for some years. This PPA borders with PPA 10, 12 and 13 as well as South Bucks. No further action is planned yet. Year 7 Pupil Forecast – SPA North Year 7 Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- +96 +4 -25 -28 -33 -27 -14 Year 7 Surplus 98 94 119 147 180 207 221 Bishop Ramsey Church of England School, The Douay Martyrs Catholic School, Harefield School, Haydon School, Northwood School, Queensmead School, Ruislip High School & Vyners School Rolls have stabilised at a high level, and revised projections show Year 7 intake have passed their peak, while total secondary roll will peak in Sept 2026. An 8% margin of spaces is necessary to ensure sufficient places due to parental preferences and this needs to be considered together with the south. All secondary schools in the north of the borough are academies, each with different admission criteria. All schools are r ated good or outstanding, and all except two are over -subscribed with long waiting lists. In 2024 almost all vacancies were in two academies. There is significant movement of pupils living to the south of the A40 travelling to schools north of the A40. 26% of pupils offered a place in a school in the north are resident in the south of the borough, compared to less than 1% in the opposite direction. The operation of the different admission criteria and parental preferences creates unpredictable outcomes a nd changing sibling links. This fluctuates and requires a margin of spaces both north and south to absorb. As intake numbers have passed their peak there is no need to expand schools at this time. This will continue to be monitored. Year 7 Pupil Forecast – SPA South Year 7 Pupil Forecast Year 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 31/32 Year-on-Year +/- -28 +19 +14 -50 -47 -44 -39 Year 7 Surplus 81 62 48 98 145 189 228 Barnhill Community High School, Bishopshalt School, Guru Nanak Sikh Academy, Harlington School, Hewens College, Oak Wood School, Park Academy West London, Rosedale College, Swakeleys School for Girls, Uxbridge High School Rolls are beginning to stabilise in this area, and revised projections show Year 7 intake reached its peak in Sept 2023, and total secondary roll will continue to rise until Sept 2027. Numbers are very susceptible to changes in cross-borough flows and the perceived educational standards in schools. Each year, demand fluctuates with changes in the level of applications and the success rate for out of borough faith and selective schools. As set out above, there is considerable mobility between north and south and out borough, which requires a margin above the projected numbers to accommodate fluctuation in parental preferences from year to year. A planned 1.5FE expansion opened in Sept 2023. No other expansions are necessary at this time.

Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public PROPOSAL TO AMALGAMATE WHITEHALL INFANT SCHOOL AND WHITEHALL JUNIOR SCHOOL – SPRING 2026 Committee name Children, Families & Education Select Committee Officer reporting Abi Preston – Director of Education & SEND Papers with report Appendix 1 – Equalities Impact Assessment for the proposed amalgamation of Whitehall Infant and Whitehall Junior Schools Appendix 2 – Proposal for pre-publication – Whitehall Infant School & Whitehall Junior School Proposal Appendix 3 – Pre-publication Information Session presentation Appendix 4 – Whitehall Schools consultation Public Notice Appendix 5 – Whitehall Schools – Statutory Proposal for Amalgamation Appendix 6 – Whitehall Schools Amalgamation – Frequently Asked Questions Appendix 7 – Financial Benchmarking for Whitehall Infant School Appendix 8 – Financial Benchmarking for Whitehall Junior School Ward Uxbridge, All HEADLINES The London Borough of Hillingdon are consulting on a proposal for Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School to amalgamate to form a single t hree-form entry maintained primary school for children aged 3 to 11 years. This change would take effect from 1st September 2026, if approved, with a total published pupil number of 630. In order to amalgamate the 2 schools and create a primary school, the Council are proposing to (technically) close Whitehall Infant School and extend the age range of Whitehall Junior School to form a primary school. Following the DfE statutory process, approval is being requested (Local Authority as the decision- maker) to amalgamate the two schools. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Children, Families & Education Select Committee: 1. Review the proposal to amalgamate Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School, by closing Whitehall Infant School, and extending the age range of the Junior School from 7–11-year-olds, to 3–11-year-olds; and 2. Provide comments to be included in the Cabinet report which will be presented on 23 April 2026. Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public SUPPORTING INFORMATION The Council, and schools are expected to consider the long-term vision of each school, ensure the best outcomes for our children and young people, and the sustainability of schools . Part of this responsibility is to continue to:  improve and provide the best possible education and care for every child;  provide an excellent working environment and experience for staff; and  support and work with their local community Officers see a range of benefits in combining the existing schools into a new primary school through the statutory amalgamation process, which include:  A consistent approach to the ways in which children are taught and supported, recognising the current strengths of both schools.  Increased opportunities for children in all key stages to come together for pastoral, social and creative activities.  Consistency of parental involvement throughout the primary phase of education by having the ability to foster longer-term relationships with families within one school.  Communication between school and parents will be simplified, especially for parents with children in both schools. It would remove any duplication and ensure a joined-up approach for events, training and other matters.  Removes the need for parents to apply for a place at the Junior School as children would automatically continue their education as part of one Whitehall school.  Increased career development opportunities for staff through the sharing of a wider range of expertise and the possibility to gain experience and an understanding of all Primary Key Stages.  Greater opportunity for cost effectiveness through economies of scale e.g. in purchasing, ensuring the best provision possible for the children; Both Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School are community maintained schools located in the Uxbridge ward and were both graded ‘Good’ at their last Ofsted Inspection. Whitehall Infant School was inspec ted in November 2024 and maintained its grade from the full inspection in March 2015, and Whitehall Junior School was inspected in June 2023 and maintained its grade from the full inspection in September 2014. Both schools are located adjacent to each ot her and effectively share one site. As they are community maintained schools, this means they are both maintained by Hillingdon Council and the Council owns the buildings and the land. The Local Authority is also responsible for determining the school admission arrangements for both schools. The Hillingdon Infant and Junior Amalgamation Policy, September 2022, (see Background paper 1) states that “The London Borough of Hillingdon will require Governing Bodies of all separate infant and junior schools to co nsider amalgamating their two linked schools when one or more of the following ‘trigger circumstances’ occur, unless there are compelling and overriding reasons” A) A headteacher vacancy arises in either or both schools. B) Total pupil numbers in either school are 25% or more below the Published Admission Number. C) Ofsted inspection in one of the schools identifies a ‘Requires Improvement’ judgement. Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public D) One or both of the schools cannot set a balanced budget or has financial problems. E) One or both of the schools inv olved is judged to be a ‘School causing concern’ by the London Borough of Hillingdon. F) One or both schools have PANs or are recruiting at below two forms of entry – making the individual schools relatively small and at risk of becoming unviable within the Hillingdon funding context. G) Other pressures whereby the educational provision would be improved through amalgamation such as provision of SEN support, staff recruitment and retention or issues linked to the buildings. Following the announcement that the Headteacher of Whitehall Infant School would be retiring in August 2026, the schools met trigger A as listed above. Initial discussions were then held with both governing bodies to outline and explore the potential for amalgamation. The potential of amalga mating Infant and Junior schools , in line with the amalgamation policy, has been discussed with schools over the last few years at various collective and individual meetings, and schools have been made aware that the Council would propose this solution under the appropriate circumstances. Both schools have been affected by the ongoing decline in the birth rate across Hillingdon, which has resulted in Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School reducing their Published Admissions Numbers from 120 (4FE) to 90 (3FE) from September 2025. Whitehall Infant School *The October 25 figure shows a reduction of 30 in the PAN, as PAN changes only take effect in the year of entry, which in this case, is Reception. Whitehall Junior School Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public *The October 25 figure shows a reduction of 30 in the PAN, as PAN changes only take effect in the year of entry, which in this case, is Year 3. Equality Impact Assessment for the proposed amalgamation An Equality Impact Assessment has been carefully considered in relation to the proposed amalgamation of Whitehall Infant and Whitehall Junior Schools (Appendix 1). It is not expected that this proposal will have any significant impact on pupils, staff, or the wider community, as the newly formed primary school will continue to operate in much the same way as it currently does. Since all children currently enrolled at both schools will remain on the same site, within the same school community, and continue to be supported by the same staff, and curriculum, no adverse effects are anticipated for pupils with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. Key points include:  No change to the school’s Net Capacity;  No change to the Published Admissions Number (PAN) for either school;  No change to the curriculum being delivered. The assessment identifies that boys, pupils from ‘other’ ethnic backgrounds, pupils with English as an additional language (EAL), and pupils receiving Special Educational Needs (SEN) Support are overrepresented in the affected cohort when compared to borough ‑wide averages. These groups may therefore be more susceptible to any unintended negative impacts arising from the proposed changes. However, the EIA confirms that funding streams allocated to support children with SEND (including SEN Support and Education, Health and Care Plans) and pupils who are disadvantaged (through pupil premium funding) are both calculated on a per ‑pupil basis. As a result, the amalgamation will not d irectly reduce the level of funding available to these groups. The amalgamation process will be managed with care and sensitivity, ensuring that the needs of all pupils, particularly those with SEND, are fully considered and supported throughout. This assessment may be updated following the outcome of the public consultation. The impact of the proposed amalgamation will be closely monitored in collaboration with both schools and their governing bodies, and appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented if necessary. RESIDENT BENEFIT & CONSULTATION As both schools are maintained schools, Hillingdon Council can propose to (technically) close Whitehall Infant School under Section 15 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006, with notice given in accordance with The School Organisation (Establishment and Discontinuance of Schools) Regulations 2013 and propose to extend the age range of Whitehall Junior School from 7–11-year-olds to 3–11-year-olds, with notice given in accordance with The School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2013. The two proposals follow two separate guidance processes: Opening and closing maintained schools and Making significant changes (‘prescribed alterations’) to maintained schools. This sets out an expectation that interested parties are consulted informally prior to publication of a statutory proposal and formal consultation. While there is no longer a statutory ‘pre -publication’ consultation period for proposed prescribed alteration changes to increase the age range of a school , there is a statutory requirement to consult any parties the proposer thinks appropriate before publishing proposals under section 15 Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public proposals to close a maintained school. Consultation was carried out in Spring 2026 with the two Whitehall schools related to this proposal, however, the following engagement with all 10 sets of Infant and Junior Schools in Hillingdon by Council Officers should also be noted:  11th June 2024 – a letter was sent to all Infant and Junior Headteachers in keeping with the Council’s Infant and Junior Schools Amalgamation policy (Successful, Sustainable, Viable Schools). As part of this policy, on the retirement or resignation of the Headteacher from either of the linked Infant and Junior Schools, the two schools will amalgamate and form an all through primary school.  18th June 2024 – Head Teachers Termly – Presentation by Head of Education and Lifelong Learning to go through benefits of infant and junior amalgamations and recognising the different contexts.  1st July 2024 - Amalgamation Information Session 1 for Head Teachers and Governors of Infant and Junior Schools  2nd July 2024 - Amalgamation Information Session 2 for Head Teachers and Governors of Infant and Junior Schools During the Autumn term of 2025, the local authority was informed that the headteacher of Whitehall Infant School would be retiring at the end of the 2025/26 academic year, with Officers meeting with both headteachers and Chair of Governors in late November 2025. In early January 2026, meetings were held with each Governing Body to outline the proposed amalgamation process and address any questions they had. A period of pre-publication consultation was carried out between Tuesday 20th January 2026 and Friday 13th February 2026. An informal consultation document (see Appendix 2) was made available in hard copy and electronic form, that outlined the proposals and relevant background information. Hard copies were made available on request from the Local Authority. This information was sent to both headteachers and Chair of Governors to share with parents of all children attending both schools on Monday 19th January 2026 on how to access the consultation document and submit a response. Information about the informal consultation and a survey about the proposals was included on the Hillingdon ‘Have Your Say’ webpage. Three online consultation meetings were hosted by Local Authority officers that provided parents/carers, staff, governors and members of the public the opportunity to comment on and ask questions about the proposals. One of these events was reserved for school staff only. A summary of dates and attendees is set out in the table below: Information Session Date Information Session Time Attendees Number of Attendees Monday 26th January 2026 4:00 pm to 5:00 pm Virtual Staff Meeting 47 Wednesday 28th January 2026 12:30 pm to 1:30 pm Virtual Public Meeting 7 Wednesday 28th January 2026 5:00 pm to 6:00 pm Virtual Public Meeting 9 Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Please see Appendix 3 – Information Session Presentation for a copy of the presentation used at the events. Parents, carers, staff, governors and members of the public were also invited to share their views by responding to the consultation by any of the following ways;  completing the online consultation form  writing directly to the Council  attending an online event Following the end of the pre-publication consultation period, a Chief Officer Report was submitted which details the key themes raised in the responses ( Background paper 2). The report was approved on 19th February 2026 and recommended proceeding to a formal consultation process through the publication of a statutory notice for the expansion of the age range at Whitehall Junior School, and the (technical) closure of Whitehall Infant School, to become one primary school. Publication As part of the formal consultation, the Council issued a Public Notice (Appendix 4) which was sent to the West London Gazette for publication on Wednesday 25th February 2026, with 6 copies put up around the school site on entrance/ exits in line with the statutory process. As the proposal for one change is linked to another, this was made clear in any notices that were published. Where a proposal by a local authority is ‘related’ to a proposal by other proposers such as this, the 2 notices could be published together and cross-refer to the other. The full proposal was published on the schools’ websites and the Council website, and included information setting out (in line with the statutory process):  how copies of the proposal may be obtained;  that anybody can object to, or comment on, the proposal;  the date that the representation period ends; and  the local authority’s address to which objections or comments should be submitted. Representation The statutory proposal (Appendix 5) is available from Wednesday 25th February 2025 at 9:00am to Wednesday 25th March 2026 at 5:00pm on the consultation page of the Hillingdon Council website. This includes a brief outline of the proposed change, the full proposal, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document (Appendix 6), a copy of the Public Notice, a questionnaire to obtain feedback, financial benchmarking for Whitehall Infant School (Appendix 7) and Whitehall Junior School (Appendix 8). Information regarding the consultation was publicised to all schools within the Borough via email. Both Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School shared the information on their school webpages by including the pdfs of the above documents as well as including a link to the Hillingdon Council consultation webpage. As Hillingdon Council also receives school admissions applications from residents who live outside of the Borough, the consultation was designed to be inclusive. Therefore, officers contacted the following surrounding Councils to share details of the consultation:  London Borough of Ealing Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public  London Borough of Hounslow  London Borough of Brent  London Borough of Harrow  Hertfordshire County Council  Buckinghamshire County Council  Slough Borough Council Drop-in sessions took place on Tuesday 3 rd March at the school site and on Monday 9 th March online. Officers were available at both sessions to answer questions and to explain the proposal as necessary. The consultation closes on Wednesday 25th March. All responses will be thoroughly considered and reflected in the report presented to Cabinet, ensuring that every voice is heard. Conclusion The proposed amalgamation aims to enhance the learning experience for children by offering a more consistent and seamless journey through their primary education. By combining resources from both schools and having one unified staff team, children will benefit from stronger relationships with familiar adults and smoother transitions between year groups. The consultation period e nds at 5:00pm Wednesday 25th March. All feedback received will be carefully reviewed and included in a report to Cabinet, ensuring that every response is shared ahead of any recommendations presented to Cabinet. Next steps If Cabinet approves the proposal to amalgamate Whitehall Infant and Whitehall Junior Schools, the Education Service will formally notify the Department for Education. The implementation of the proposal will then follow the statutory process set out in the Department for Education’s guidance: School organisation: local -authority-maintained schools - GOV.UK, Opening and closing maintained schools and Making significant changes (‘prescribed alterations’) to maintained schools. This ensures that all legal and procedural requirements are fully met. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) Schools Block Funding represents the majority of funding for schools within Hillingdon, although each school may receive additional DSG funding or Grants. If the schools amalgamate, the combined school will only be eligible for one lump sum (an allocation from the Dedicated Schools Grant provided to individual schools to support fixed costs that is currently £165,436 a year – based on the budget for 2025/26) in the future. As detailed in the Schools operational guide: 2025 to 2026 - GOV.UK, “wh ere schools amalgamate after 1 April 2025, the new school will receive funding equivalent to the formula funding of the closing schools added together for the appropriate proportion of the year. This means that they receive the combined lump sums for the r emainder of the year and 70% of the second lump sum in the following year. Local authorities can apply to provide a second year of protection. This needs to be discussed and agreed with Schools Forum.” Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Amalgamating the two schools will ultimately result in the loss of one of the lump ‑sum funding allocations that each school currently receives. However, the combined school may achieve improved economies of scale, including savings from needing only one headteacher, which could help offset the impact of thi s funding reduction. If the proposal was approved, the new primary school would receive the same lump sum payment as all other primary schools in the Borough. Funding for pupils with SEND would not be affected by the proposed amalgamation. Both schools co mbined funding is approximately £4,624k funding per year. If the proposal is approved, this would mean that following financial year (2027/28) after amalgamation the amount received would be £4,575k and the second financial year (2028/29) funding would be £4,459k. The figures above and detailed in the table below are based on the assumption that the number of pupils remains constant. * Early Years Funding is not included in the figures above It is important to note that other DSG funding e.g. Early Years funding (EYSFF), Pupil Premium and other grants paid to the school may be affected in future years, however, these are based on pupil numbers and would not be affected by amalgamation (these would be depending upon the grant conditions, guidance and specific calculations). Once the school receive their budget, they decide how this is allocated across the school, and what the funding is spent on including staff and resources. The amalgamation will have no impact on the Council’s General Fund, as all financial implications are contained within the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). The proposal does not require additional Council funding or create any new pressure on the General Fund. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS There are no legal impediments to the recommendations within the report. BACKGROUND PAPERS Background paper 1 – Hillingdon Infant and Junior Amalgamation Policy – September 2022 Background paper 2 – Chief Officer Decision Notice – Whitehall Infant and Junior Schools Background paper 3 – Opening and Closing Maintained Schools Background paper 4 – Making significant changes (‘prescribed alterations') to maintained schools Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Equalities Impact Assessment for the proposed amalgamation of Whitehall Infant and Whitehall Junior Schools Appendix 2 – Proposal for pre-publication – Whitehall Infant School & Whitehall Junior School Proposal Appendix 3 – Pre-publication Information Session presentation Appendix 4 – Whitehall Schools consultation Public Notice Appendix 5 – Whitehall Schools – Statutory Proposal for Amalgamation Appendix 6 – Whitehall Schools Amalgamation – Frequently Asked Questions Appendix 7 – Financial Benchmarking for Whitehall Infant School Appendix 8 – Financial Benchmarking for Whitehall Junior School

1 Pre-publication (Stage One) Consultation: Proposal to amalgamate Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School Cowley Road, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 2LX Consultation period: Tuesday 20th January 2026 to Friday 13th February 2026 2 Introduction Hillingdon Council are proposing to undertake a formal consultation on the future of Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School to form a single Primary School. To start this process the local authority is conducting a pre-publication (stage one) consultation (referred to as the consultation) in line with statutory guidance, to gather the views of staff, families, local residents and any other stakeholders. This is a formal process governed by statutory guidance from the Department for Education (DfE), and it is a technical process. As a result of this we are expected to use a range of technical language which we will look to make accessible to all stakeholders. If you have any queries or questions regarding the language or descriptions within any of our documents, please do not hesitate to contact our team by any of the ways set out in the documentation. What is the proposal? The proposal is that Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School are amalgamated to form a single Primary School from 1st September 2026. The newly formed Primary School would continue to use the existing buildings and site as the Infant and Junior schools. The amalgamated school would continue to provide 630 places in Reception to Year 6 (90 per year group) and offer places for children aged from 3 to 11 years old. The consultation will start on Tuesday 20th January 2026 at 9:00am and will end on Friday 13th February 2026 at 5:00pm. If you would require this document in another language, please contact either Whitehall Infant School, Whitehall Junior School or our team to request this. Why are we proposing the change? Hillingdon Council are seeking your views on a proposal to amalgamate (also referred to as merging) Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School. The headteacher of the Infant School has confirmed her intention to retire at the end of this academic year in August 2026.which means the Infant school meets one of the key triggers outlined in the Councils Amalgamation Policy, representing a good opportunity to bring two good schools together. The new primary school would be built on a strong foundation, benefiting from the existing strengths and effective practices of both schools, which already collaborate to serve their local community. Over time, this partnership would create further opportunities to enhance whole -school st rategies and improve teaching and learning across all key stages. What are some of the advantages of amalgamation? The Council see significant advantages in combining the existing schools into a new primary school. Both schools would benefit from working close r together with some of the key benefits to amalgamating Infant and Junior schools including: • A consistent approach to the ways in which children are taught and supported, recognising the current strengths of both schools. • Increased opportunities for children in all key stages to come together for pastoral, social and creative activities. • Consistency of parental involvement throughout the primary phase of education by having the ability to foster longer-term relationships with families within one school; 3 • Communication between school and parents will be simplified, especially for parents with children in both schools. It would remove any duplication and ensure a joined up approach for events, training and other matters; • Removes the need for parents to apply for a place at the Junior School as children would automatically continue their education as part of one school. • Increased career development opportunities for staff through the sharing of a wider range of expertise and the possibility to gain experience and an understanding of all Primary Key Stages. • Greater opportunity for cost effectiveness through economies of scale e.g. in purchasing, ensuring the best provision possible for the children Will there be any changes to the size of the school and the school buildings? No, the size of the school and school buildings will remain exactly the same. The proposed Primary school will have a published admission number equal to the sum of the current Infant, Nursery and Junior schools’ numbers. Therefore there would be no change to the capacity of the proposed amalgamated Primary school, or the use of the buildings as if the decision were made to proceed. How would an amalgamation be implemented? In order to amalgamate the two Whitehall Schools it is proposed to (technically) close one school and expand the age range of the other school. As both schools are community maintained schools, the Local Authority are proposing that Whitehall Infant School will (technically) close, and Whitehall Junior School would expand its age from 3 to 11 year olds. The new school would then be one Primary School. The combined school would retain the same DfE number as the current Junior School. Will the school be renamed Whitehall Primary School if the schools amalgamate? If the schools do progress to amalgamation, then the governing body together with the Senior Leadership Team can liaise with staff, parents and carers on a possible new name for the all-through primary school. What would an amalgamated school look like? Whitehall Junior School would increase the age range of children it accepts from the current age range to 3 to 11 year olds (from Nursery - Year 6) and would then change its name, to reflect that it educates a wider age range. At the same time Whitehall Infant School would formally (technically) close. The primary school would provide 90 places per year group from Reception to Year 6 and a total of 630 places. All children on roll at the Whitehall Infant School at the point of amalgamation would continue as pupils of the primary school. Admissions If the proposal is agreed and both schools amalgamate, the following would apply: • Children at Whitehall Infant School will automatically be enrolled at the newly amalgamated Primary school. • Children who have applied for Reception places at Whitehall Infant School for Sep tember 2026 would be offered places at the newly formed Primary school through the standard admissions process, using the schools current agreed Admission’s Policy. 4 • Children who have applied to transfer from Whitehall Infant School to Whitehall Junior School for September 2026 will automatically have a place at the Primary School. Will there be any Financial Implications from amalgamation? Currently, both Whitehall Infant School to Whitehall Junior School receive separate lump sum allocations. If the proposed amalgamation is approved by Cabinet, the combined primary school will lose one of these “lump sums ” (amounting to approximately £159,000) over a two -year period. However, this reduction in funding will be offset by efficiencies gained through economies of scale and reduced staffing costs, particularly due to the planned retirement of the Infant School headteacher at the end of the 2025/26 academic year. As part of the amalgamation, reviewing how resources are allocated and deployed will help the school offset the impact of losing one lump sum. This process can be supported by using the Gov.uk Financial Benchmarking and Insights Tool to compare spending across both schools with similar schools in England, identifying opportunities for greater efficiency. When would an amalgamation happen if it is approved? The amalgamated school could be established from 1 st September 2026, which would be subject to the statutory consultation process and approval from Cabinet. Who will be the governors of the primary school? If amalgamation does go ahead, the Governing Body of Whitehall Junior School will review its Instrument of Government to ensure it accurately records the term of office for each category of governors needed to support the new school with a balanced and eff ective governance structure. If vacancies exist for new governors, they would be recruited following the same process that is currently in place. We would expect governors from the existing Infant and Junior school to be involved in this process. The consultation process The consultation will start on Tuesday 20th January 2026 at 9:00am and will end on Friday 13 th February 2026 at 5:00pm. The closing date for online responses is Friday 13th February 2026 at 5:00pm and any hard copies returned by hand or post must be submitted to The London Borough of Hillingdon office by 5:00pm Friday 13th February 2026. How can I make comments about the proposals? Parents, carers, staff, governors and members of the public are invited to share their views by responding to the consultation by any of the following; completing the on-line consultation form, writing directly to the Council, or attending an on-line event during the consultation period as set out below: • Parents, carers, staff, governors and members of the public are invited to send their comments by replying using the online survey available at www.hillingdon.gov.uk/have-your- say • You can also use the response form (or any other written format) at the end of this document to record your views. It can be sent to: London Borough of Hillingdon 2W - School Place Planning Team Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, 5 UB8 1UW or emailed to: Schoolamalgamations@Hillingdon.gov.uk If you or anyone you know would like a paper copy of this form or in any other format, please email schoolamalgamations@hillingdon.gov.uk. If you would require this document in another language, please contact either Whitehall Infant School, Whitehall Junior School or our team to request this. On-Line drop-in session Location Date/Time Session Attendees Microsoft Teams Join the meeting now Wednesday 28th January 12:30pm – 1:30pm (all stakeholders) On-line - Question and Answer Drop in Session - Public Meeting Microsoft Teams Join the meeting now Wednesday 28th January 5:00pm – 6:00pm (all stakeholders) On-line – Question and Answer Drop in Session – Public Meeting Comments made at the meetings will be recorded in written format and will contribute to the consultation outcomes. A separate meeting will be arranged for staff members and governors of both Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior Schools only, to discuss any questions they may have. The staff members and governors are also welcome to join any or all of the other meetings as well. How will the decision about the proposed amalgamation and expansion of the schools be made? After the consultation is complete, all the responses regardless of whether they are comments in support of the proposal, objections, or other suggestions will be collated and considered by the Council. Officers will have regard to the information and feedback and consider whether to request approval to progress to a statutory proposal being published to amalgamate the two schools . If agreed, this process will then commence with the issuing of a Public Notice and the statutory proposal. The representation period will last for four weeks during which time a formal consultation will take place. Officers will present the proposal to amalgamate the two school to the Children, Families and Education Select Committee for comments during the consultation process . After the formal consultation has closed, the consultation responses and recommendations will be submitted to Hillingdon Council Cabinet, along with a summary report requesting them to make a final decision on whether the schools should amalgamate and agree the date of when this should happen. If Hillingdon Council Cabinet decides not to accept a recommendation to amalgamate, the schools will continue as separate infant and junior schools. Guidance for the amalgamation process 6 The proposal would follow two separate guidance processes: Opening and closing maintained schools and Making significant changes (‘prescribed alterations’) to maintained schools. 7 INFORMAL CONSULTATION RESPONSE FORM Proposal to Amalgamate Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School The proposal is to bring together Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School to form a single 3 form-entry Primary School from 1st September 2026. The newly formed Primary School would use the existing buildings and site as the current schools. We are keen to hear your views about the proposal. and would be grateful if you would spend a few minutes to complete this questionnaire. Responses must be submitted to London Borough of Hillingdon, 2W - School Place Planning Team, Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW by 5pm Friday 13th February 2026 and are anonymous. You can also complete the form online available at www.hillingdon.gov.uk/have-your-say where responses must be received by 1. Do you agree with the proposal to amalgamate Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School to form a single three-form Primary School? Please circle as appropriate YES / NO / Don’t know 2. If you agree with the proposal, please say why you think it is a good idea: 8 3. If you disagree with the proposal or ‘don’t know’, please provide details why: 4. If you have any other comments, issues or questions, or have any other suggestions, please advise them here. The following questions are about you and are optional. Your answers will be kept in strict confidence and not shared with any third party. 5. Are you completing this questionnaire as (tick or cross next to the relevant answer): - A parent/carer/guardian - A staff member - A local resident - Prefer not to say - Other - Blank 9 6. How many children under the age of 18 live in your household? (a tick of cross next to the relevant answer): - None - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5+ 7. Which school(s) does your child(ren) currently attend? - Whitehall Infant School - Whitehall Junior School - Other Primary School in Hillingdon - Other Secondary School in Hillingdon - Out of borough Primary School - Out of borough Secondary School - N/A 8. If you would like to provide any other comments on the proposal, please put them below.

1 Formal (Stage Two) Proposal to Amalgamate Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School Consultation Period: Wednesday 25th February 2026 to Wednesday 25th March 2026 Introduction Hillingdon Council are undertak ing a formal consultation on the proposed amalgamation of Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School to form a single Primary School. In order to amalgamate and comply with statutory guidance, it is proposed that Whitehall Infant School would (technically) close, with Whitehall Junior School extending its age range to accommodate all Primary aged children from the two schools within the same buildings. Public Notice Notice is given in accordance with section 15 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and the School Organisation (Establishment and Discontinuance of Schools) Regulations 2013 that the London Borough of Hillingdon is proposing to discontinue (technically close) Whitehall Infant School with effect from 31st August 2026. Notice is given in accordance with section 19 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and the School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2013 that the London Borough of Hillingdon is proposing to make prescri bed alterations to Whitehall Junior School with effect from 1 st September 2026. The prescribed alterations proposed are: • Extend the age range of Whitehall Junior School to accommodate pupils from Nursery to Year 6. • Increase the total pupil numbers at Whitehall Junior School to 630 pupils, (Reception to Year 6) in order to form the new primary school Contact Details: Name and address of Local Authority (LA): London Borough of Hillingdon, Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW Name, address and category of schools proposed to be amalgamated: Whitehall Infant School, Cowley Road, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 2LX, URN: 102411 (Community School) 2 Whitehall Junior School, Cowley Road, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 2LX, URN: 102399 (Community School) This proposal is published following the Department for Education (DfE) Statutory Guidance (August 2025) Making Significant Changes (‘prescribed alterations’) to Maintained Schools and Opening and Closing Maintained schools (October 2024). Type of Proposal This is the proposed c losure of Whitehall Infant School and the expansion of the age range of Whitehall Junior School to create a primary school which will include pupils from the Infant and Junior schools. Proposal The London Borough of Hillingdon are consulting on a proposal for the two schools to amalgamate to form a single , three-form entry community primary school , with a total published pupil number of 630 (from Reception to Year 6) , with effect from 1st September 2026. The proposed process involves the following steps: • Closing (technically) Whitehall Infant School and all pupils, staff, land, buildings and equipment would become part of Whitehall Junior School (which would become a Primary school) from 1st September 2026 • Extending the age range of Whitehall Junior School from Years 3 to 6, to Nursery to Year 6 (and changing its name to a Primary school to reflect the full primary age range) with effect from 1st September 2026 The new primary school would continue to offer nursery provision, and therefore the age range would be from 3 to 11 year-olds, and would include existing pupils from the Infant and Junior schools. The process of amalgamation is a technical process to join 2 schools together and in order to conduct the process in a legally compliant manner, the Council are required to use appropriate technical language. However, it is important to note that: • No buildings or property at the school sites will be closed, removed, developed or sold as a result of the proposed amalgamation • No children will be displaced as a result of the proposed amalgamation • There will not be a change in pupil numbers as a result of the proposed amalgamation • Children will continue to be educated at the same site • When we refer to the closure of Whitehall Infant school, it is purely a technical change, and the pupils, staff and buildings will not be affected as a result of this proposal Proposer The proposers for the proposed closure of Whitehall Infant School and the proposed expansion of the age range of Whitehall Junior School are Hillingdon Council. 3 Implementation Date It is proposed that Whitehall Infant School would (technically) close on 31st August 2026 and Whitehall Junior School will expand to become a Primary school on the existing site s with effect from 1st September 2026. Reason for amalgamation Hillingdon Council sees a range of benefits in combining the existing schools into a new primary school through the statutory amalgamation process, which include: • A consistent approach to the ways in which children are taught and supported, recognising the current strengths of both schools. • Increased opportunities for children in all key stages to come together for pastoral, social and creative activities. • Consistency of parental involvement throughout the primary phase of education by having the ability to foster longer-term relationships with families within one school. • Communication between school and parents will be simplified, especially for parents with children in both schools. It would remove any duplication and ensure a joined-up approach for events, training and other matters. • Removes the need for parents to apply for a place at the Junior School as children would automatically continue their education as part of one Whitehall school. • Increased career development opportunities for staff through the sharing of a wider range of expertise and the possibility to gain experience and an understanding of all Primary Key Stages. • Greater opportunity for cost effectiveness through economies of scale e.g. in purchasing, ensuring the best provision possible for the children; Both Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School are community maintained schools located in the Uxbridge ward and were both graded ‘Good’ at their last Ofsted Inspection. Whitehall Infant School was inspected in November 2024 and maintained its gr ade from the full inspection in March 2015, and Whitehall Junior School was inspected in June 2023 and maintained its grade from the full inspection in September 2014. Both of these schools are located adjacent to each other and effectively share one site. As they are community maintained schools, this means they are both maintained by Hillingdon Council and the Council owns the buildings and the land. The Local Authorit y is also responsible for determining the school admission arrangements for both schools. The Hillingdon Infant and Junior Amalgamation Policy , September 2022, states that “The London Borough of Hillingdon will require Governing Bodies of all separate infant and junior schools to consider amalgamating their two linked schools when one or more of the following ‘trigger circumstances’ occur, unless there are compelling and overriding reasons” A. A headteacher vacancy arises in either or both schools. B. Total pupil numbers in either school are 25% or more below the Published Admission Number. C. Ofsted inspection in one of the schools identifies a ‘Requires Improvement’ judgement. D. One or both of the schools cannot set a balanced budget or has financial problems. 4 E. One or both of the schools involved is judged to be a ‘School causing concern’ by the London Borough of Hillingdon. F. One or both schools have PANs or are recruiting at below two forms of entry – making the individual schools relatively small and at risk of becoming unviable within the Hillingdon funding context. G. Other pressures whereby the educational provision would be improved through amalgamation such as provision of SEN support, staff recruitment and retention or issues linked to the buildings. Following the announcement that the Headteacher of Whitehall Infant School would be retiring in August 2026, the schools met trigger A as listed above. Initial discussions were then held with both governing bodies to outline and explore the potential for amalgamation. The potential of amalgamating Infant and Junior schools in line with the amalgamation policy, has been discussed with schools over the last few years at various collective and individual meetings, and schools have been made aware that the Council would pro pose this solution under the appropriate circumstances. Both schools have been affected by the ongoing decline in the birth rate across Hillingdon, which has resulted in Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School reducing their Published Admissions Numbers from 120 (4FE) to 90 (3FE) from September 2025. Whitehall Infant School *The October 25 figure shows a reduction of 30 in the PAN, as PAN changes only take effect in the year of entry, which in this case, is Reception Whitehall Junior School 5 *The October 25 figure shows a reduction of 30 in the PAN, as PAN changes only take effect in the year of entry, which in this case, is Year 3. There is no boarding provision at either school, which are both are co-educational. Objectives (including how the proposal would increase educational standards and parental choice) The proposal to amalgamate the schools has been put forward by the LA for the long- term benefit of children currently attending the schools , and those who will attend in the future. Academic research highlights the benefits of amalgamating infant and junior schools in relation to continuity of education and educational outcomes. The amalgamation of the Whitehall Schools will support a cohesive and continuous educational journey, underpinned by a unified curriculum, consistent teaching methodologies, and ali gned pastoral support. This integrated approach promotes collaboration, and the sharing of best practices, ensuring pupils experience a smooth and confident progression from the early years through to Year 6. Displaced pupils This proposal is to amalgamate the two schools, and therefore no pupils would be displaced. From 1st September 2026, pupils currently at Whitehall Infant School would have places at the expanded Whitehall Junior School (which would become the Primary school). Current pupils in Year 2 would automatically transition to Year 3. Impact on the community Both Whitehall Infant and Whitehall Junior Schools serve the same geographical area and are located adjacent to each other and effectively share one site . The proposed amalgamation of Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School will not displace any pupils, or have any impact on travel, and will therefore have no impact on the community. The proposal will provide certainty of progression to the junior phase and offer an all-through primary education. Rural primary schools Not applicable. Balance of denominational provision Not applicable. Early Years provision It is intended that the current nursery at Whitehall Infant School would continue to operate as part of the primary school, and the proposed age -range change of Whitehall Junior School includes the nursery provision. There would be no change for children in the current setting, therefore, the provision would continue to be accessible and convenient for local families. Sixth Form provision Not applicable. 6 Effect on other Educational Establishments There will be little to no impact on other educational establishments as current pupils from Whitehall Infant School will automatically continue their educational journey into Key Stage 2 if the proposal for amalgamation is approved. For the last 3 years, 99% children attending the Infant school secured places at the Junior school, so it is likely that there will minimal, or no impact on surrounding schools. However, parents have the right to apply for a place at an alternative school if they wish, in line with all other schools. Special Educational Needs The schools do not provide a Specialist Resource Provision (SRP), or a Designated Unit (DU) recognised by the local authority as being reserved for children with special educational needs. Children with special educational needs will continue to receive the same high levels of support in the primary school. Travel Both Whitehall Infant School and Whitehall Junior School are located adjacent to each other and effectively share one site so there will be no travel implications. Financial implications The Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) Schools Block Funding represents the majority of funding for schools within Hillingdon, although each school may receive additional DSG funding or Grants. Both schools’ combined funding is approximately £4,624k funding per year. If the proposal is approved, this would mean that following financial year (2027/28) after amalgamation the amount received would be £4,575k and the second financial year (2028/29) funding would be £4,459k. The figures above and detailed in the table below are based on the assumption that the number of pupils remains constant. * Early Years Funding is not included in the figures above It is important to note that o ther DSG funding e.g. Early Years funding (EYSFF), Pupil Premium and other Grants paid to the school may be affected in future years, however these are based on pupil numbers and would not be affected by amalgamation (these would be depending upon the grant conditions, guidance and specific calculations). 7 If the schools amalgamate , the combined school will only be eligible for one lump sum (an allocation from the Dedicated Schools Grant provided to individual schools to support fixed costs that is currently £165,436 a year – based on the budget for 2025/26) in the future. As detailed in the Schools operational guide: 2025 to 2026 - GOV.UK,, “where schools amalgamate after 1 April 2025, the new school will receive funding equivalent to the formula funding of the closing schools added together for the appropriate proportion of the year. This means that they receive the combined lump sums for the remainder of the year and 70% of the second lump sum in the following year. Local authorities can apply to provide a second year of protection. This needs to be discussed and agreed with Schools Forum.” Amalgamating the two schools will ultimately result in the loss of one of the lump‑sum funding allocations that each school currently receives. However, the combined school may achieve improved economies of scale, including savings from needing only one he adteacher, which could help offset the impact of this funding reduction. Once the school receive their budget, they decide how this is allocated across the school , and what the funding is spent on. Project costs and indication of how these will be met, including how long-term value for money will be achieved There are no direct project costs other than the costs of following the statutory process for school alterations and closures. Process for making representations (objections and comments) Within four weeks from the date of publication of this proposal, from 9am on Wednesday 25th February 2026 to 5pm on Wednesday 25th March 2026, any person may object to , support, or make comments on the proposal. During this time , any person can send written representation to the Council directly to have their views on the proposals taken into consideration by the decision maker. You can respond to the proposal by: • Completing the online questionnaire by visiting the consultation page www.hillingdon.gov.uk/have-your-say • Emailing schoolamalgamations@hillingdon.gov.uk • Submit a written response to: School Place Planning Team, London Brough of Hillingdon, Civic Centre, 2W, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW All consultation responses must be received by 5pm on Wednesday 25th March 2026. The consultation will involve a drop -in session for anyone affected by the proposal where Officers will be on hand to answer questions in person and to explain the proposal, as necessary. This opportunity will be also offered virtually for stakeholders to attend if that is more convenient. 8 Information Session Details Date Time Venue Attendees Tuesday 3rd March 2026 1:45 to 2:45pm (parents/carers/ residents) Whitehall Junior School Hall, Cowley Road, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 2LX Drop-in session – Public meeting Tuesday 3rd March 2026 3:30pm – 4:30pm (staff members) Whitehall Infant School Hall, Cowley Road, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 2LX Drop-in session – staff meeting Monday 9th March 2026 12:30pm – 13:30pm (parents/carers/ residents) Virtual meeting – click here to join Drop-in session – Public meeting Monday 9th March 2026 5:00pm – 6:00pm (parents/carers/ residents) Virtual meeting – click here to join Drop-in session – Public meeting Decision Hillingdon Local Authority will be the decision maker. They must satisfy themselves that an appropriate fair and open local consultation has been carried out. The Local Authority Cabinet will decide on the proposal within two months of the closure of the consultation period. When the decision has been taken, the Local Authority will publish the outcome of the decision on their website and communicate the outcome to relevant stakeholders in writing. A copy of this consultation is also available at: • Whitehall Infant School website • Whitehall Junior School website Alternatively, you can make contact with the Council or the schools through email or postal addresses below to request a hard copy of the consultation documents. Email: • School Place Planning Team, Hillingdon Council – schoolamalgamations@hillingdon.gov.uk • Whitehall Infant School - Office@mail.whitehallinf.org • Whitehall Junior School - Office@whitehalljunior.org 9 Writing to: • School Place Planning Team, London Brough of Hillingdon, Civic Centre, 2W, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW • Whitehall Infant School, Cowley Road, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 2LX • Whitehall Junior School, Cowley Road, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 2LX

Frequently Asked Questions – Proposed Whitehall Amalgamation Why is an amalgamation of Whitehall Infant and Whitehall Junior schools being suggested? The headteacher of Whitehall Infant School has confirmed her intention to retire at the end of this academic year in August 2026. This will result in a headteacher vacancy and means the two schools meet one of the triggers outlined in the Councils Amalgamation Policy What are some of the advantages of the proposed amalgamation? The proposal to amalgamate the schools is underpinned by the intention of the Council to further improve the quality of provision already in place at both schools by ensuring a consistent and continuous approach to teaching and learning throughout children’s time at Whitehall. It will also enable the Governing Body, Senior Leadership Team, and school staff to plan pastoral support for pupils from Nursery to Year 6. Finally, the proposal will enable the two schools to merge and strengthen their community li nks, building on the extended school programmes in place in both schools. Educational advantages for pupils • The proposed amalgamation would remove the need to reapply for a school place moving to the Junior school and enable a smoother transition into Key Stage 2. • The new school would have just one Ofsted inspection and rating, giving a clearer picture of how the whole school is doing. • Enhanced curriculum planning which can take into account all three stages of the primary phase of education (Early Years, Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2) so that children make the best possible progress in their learning and development during their time at Whitehall; • A consistent approach to the ways in which children are taught and supported , recognising the current strengths of both schools. • Being able to monitor children’s progress from age 3 to age 11 would enable staff to build up a comprehensive understanding of each child and build consistently on their achievements throughout their time at Whitehall. • Continuity of experience and provision, which could be especially important for vulnerable children and those with special educational needs. • Increased opportunities for children in all key stages to come together for pastoral, social and creative activities. • Improved consistency of safeguarding through seamless knowledge of children throughout their time at Whitehall. • The proposed amalgamation w ould allow consistency of policy and planning across primary key stages as well as the potential for cross -phase policies with a key stage specific focus. Advantages for school families • Consistency of parental involvement throughout the primary phase of education by having the ability to foster longer -term relationships with families and staff within one school; • Communication between school and parents will be simplified, especially for parents with children in both schools. It would remove any duplication and ensure a joined up approach for events, training and other matters; • Removes the need for parents to apply for a place at the Junior School as children would automatically continue their education as part of one Whitehall school. Advantages for the leadership and governance • A single leadership team providing vision and continuity from Nursery to Year 6; • The opportunity to build partnerships with children, parents and families over a longer period of time. • Working in partnership as one school within the community. • The p otential to attract from a wider pool of teaching and support staff due to greater career opportunities provided by an all through primary school. • Greater flexibility in staffing • A single Ofsted inspection programme rather than both schools being inspected on a regular cycle. Advantages for the staff • Increased career development opportunities through the sharing of a wider range of expertise and the possibility to gain experience and an understanding of all primary Key Stages. • Continuous assessment, tracking and target -setting procedures for the entire primary phase of education; • Opportunities to use the accommodation of both schools more effectively to support teaching and learning; • Stability of staffing and increased opportunities for staff retention Advantages for the use of resources • Increased sharing of resources and expertise would benefit both children and staff and avoid unnecessary duplication. • As one school there is the potential to improve the use of school facilities through shared spaces; • Greater opportunity for cost effectiveness through economies of scale e.g. in purchasing, ensuring the best provision possible for the children; • Greater resilience for the future for both schools especially in light of falling pupil numbers, and financial pressures • A larger workforce with a broader range of shared expertise. What are the risks in amalgamating the two schools? Hillingdon Council consider that the proposed amalgamation would bring a range of benefits and opportunities to the schools’ pupils, staff and families as outlined above. One possible risk is that the amalgamation process may distract governors and staff during the year with some uncertainty until a formal decisio n is taken, and then with implementation work required after the formal decision. This work includes the alignment of processes, procedures, ethos and culture . To mitigate this risk , the schools are both working closely with Hillingdon Council to minimise the impact upon pupils, families, governors and staff , to ensure that the process runs as smoothly as possible if the proposal is agreed. Also, the proposed amalgamation may be unsettling to staff and would need to be carefully managed by the school. Hillingdon Council is committed to undertaking all steps of this process in an open and transparent way, with the best interests of the pupils, and the schools at its heart, and will continue to work with the schools during and after this process. The timetable outlined in the proposal allows sufficient time to deliver the amalgamation. As outlined above, if the proposed amalgamation progresses, the implementation of the amalgamation will be dealt with through collaboration of the staff and leadership teams across both schools . The school leadership teams are already working together at this time, to plan for any potential changes, and support closer working relationships. There are a number of other possible risks that are common to all schools – such as staff recruitment and retention, pupil number changes in the local area, and school funding decisions by the Department for Education. Amalgamation is not considered to increase the risk of any of these issues and indeed may help to reduce or manage the risk s compared to remaining as separate infant and junior schools. How would the new school be created? The proposed process involves the following steps: • Closing (technically) Whitehall Infant School and all pupils, staff, land, buildings and equipment would become part of Whitehall Junior School (which would become a Primary school) from 1st September 2026 • Extending the age range of Whitehall Junior School from Years 3 to 6, to Nursery to Year 6 (and changing its name to a Primary school to reflect the full primary age range) with effect from 1st September 2026 Will there be any changes to the size of the school and the school buildings? No, the size of the school and building will remain exactly the same. The proposed Primary school will have a published admission number equal to the sum of the current Infant, Nursery and Junior Schools’ numbers. Therefore , there would be no change to the capacity of the proposed amalgamated Primary school if the decision were made to proceed. Does the proposed amalgamation affect school funding? The education budget that the Council receives from central government is ‘ring-fenced’ and can only be spent on education – so there is no saving for the Council through the proposed amalgamation. The budget for each individual school is determined by a formula that includes an amount for every school but is mainly determined by the number of pupils in the school . There are many primary schools in the borough which are the same size as the proposed new primary school, and they are able to provide effective education within their budgets. As detailed in the Schools operational guide: 2025 to 2026 - GOV.UK, ‘where schools amalgamate after 1 April 2025, the new school will receive funding equivalent to the formula funding of the closing schools added together for the appropriate proportion of the year.’ As an example, if the schools amalgamated 1 st September 2026 they would receive the combined lump sums for the remainder of the financial year (April 2026/27) and 70% of the second lump sum in the following financial year (April 2027/28). ‘Local authorities may apply to provide a second year of protection. This needs to be discussed and agreed with schools forum’. The financial implication of the amalgamation of the two schools will be the eventual loss of the lump sum income usually available per school (amounting to approximately £165,000). The school will however, benefit from better economies of scale which will mitigate the impact of this loss , including the loss of a Headteacher salary with the retirement of the current Headteacher of the Infant school . The proposal itself is not expected to directly affect the number of teachers or teaching assistants, as staffing levels will continue to be aligned with the number of children enrolled at both schools. A review of resource allocation and deployment as part of the amalgamation will enable the school to mitigate the i mpact of the loss of one lump sum over time. This can be supported by using the Gov.uk Financial Benchmarking and Insights Tool to see how spending across both schools compares with similar schools across England to identify the opportunity for any efficiencies. What will happen if the amalgamation does not proceed? The schools would remain separate and the governing body of the Whitehall Infant School would appoint a new headteacher. Will the school be renamed Whitehall Primary School if the schools amalgamate? If the schools do progress to amalgamation, then the governing body together with the Senior Leadership Team can liaise with staff, parents and carers on a possible new name for the all-through primary school. Who would be the governors of the proposed new Primary School? The Governing Body of Whitehall Junior School will consult with the Governing Body of Whitehall Infant School and review its Instrument of Government to ensure it accurately records the term of office for each category of governor . They will also review t he name of the school and membership of governors needed to support the school with a balanced and effective governance structure. It is envisaged that the new Governing Body will comprise of a combination of Governors of both current schools. Will there be a new uniform? The decision on any change to uniform and when it will be introduced will be confirmed by the Governing Body of the primary school if amalgamation is progressed. What would the school admissions arrangements be if there is an amalgamation? The Local Authority is the Admissions authority for both Whitehall Schools . If the proposed amalgamation is approved, the admissions process will be simplified. Families would no longer need to apply for a Junior School place, as children in Year 2 would automatically progress to Year 3 within the same school. There would be no changes to the admissions arrangements for Nursery and Reception. Who will be parents’ first point of contact if the schools amalgamate? Will there just be one reception team? It is too early at this stage to know exactly how the school support team would be structured. This would be a decision for the school. Will there be any job losses if amalgamation progresses? The staffing structure would be considered in detail by the schools if the amalgamation is formally approved. This would be a decision for the school. Will staff have the opportunity to work across different key stages (EYFS, Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2) if amalgamation progresses? This will be a decision for the school , but in principle yes, becoming a Primary School would give staff the opportunity to gain experience in different key stages where they were interested in doing so. This would be based on individual preferences and the school’s requirements, and the school would decide how this would work in practice. Will there be any changes to the Senior Leadership Team structure if amalgamation progresses? It is too early in the process to confirm what the Senior Leadership Team structure might look like. Staff would of course be consulted by the school on any changes if appropriate. Any consultations would include a timeframe for any changes. This would be the responsibility of the school. However, there would only be one Headteacher for the new Primary school if the proposal is accepted. Will there be any changes to subject leaders – i.e. would there be a need for two subject coordinators? It is too early in the process to confirm what a primary staffing structure might look like for the new school. Staff would of course be consulted by the school on any changes to the staffing structures if appropriate. Any consultations would include a timeframe for any changes. This would be the responsibility of the school. Will teachers be moved into different year groups or key stages? This will be a decision for the school, in consultation with individual staff, with some people potentially seeing this as an opportunity to gain experience of a different Key Stage. Will the teachers and support staff stay the same? This will be a decision for the school, in consultation with individual staff . If the decision is made to amalgamate the two schools, then the staffing structure for the Primary School would be reviewed by the headteacher and Governing body. Will teachers’ contracts be affected if the proposed amalgamation goes ahead? Teachers’ contracts would stay the same, except for updating the school name to reflect the new primary school . They would not fall under TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings: Protection of Employment) arrangements, as the London Borough of Hillingdon is already the employer for staff in both schools. Have other options been considered such as federating? The Council has considered alternative options for Infant and Junior schools, and believe it is better to bring the two schools together through amalgamation rather than any other options for the following reasons: 1. Single Governance Structure • Amalgamation creates one governing body for the new school, simplifying decision-making and accountability. • Federation still requires balancing priorities across both schools, which can lead to complexity and slower decisions. 2. Unified Vision and Culture • A single school can develop a cohesive ethos, policies, and improvement plan. • Federated schools often maintain separate identities, which can dilute strategic focus. 3. Financial Efficiency • Amalgamation allows one budget , reducing duplication in administration, leadership, and services. • Federation keeps separate budgets, which limits cost savings. 4. Streamlined Leadership • One Headteacher and leadership team for the amalgamated school ensures clarity and consistency. • Federations often require an Executive Head plus Heads of School, which can be more costly and complex. 5. Easier Compliance and Accountability • Amalgamation means one Ofsted inspection , one set of statutory returns, and one admissions policy. • Federation requires separate inspections and compliance for each school. 6. Sustainability and Resilience • Amalgamation is often better for schools with falling rolls or financial pressures, as it creates a single, stronger institution. • Federation may not fully address viability issues if pupil numbers continue to decline. 7. Simplified Communication • Parents, staff, and stakeholders deal with one school identity, reducing confusion. • Federation can lead to mixed messaging if schools retain separate branding. Have other options been considered such as joining a Multi Academy Trust (MAT)? If the decision was made to join a MAT , the LA would prefer that this would be the case for both schools, to ensure the benefits of amalgamation above could be delivered. However, if only one school wanted to become part of a MAT, this would still result in the need for a new Head Teacher at the Infant school , but could also bring a number of operational and strategic challenges if the schools operated independently from each other.

Minutes CORPORATE PARENTING PANEL 27 January 2026 Meeting held at Committee Room 6 - Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge UB8 1UW To Members of the Panel: Voting Members: Councillor Nick Denys (Chair) Councillor Heena Makwana Councillor Jan Sweeting Non-voting Members: Representatives of the Children in Care Council, and Care Experienced Young People Ash Knight, Participation Manager Dr Kate Head, Designated Doctor for Children Looked After covering Hillingdon, Harrow and Brent (virtual) Officers Present: Poppy Reddy, Assistant Director, Care, Support & Transition Lisa Steel, Virtual School Headteacher Lana Hormiz, Children's Participation Officer Kirsty DeSouza, Contextual Safeguarding Co-ordinator Ryan Dell, Democratic Services Officer Also Present: Katie Randall, Clinical Services Manager , Harrow 0 -19 Service, CCN Team, Special School Nursing and Looked After Children, CNWL * This meeting was co-chaired by a Children in Care Council member 24. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (Agenda Item 1) Apologies had been received from Bridget Owen. 25. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST IN MATTERS COMING BEFORE THIS MEETING (Agenda Item 2) None. 26. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING (Agenda Item 3) It was noted that when these draft minutes had been presented to the Select Committee, two corrections had been highlighted. These corrections had been amended and were included in these minutes. RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting dated 28 October 2025 be approved as an accurate record. 27. MAKING HAYES SAFER UPDATE (Agenda Item 4) Officers and young people gave a presentation on the Making Hayes Safer project:  Vision o The vision of the project was to eliminate violence and exploitation, and make communities feel safe  Aim o To tackle serious youth violence and exploitation through the lens of contextual safeguarding  Creative Arts Approach o Activities included events taking place in the Teen Room at Botwell Library such as youth worker led discussions o Outputs included 54 attendances by young people, some of whom were NEET, eight podcasts and music productions  Feedback from Activities o Feedback on the activities was received from young people across six schools and included the child’s voice on knife crime o Feedback was collected via a survey of 279 young people  AXIS o AXIS, a child exploitation team for Hillingdon, was engaging primary schools on the project  Responding to Tragedy o Following the loss of a 16 -year-old to se rious youth violence, t he project had stepped in to provide crucial bereavement and trauma support , and had been working with the young person’s mother o The project was also planning a memorial bench near the young person’s home  YMCA West London Youth Project o Offered free sports for young people  Hayes Community Action Day o Funded by the Making Hayes Safer project. o In partnership with the Teen Room (Botwell Library) and Communities Against Violence (CAV) o Featured 356 attendees and guest speakers  Employment o One young person had been employed on the Making Hayes Safer project for three months o This include d visiting schools, speaking to young people, attending residential trips and mentoring children at risk of exploitation and serious youth violence o As the young person had lived through similar experiences, young people were more likely to listen, relate and change their mindset. o The young person was commended for their work, and ha d been nominated for the National CrimeBeat Award  Residential trip o 15 young people took part in a residential trip to Wales o Several of the young people were now enrolled in college or in employment o Officers played a video by one of the young people giving their feedback on the trip/ Feedback included:  This experience was amazing and something I’ll never forget  The residential has really made a difference to me, I can achieve things I didn’t believe I could  Programmes like this are important because they give young people safe and positive experiences which is what the Making Hayes Safer project is all about  Self-Defence Programme o 10 young people took part in a six-week programme learning self-defence o Successful students will receive a Red Belt with a White Stripe and a Certificate of Achievement  Basketball o Basketball sessions were run at the Global Academy during the summer holidays o Feedback from young people highlighted the need for girls -only sessions, as well as mixed sessions, which had been implemented  Knife bin o Following feedback from young people, a knife bin had been re-introduced in Hayes at Pump Lane Car Park. o This will run as a one-year pilot. o This allowed anonymous drop-offs  Family Lives o Family Lives had been commissioned for one year as part of the Making Hayes Safer project, aiming to support families, parents, and children in addressing serious youth violence  Business Engagement & Contextual Safeguarding o Every business in Hayes would be offered the opp ortunity to join a free session on ‘what is contextual safeguarding’, held at their convenience online or face-to-face. o The aim was to gain awareness and understanding of what contextual safeguarding is and what to do if you see a child with changed behaviour  Business Engagement & Safe Hub o A safe hub was being launched for children walking home from school or out in the community o This consisted of a list of stores with a waiting area whereby young people can step into a safe hub location where trusted staff will offer support  Making Hayes Safer logo o Year 6 students from three local schools are taking part in designing the official logo for the Making Hayes Safer project o A winner from each school will receive a 1st, 2nd and 3rd prize o This aimed to empower the community to drive lasting, positive change in Hayes Members asked about funding for the project. It was currently funded by the Violence Reduction Unit, but officers were looking for external funding. It was noted that after one year of the project, there had been a reduction in the number of referrals to the Youth Justice Service. The Chair noted that the Panel would try to assist the project where possible. Members asked how it was ensured that lessons learned were long -lasting. Officers noted that the young people involved were known to the Youth Justice Service and so already ha d an allocated case worker and had regular contact with the Participation Team. Some young people were acting as mentors, for example on the residential trips. Young people noted that once young people get involved, they stay involved. For example, one young person had become more involved in the project since going on a residential trip. T he young people also noted that the project had helped them to see more opportunities, as similar opportunities (e.g. residential trips and KICA) were not common. The young people commended the role of the Participation team as very important, and that it was important to see how different teams fit into the system. The young people noted the importance of having people believe in you. Members asked if Ward Councillors were involved. Officers advised that they tried to have regular contact with Councillors and local police. Officers highlighted difficulty in finding venues, noting that schools were more available in holidays. Members commended officers and the young people. Members asked how feedback was collected. Young people advised that they had gone into schools and spoken to pupils in Y ear 7-11. The pupils wrote down what ‘safe’ and ‘not safe’ meant to them. It was noted that it was good that the young people felt able to share their feedback. Having a young person going into the schools also helped to build relationships. RESOLVED: That the Panel noted the presentation 28. ACCOMMODATION, PLACEMENTS & HOUSING (Agenda Item 5) Officers introduced the report, noting that there were a range of types of accommodation available to young people from pre-birth up to the age of 25. The first consideration was always for young people to stay with their birth families where possible. Officers aimed to ensure support, opportunities, empowerment and stability for young people. Hillingdon play ed an active role in the regional commissioning work led by the West London Alliance, using shared frameworks to source high-quality children’s placements across West London. Kinship Care If young people cannot be placed with their birth parents, kinship care allow ed them to remain within their extended family or close network, preserving identity, culture, and continuity of relationships . There were currently 223 young people under Special Guardianship arrangements. Officers noted that they tried to mirror the support offered to foster carers to kinship carers. Foster Care If young people cannot be placed with their birth families, then foster care was the next most suitable option. Foster care allow ed carers to be match ed to young people’s needs. The new fostering offer had been launched in May 2024. Officers tried to keep young people in the borough as much as possible where suitable. As of January 2026, there were 72 registered fostering households caring for 75 children. Four more fostering households were due to be presented at panel for approval by the end of the year. Hillingdon was part of the Foster with West London Hub. Of the eight local authorities, Hillingdon had the highest number of enquiries, 127 compared with the next performing local authority at 103. Hillingdon had signed up to the Care Friends app. This provided a small financial incentive to foster carers to refer a friend as a potential new carer. Staying Put Staying Put was a statutory scheme that allowed young people to remain with their foster carers after they turn ed 18, allowing for additional consistency and stability. Staying Close Staying Close is a programme that currently support ed 46 Care Experienced Young People aged over 18 across ten properties. In partnership with the Estates team and commissioned providers, a pilot scheme was underway to support Care Experienced Young People in moving into the private rental sector, including approval for a six-bedroom property. From April 2026, operational and strategic responsibility will transfer to the Housing service, aligning with the new statutory duty for all local authorities to provide Staying Cl ose and to support the continued development of integrated housing pathways. Residential homes Young people were not placed in residential homes except as a last resort. In December of 2025, officers successfully registered 12 new residential beds in six new homes. This was the first development of its kind in London, and it brought the total number of in -house residential spaces to 23. These homes were regulated by Ofsted. There were two step-aside placements that aimed to bring young people back into the borough. This helped to maintain stability and positive outcomes. Supported accommodation Supported accommodation services offer accommodation and support to young people aged 16 -18 (or up to 21 and 25 for care -experienced young people in education or training). All semi-independent accommodation was accredited and tailored to meet individual n eeds, facilitating the transition into adulthood. These settings were registered with Ofsted. The P3 Navigator Plus project ha d been developed to support young people during their transition into adulthood, offering an early intervention and prevention approach to ensure timely support and avoid long waiting times associated with more acute services. There was a block contract with the YMCA offering 21 bedrooms with 24-hour on- site support for Care Experienced Young People who are over 18 and need ongoing support to prepare for adulthood. Shared accommodation There were approximately 30 independent HMOs specifically for young people aged over 18 who were continuing to seek asylum with no recourse to public funds. There were currently 84 young people in such properties. Members asked about how to make a house into a home, and how to feel secure. Officers advised that all young people ha d an allocated worker, and all placements were vetted prior. If the young person was under 18, they were visited every six weeks. Members asked about the 30 HMOs, asking if there was support available to the young people living in them. Officers highlighted key working sessions, allocated P As and networks. Officers further advised that the HMOs were spread throughout the borough. Members commended the “excellent” report. Young people asked if the training was the same for Special Guardians as it was for foster carers. Officers advised that training for foster ca rers was replicated for Special Guardians, including attachment training. Young people noted that help past the age of 21 was needed. While young people ha d an allocated PA until the age of 21, it was often needed beyond this. Officers advised that 21 was the statutory cut-off, though some young people had a PA up until the age of 25 as needed or were supported via a duty PA. RESOLVED: That the Panel noted the content of the report 29. VIRTUAL SCHOOL ANNUAL REPORT (Agenda Item 6) Officers introduced the report. The Virtual School oversaw a complex cohort of young people, with a high number of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. Termly visits were made to young people in out-of-borough settings. PEP completion was at 100%, and more than 97% of PEPs were confirmed as meeting the highest quality benchmarks. All young people aged 2-18 had an allocated Virtual School Officer. The Virtual School held its second annual conference, with a wide range of schools and partner organisations in attendance . Highlights included a care-experienced keynote speaker and an inspiring Hillingdon Care Experienced Panel. Over 70% of attendees rated the event as exceptional. Over 64 children had engaged in enrichment activities. Emotionally Based School Non -Attendance (EBSNA) had been rising, and EBSNA training was given to all Virtual School Officers. The number of children receiving one or more suspensions had decreased from 15 to 11 this year. Two Perm anent Exclusions had been issued to Care for Children. Both decisions were robustly challenged and as a result, one exclusion was overturned. Targeted mentoring and evening classes had been introduced for young people not in employment, education or trai ning. These were funded up to the age of 18 but also offered for young people over 18. 60% of NEET participants had transitioned into EET. 23% of young people achieved a grade 5+ in English & maths (Key Stage 4). This highlighted the need for continued focus on core subjects, particularly English Language. Officers highlighted that a young person’s education cannot be taken away from them. Colleagues from the health team noted that there were events run by CNWL for NEET young people, but these had low attendance. The report noted that “Over the past five years, while the overall number of CFC has risen slightly (up 1%), the proportion of younger children has declined”. Members asked why. This was in part due to more early intervention, early collaborat ive working and improvements in SEND identification. Young people asked if there were rewards and incentives for engagement. Officers noted that there were , but they would like to do more. However, there were some funding implications. Members asked abo ut Pupil Premium Plus (PPP) and how this worked. Officer s explained that a lump sum was received, and that some was retained for staffing, resources and interventions. The Virtual School had continued with a new method for the devolution of PPP to schools which enable d a clear focus on usage and impact. This involved schools making requests for the funding they wish to use for each child as part of the termly PEP meeting. This process had improved the scrutiny of grant fund usage. On absences, officers noted that this was often linked to medical needs. There were also often additional needs for children in care such as dental needs. Members asked about reasons for EBSNA. Officers advised that this was partly a COVID legacy. This was a national issue that needed to be addressed. EBSNA appeared to affect children in care less than other young people. It was also noted that the school environment can be triggering for some young people. The young people highlighted that young people had to attend school whilst adult s can work from home , although school can be a safe place. The Virtual School was exploring alternative strategies, such as AV1 Robots, to bridge learning gaps and help highly anxious learners return to the classroom. This may be useful for emergency school placements. The young people highlighted that this had the potential to make them stand out in a negative manner. RESOLVED: That the Corporate Parenting Panel: 1. Noted the educational outcomes and p rogress detailed in the report and endorsed the continued strategic priorities for 2025/26; and 2. Noted the Virtual School’s planned restructure to strengthen locality-based working and improve outcomes for vulnerable learners 30. CHILDREN’S SERVICES PERFORMANCE DATA Q3 2025-26 (Agenda Item 7) Officers introduced the report. Members commended officers for replacing references to LAC in the report. As part of an improvement plan, a Peer Review into Transition to Adulthood had been commissioned. This would include a number of meetings and focus groups with internal and external partners, Care Experienced Young People and providers. This review would help to identify areas for improvement. It was suggested that findings of this review could be presented to the Panel. RESOLVED: That the Corporate Parenting Panel noted the content of the report 31. WORK PROGRAMME (Agenda Item 8) Members considered the work programme. It was suggested that some items be moved back from the March meeting, including the health team annual report. Any further changes would be discussed and agreed prior to the next meeting. It was noted that the Children, Families & Education Select Committee had recently considered the Family First Reforms. The young people gave an update on their involvement in this:  This included weekly group meetings of young mothers and expectant mothers to network with each other  The young person was involved in this as a way to support new families  It was recognised that being a new mother can be scary RESOLVED: That the Corporate Parenting Panel considered the report The meeting, which commenced at 5:30 pm, closed 7:00 pm. These are the minutes of the above meeting. For more information on any of the resolutions, please contact Ryan Dell on democratic@hillingdon.gov.uk.

Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public FOSTERING REVIEW: DRAFT FINAL REPORT Committee name Children, Families & Education Select Committee Officer reporting Ryan Dell, Democratic Services Papers with report Appendix A – Updated scoping report Appendix B – Guidance on undertaking policy reviews Ward All HEADLINES This report presents the Committee with a draft of the final report for its review into fostering. RECOMMENDATION That the Select Committee: 1. Agree the final report for its review into fostering; 2. Delegate any final wordin g amendments to the Democratic Services Officer in conjunction with the Chair and in consultation with the Opposition Lead; and 3. Agree the review’s submission to Cabinet thereafter. Note: To assist Members, Democratic Services will share the draft report separately to the Committee when ready in advance of the meeting. SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1) Scoping report – looking at the original parameters of the review The updated review scoping report is attached so Members can be reminded of the original Terms of Reference as set out below, and whether the Committee has met these: 1. To understand the needs and experiences of children in foster care through examining demographics, underrepresented groups, placement types, placement stability, educational attainment, wellbeing and emerging trends. 2. To evaluate the effectiveness of current recruitment and retention strategies, and support available to foster carers, including the impact of the new fostering offer. 3. To identify barriers to fostering for potential carers and Cared for Children, and to identify opportunities for improvement. 4. To formulate recommendations to Cabinet aimed at strengthening Hillingdon’s fostering provision, thereby improving outcomes for Cared for Children. 2) Policy review guidance Members are asked to consider whether draft findings and recommendations: Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public ● Meet the initial aims/ objectives of the review (as above) ● Be SMART, Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound ● Not be a short-term fix, but a lasting outcome ● Consider the financial aspect, e.g. cost neutral, provide savings or if at a cost, then affordable – and if possible aligned with the MTFF (budget planning process) ● Are based on a broad evidence base as possible and ‘user or resident’ insight ● Not create additional bureaucracy, e.g. if it relates to a policy, then to seek to review or amend existing policies (unless there is an absolute imperative for a new policy) ● If publicity o r wider engagement or education is recommended, to target such communications as best as possible rather than generally ● Consider ‘conclusions’ as well as any specific recommendations. RESIDENT BENEFIT This review aims to help improve the fostering offer, to improve outcomes for young people and foster carers. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS None at this stage, pending any committee recommendations. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS None at this stage, pending any committee recommendations. BACKGROUND PAPERS NIL. APPENDICES Appendix A – Updated scoping report Appendix B – Guidance on undertaking policy reviews

Page 1 SCOPING REPORT Major Review Working Title Caring for Our Children: Enhancing Fostering Provision and Support Committee Children, Families & Education Select Committee Review Year 2025/26 MY 1. OBJECTIVES Aim of review This review aims to assess the effectiveness of the new fostering offer in Hillingdon and will explore opportunities for improvement through a focus on recruitment and retention; support for foster carers; and outcomes and experiences for children in care. The review will also assist in recruiting more foster carers ; raising awareness of the benefits of fostering; and highlight ing the positive outcomes it can have for young people. The review also aims to ensure that the service is responsive, inclusive and aligned with Corporate Parenting responsibilities so that all children in care can live in stable, loving homes. Terms of Reference 1. To understand the needs and experiences of children in foster care t hrough examining demographics, underrepresented groups, placement types, placement stability, educational attainment, wellbeing and emerging trends. 2. To evaluate the effectiveness of current recruitment and retention strategies, and support available to foster carers, including the impact of the new fostering offer. 3. To identify barriers to fostering for potential carers and Cared for Children, and to identify opportunities for improvement. 4. To formulate recommendations to Cabinet aimed at strengthening Hillingdon’s fostering provision, thereby improving outcomes for Cared for Children. 2. BACKGROUND Context Foster care plays a vital role in providing a safe, stable and nurturing environment for children who cannot live with their birth families. The Council has a statutory duty to ensure high-quality care and support for both foster carers and children . Nationally, there is a shortage of foster carers, and local authorities are facing increasing pressure to meet the diverse needs of children in care. Page 2 Scope The review will focus on:  Council-run fostering services and commissioned providers  Recruitment and retention of foster carers  Placement stability  Outcomes for children in foster care (including their transition to independence/ Staying Close/ Staying Put)  Support services for children in foster care including social work, health and education  Support services for foster carers (e.g. Mockingbird) including training, respite and financial packages Known issues  National shortage of foster carers  Recruitment and retention challenges, particularly for carers of teenagers and children with complex needs, and the time needed to recruit new carers  Limited awareness/ promotion of fostering opportunities  Placement instability/ breakdowns  Support and training for foster carers  Transition planning for children leaving care Connected matters  Corporate Parenting – ensuring the Council meets its responsibilities to children in care  SEND Strategy – supporting children with additional needs in foster care  Youth Justice – links between care experience and youth offending  Education – attainment and attendance of children in care  Equalities – ensuring diverse and inclusive fostering provision  Health & wellbeing – safeguarding children in care Legislative context Key Legislation and Regulations:  Children Act 1989: outlines the responsibilities of local authorities in providing services for children in need.  Children Act 2004: emphasises five key outcomes: being healthy, staying safe, enjoying and achieving, making a positive contribution, and achieving economic well-being.  Fostering Services (E ngland) Regulations 2011 : outlines the standards and requirements for fostering services.  Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (England) Regulations 2010 : focuses on the planning, monitoring and review of children’s placements in foster care.  Care Leavers (England) Regulations 2010 : covers arrangements for children leaving foster care. Page 3  Children and Social Work Act 2017 : establishes seven corporate parenting principles that local authorities must follow to ensure they act in the best interests of children in their care.  National Minimum Standards (NMS) : provides best practice guidance for fostering agencies, setting out the minimum expectations for their services and operations, according to Simply Fostering.  Working Together to Safeguard Children 2023: outlines essential guidelines for multi-agency collaboration to protect and promote the welfare of children. Key Aspects of Fostering Legislation:  Safeguarding Children: o A core principle of fostering legislation is the protection of children from harm and abuse. Foster carers are expected to provide a safe and nurturing environment, and fostering services have a duty to ensure the welfare of children in their care.  Support for Foster Carers: o Fostering legislation recogni ses the vital role of foster carers and emphasises the need for them to receive adequate support, training, and information to enable them to provide effective care.  Placement and Review: o Legislation outlines t he process for placing children in foster care, including the assessment of foster carers, the development of care plans, and the regular review of placements to ensure they are meeting the child's needs.  Leaving Care: o Legislation addresses the support an d arrangements for young people leaving foster care, ensuring a smooth transition to adulthood. Other Relevant Considerations:  Private Fostering: o Separate guidance and regulations exist for private fostering arrangements, which involve children being cared for by someone who is not a close relative.  Health and Safety: o Foster carers are expected to adhere to health and safety standards, including those related to fire safety, first aid, and medication management.  Behaviour Management: o Fostering legisl ation and guidance address the management of children's behaviour in foster care, emphasi sing positive approaches and de-escalation techniques. 3. EVIDENCE GATHERING Core intelligence required  Number of foster carers and children in care  Demographics of foster carers and children in care  Information on recruitment and retention practices  Data on placement types and stability  Feedback from foster carers and children in care Page 4 Cabinet Members & Service relevant to this review Remit Portfolio(s) Directorate Service Areas Cabinet Member for Children, Families & Education Children’s Services Children's Social Care (incl. safeguarding & corporate parenting) Corporate Parenting Panel Prevention & Youth Justice (incl. youth services, stronger families and adolescent mental health) Education & SEND (incl. Adult & Community Learning, Skills, Lifelong Learning, Music Services and School Travel) Adult Services & Health Children and Families Support Services (incl. Early Years and Children's Centres) This Select Committee has also established a Panel to support strong oversight of the Council’s corporate parenting responsibilities. The Committee may wish to engage the Panel in its work. Discussions on draft or emerging recommendations may be undertaken with relevant Cabinet Members as per the Protocol on Overview & Scrutiny and Cabinet Relations approved by full Council. Witnesses Internal witnesses:  Children’s Social Care  Fostering Team  Virtual School  Participation Team  Fostering & Permanence Panel representative External witnesses:  Foster carers  Care experienced young people Initial Papers/ further reading  Hillingdon Fostering Statement of Purpose (Hillingdon_Statement_of_Purpose_Fostering_update_2023 (1).pdf)  Ofsted inspection reports  Local Placement Sufficiency Strategy Lines of Enquiry Specific lines of enquiry will be worked up prior to witness sessions. Page 5 1. Context and current landscape i. What are the current demographics of foster carers and children in care? ii. Which cohorts of young people are underrepresented in foster care? 2. The new fostering offer i. What does the new fostering offer consist of? ii. How does the new fostering offer compare to the previous offer? 3. Recruitment and retention i. What are the current recruitment and retention strategies? ii. What are the key challenges in recruiting and retaining foster carers? 4. Support and experience i. How are foster carers supported and trained (including PACE/ safeguarding training)? ii. What are the lived experiences of foster carers (including those in the mockingbird constellation) and children in foster care? 5. Placement stability and outcomes i. How effective are placement matching and stability efforts? ii. How can we improve placement stability and reduce placement breakdowns, and what procedures are in place for when placements break down? 6. Partnerships and cost effectiveness i. How does Hillingdon work with the Foster with West London hub? ii. What are the comparative costs and outcomes of in-house fostering vs independent fostering agencies and residential care? Some early ideas to consider: 1. Enhanced training and wellbeing support for carers 2. Peer mentoring schemes 3. Digital platform for fostering information and applications 4. Community engagement campaigns 5. Flexible financial support packages 4. REVIEW PLANNER Proposed timeframe & milestones for the review: Meeting Date Action Purpose/ theme Witnesses/ officers attending 25 September 2025, 19:00 Agree Scoping Report What do we need? Democratic Services 13 November 2025, 19:00 Witness Session 1 Understanding fostering in Hillingdon Director of Children’s Safeguarding & Care Assistant Director of Care Provision Services Service Manager – Care Delivery Page 6 Virtual School Headteacher Assistant Director for Education Fostering & Permanence Panel rep 16 December 2025, 17:30 Witness Session 2a (Private session) Young peoples’ experiences/ best practices Children in care/ care experienced young people Children’s Participation Team Manager Fostering & Permanence Panel rep 04 December 2025, 17:30 Witness Session 2b (Private session) Foster carer experiences/ best practice Foster carers 07 January 2026, 19:00 Draft findings, conclusions and recommendations Drafting recommendations Democratic Services 05 February 2026, 19:00 Final findings, conclusions and recommendations Finalising recommendations Democratic Services 12 March 2026, 19:00 Approval of final report Finalise proposals to Cabinet Democratic Services 23 April 2026. 19:00 Target Cabinet reporting Resource requirements No financial assessment required at scoping stage. Any recommendations with budget implications will be discussed with Cabinet Members and the Leader. Equalities impact The review will consider how to ensure inclusive access to fostering and reduce disparities in outcomes for children in care. Scrutiny Benefit This review will:  Improve outcomes for children in care  Strengthen support for foster carers  Promote joined-up working across services  Drive service improvement and innovation  Support future external inspections  Support strategic priorities for children and families Author of Scoping Report Ryan Dell, Democratic Services Officer Mark Braddock, Statutory Scrutiny Officer Date Updated 18/02/26

Appendix B - Guidance on undertaking policy reviews Over the years, Hillingdon’s overview and scrutiny committees have undertaken successful in - depth reviews of Council services and policies. This has resulted in a number of positive changes locally, with some also affecting policy at a national level. Such committees engage Councillors in a wide range of Council activity and build a greater understanding about service provision to residents. Policy reviews generally seek to: 1. Address a [significant] matter affecting the Borough 2. Seek to improve the delivery and/or efficiency of local services 3. Consider changes to policies or procedures to improve outcomes to residents/users REVIEW PHASES The typical phases of a review are as follows and set out further below: 1 Selection of topic 2 Scoping the review / setting out objectives 3 Witness & evidence stage (this is the main activity) 4 Findings and Draft recommendations (possible early report draft) 5 Final report approved by Committee 6 Referred to Cabinet for consideration 7 Monitoring the implementation of recommendations once approved / amended by Cabinet at meetings, i.e. in six months 1. Selection of topic It is always best to sound out and check the feasibility of potential review topics early on, as there will be lots of ideas coming forward and often knowing what topic will add most value will be difficult to gauge at this stage. It is important not to generalise, e.g. a review into waste services. It may also not be known whether a topic is currently under review by the Cabinet or Council officers or part of a planned service transformation in due course. All of this and other factors need to be investigated and in particular, any duplication of review activity should not take place. Whilst most policy reviews last a number of months, not all policy review ideas will suit this and may benefit from a single meeting review. It really depends on the scope of the review. If very narrow, i.e. a particular service policy, then a single meeting review may suffice. If a review seeks to look at an entire way a service operates then a number of months may be required to ensure you can undertake all your witness sessions and secure the necessary evidence and information before you formulate your findings. Ideas for review topics can come from a number of sources including:  Committee Members  Cabinet Members  Council officers  External partners/ organisations  Residents  Ombudsman findings When Councillors or the Committee itself considers a potential review topic, it is recommended running it through the Scrutiny Topic Scorecard (see Annex A). This gives you the opportunity to ‘score’ topics based upon their impacts under the following criteria: Resident focused Influence Achievable Correct remit New Wider support Drives improvement Drives transformation and efficiency National impact Another way to consider a potential review topic, is to add this as an information item at an upcoming meeting on your work programme, to probe the matter further with Council officers and ascertain whether it merits a fuller review – again perhaps running it through the Scorecard above. It is strongly advised that one review topic is undertaken at any one time, given resources. 2. Scoping report Once a topic is agreed upon by the Committee, then officers will prepare a scoping report setting out the objectives of the review for your consideration. The scoping report will s how how the review can be timetabled and structured, i.e. through themed witness sessions, along with details of potential witnesses and other contextual information to get the review started, e.g. lines of enquiry or questioning of witnesses. The scoping report is a ‘live’ document owned by the Committee. Should the review’s focus change mid-review, then the scoping document and its objectives can be adapted. 3. Witness and evidence stage Ultimately, the Committee’s efforts are at their best when extern al witnesses and residents participate, adding value to intelligence gathering and findings. In support of this, Committees have undertaken a variety of both formal and informal activity “in meetings” and “outside meetings”. It is important to pull togethe r a broad evidence based for any potential findings later on. Additionally, the ability for Councillors to bring their ‘local’ insight is highly valuable. Activities the Committee can undertake include: ● Surveys/ social media ● Promotion of review to seek views ● Invite the relevant Cabinet Member to attend for their views ● Question key council officers ● Hold informal workshops ● Networking events, e.g. with partners ● Have closed meetings, i.e. confidential, such as social care clients ● Commission reports from council officers / externally ● Request data and intelligence on the topic ● Visits to other local authorities ● Undertake site visits within the Borough or council facilities ● Appoint experts or advisors to join the Committee throughout its review ● Selecting the best range of witnesses to get a real user / resident perspectives ● Invite national experts in their field Whilst information will be provided to Councillors, it may be helpful when preparing for this stage of a review, that Councillors: ● Prepare their draft questions for each witness in advance; ● Read a witness bio or find out more about their organisation; ● Do their own additional research on the topic - you may find something officers don’t! ● Use their network of councillors in other local authorities to seek views; ● Tell residents at Surgeries / Ward Walks about your review, get their thoughts. 4. Findings and draft recommendations & 5. Final Report After hearing from witnesses and receiving evidence, the Committee then will meet to pull together all the information and shape its collective findings, i.e. what needs to be improved or changed as a result. The Committee will form ‘draft’ recommendations from this, which consistent with the Protocol on Cabinet and Scrutiny Relations, are usu ally shared with the Cabinet Member for their feedback and valuable insight. In developing any recommendation, the Committee should bear in mind the following: ● Meet the initial aims / objectives of the review ● Be SMART, Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound ● Not be a short-term fix, but a lasting outcome ● Consider the financial aspect, e.g. cost neutral, provide savings or if at a cost, then affordable – and if possible aligned with the MTFF (budget planning process) ● Be based on a broad evidence base as possible and ‘user or resident’ insight ● Not create additional bureaucracy, e.g. if it relates to a policy, then to seek to review or amend existing policies (unless there is an absolute imperative for a new policy) ● If publicity or wider en gagement or education is recommended, to target such communications as best as possible rather than generally ● Consider ‘conclusions’ as well as any specific recommendations. Around this time, the Democratic Services Officer supporting the Committee will advise further on findings and drafting recommendations. Throughout this process, their role is critical to the Committee, to guide Members and secure the information and any witness activity that Members wish to undertake. They also work with the Chairman to bring the final draft report for the Committee to approve before it is scheduled to Cabinet. 6. Referred to Cabinet & 7. Monitoring of recommendations The Committee’s report will be shared with the Leader and Cabinet Member and scheduled to a Cabinet meeting as soon as possible. There is a legal requirement for any such report to be considered by the Cabinet. Should Cabinet approve the Committee’s recommendations, then they become official policy and officers are charged with implementing them. A post report review is undertaken in say 6 months or a years’ time to see how the Committee’s recommendations have been implemented. This is scheduled on your work programme.

Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public CABINET FORWARD PLAN Committee name Children, Families & Education Select Committee Officer reporting Ryan Dell, Democratic Services Papers with report Appendix A – Latest Forward Plan Ward As shown on the Forward Plan HEADLINES To monitor the Cabinet’s latest Forward Plan which sets out key decisions and other decisions to be taken by the Cabinet collectively and Cabinet Members individually over the coming year. The report sets out the actions available to the Committee. RECOMMENDATION That the Children, Families & Education Select Committee notes the Cabinet Forward Plan. SUPPORTING INFORMATION The Cabinet Forward Plan is published monthly, usually around the first or second week of each month. It is a rolling document giving the required public notice of future key decisions to be taken. Should a later edition of the Forward Plan be published after this agenda has been circulated, Democratic Services will update the Committee on any new items or changes at the meeting. As part of its Terms of Reference, each Select Committee should consider the Forward Plan and, if it deems necessary, comment as appropriate to the decision -maker on the items listed which relate to services within its remit. For reference, the Forward Plan helpfully details which Select Committee’s remit covers the relevant future decision item listed. The Select Committee’s monitoring role of the Forward Plan can be undertak en in a variety of ways, including both pre-decision and post-decision scrutiny of the items listed. The provision of advance information on future items listed (potentially also draft reports ) to the Committee in advance will often depend upon a variety o f factors including timing or feasibility, and ultimately any such request would rest with the relevant Cabinet Member to decide. However, the 2019 Protocol on Overview & Scrutiny and Cabinet Relations (part of the Hillingdon Constitution) does provide guidance to Cabinet Members to:  Actively support the provision of relevant Council information and other requests from the Committee as part of their work programme;  Where feasible, provide opportunities for committees to provide their input on forthcoming executive reports as set out in the Forward Plan to enable wider pre -decision scrutiny (in addition to those statutorily required to come before committees , i.e. policy framework documents – see para. below). As mentioned above, there is both a constitutional and statutory requirement for Select Committees to provide comments on the Cabinet’s draft budget and policy framework proposals after publication. These are automatically scheduled in advance to multi-year work programmes. Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public Therefore, in general, the Committee may consider the following actions on specific items listed on the Forward Plan: Committee action When How 1 To provide specific comments to be included in a future Cabinet or Cabinet Member report on matters within its remit. As part of its pre -decision scrutiny role, this would be where the Committee wishes to provide its influence and views on a particular matter within the formal report to the Cabinet or Cabinet Member before the decision is made. This would usually be where the Committee has previously considered a draft report or the topic in detail, or where it considers it has sufficient information already to provide relevant comments to the decision-maker. These would go within the standard section in every Cabinet or Cabinet Member report called “Select Committee comments”. The Cabinet or Cabinet Member would then consider these as part of any dec ision they make. 2 To request further information on future reports listed under its remit. As part of its pre -decision scrutiny role, this would be where the Committee wishes to discover more about a matter within its remit that is listed on the Forward Plan. Whilst such advance i nformation can be requested from officers, t he Committee should note that information may or may not be available in advance due to various factors, including timescales or the status of the drafting of the report itself and the formulation of final recommendation(s). Ultimately, the provision of any information in advance would be a matter for the Cabinet Member to decide. This would be considered at a subsequent Select Committee meeting . Alternatively, information could be circulated outside the meeting if reporting timescales require this. Upon the provision of any information, the Select Committee may then decide to provide specific comments (as per 1 above). 3 To request the Cabinet Member considers providing a draft of the report, if feasible, for the Select Committee to consider prior to it being considered formally for decision. As part of its pre -decision scrutiny role, this would be where the Committee wishes to provide an early steer or help shape a future report to Cabinet, e.g., on a policy matter. Whilst not the default position, Select Committees do occasionally receive draft versions of Cabinet reports prior to their formal consideration. The provision of such draft reports in advance may depend upon different factors, e.g., the timings required for that decision. Ultimately any request to see a draft report early would need the approval of the relevant Cabinet Member. Democratic Services would contact the relevant Cabinet Member and Officer upon any such request. If agreed, the draft report would be considered at a subsequent Select Committee meeting to provide views and feedback to officers before they finalise it for the Cabinet or Cabinet Member. An opportunity to provide specific comments (as per 1 above) is also possible. 4 To identify a forthcoming report that may merit a post - decision review at a later Select Committee meeting. As part of its post -decision scrutiny and broader reviewing role, t his would be where the Select Committee may wish to monitor the implementation of a certain Cabinet or Cabinet Member decision listed/taken at a later stage, i.e., to review its effectiveness after a period of 6 months. The Committee should note that this is different to the use of the post -decision scrutiny ‘call-in’ power which seeks to ask the Cabinet or Cabinet Member to formally re -consider a decision up to 5 working days after the decision notice has been issued. This is undertaken via the new Scrutiny Call-in App members of the relevant Select Committee. The Committee would add the matter to its multi-year work programme after a suitable time has elapsed upon the decision expected to be made by the Cabinet or Cabinet Member. Relevant service areas may be best to advise on the most appropriate time to review the matter once the decision is made. BACKGROUND PAPERS  Protocol on Overview & Scrutiny and Cabinet relations adopted by Council 12 September 2019  Scrutiny Call-in App

Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) 118 Best Start in Life / Family Hubs Strategy The Cabinet Member will consider a strategy that aligns with national Best Start in Life (BSIL) and Family Hubs reforms, which require local authorities to deliver more coherent, accessible, and joined ‑ up early years and family support services. The strategy aims to strengthen operational effectiveness, modernise practices, and ensure services remain responsive to the needs of children and families across the borough. N/A March Cllr Susan O'Brien - Children, Families & Education Children, Families & Education Antony Madden / Vali Danciu / Tehseen Kauser Julie Kelly Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC 23 April TBC TBC Democratic Services Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All 23 April TBC TBC Democratic Services Public SI School Organisation Plan annual update The School Organisation Plan, originally approved by Cabinet in 2024, sets out how the London Borough of Hillingdon in accordance with its statutory duty, seeks to ensure there are sufficient primary, The Cabinet Member will consider the annual update to the Plan. N/A April Cllr Susan O'Brien - Children, Families & Education Children, Families & Education Nav Minas / Abi Preston Julie Kelly Public SI Standards and quality of education in Hillingdon during 2024/25 The Cabinet Member will receive the Annual Report regarding children and young people's educational performance across Hillingdon schools, for publication. N/A April Cllr Susan O'Brien - Children, Families & Education Children, Families & Education Abi Preston / Michael Hawkins Julie Kelly Public Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers BOROUGH LOCAL ELECTIONS - 7 MAY 2026 MARCH 2026 APRIL 2026 1 Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers SI Corporate Disposals Programme 2026/27 As part of the Corporate Disposal programme, Cabinet will consider recommendations on property and land disposals for the financial year 2026-2027 and make the necessary decisions on sites to be declared surplus and provide delegated authority to enable the implementation of any decisions made. Various 28 May TBC TBC Andrew Low / Richard Mortimer Dan Kennedy Private (3) SI Minor Property Transactions This monthly standing report to Cabinet covers operational property matters requiring approval. These may include: granting discounted leases to voluntary organisations; approving easements, wayleaves, or utility leases supporting capital projects; authorising academy school property issues; and agreeing leases for temporary housing or other service-related property needs. All 28 May TBC TBC Andrew Low Dan Kennedy Private (3) SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. Various 28 May TBC TBC Democratic Services Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private and confidential matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC 28 May TBC TBC Democratic Services Public SI Review of Council Constitution The Council may reviews it's Constitution on a regular basis and may make changes at any Council meeting. The Annual Council meeting in May also provides an opportuntity for such reviews at the start of the new Municipal Year, if any changes are required. N/A 14 May (AGM) N/A N/A Lloyd White Public SI Annual Report of the Select Committees This annual report sets out the important work undertaken by the Council's Select Committees during the previous Municipal Year. The Select Committee are responsible for monitoring and scrutinising council services and the Cabinet, holding to account external bodies and making recommendations on policy to the decision-making Cabinet. N/A 14 May (AGM) N/A All Mark Braddock Public JUNE 2026 MAY 2026 2 Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers 120 Age Friendly Plan Following Cabinet's consideration of a draft Age Friendly Delivery Plan for older people in December 2025 and further consultation and engagement on this, Cabinet will consider approval of the Plan and consider annual updates on its progress each May. N/A NEW ITEM 25 June TBC TBC Sarah Durner / Gary Collier Sandra Taylor Public 82b West London Waste Plan (policy framework) Following consultation, Cabinet will consider regulation 19 consultation to commence on the Joint Waste Plan. This Plan forms part of the Council's development plan documents, therefore it is policy framework. N/A NEW ITEM 25 June 26 November TBC TBC Gavin Polkinghorn Dan Kennedy Public 45a Housing Strategy (Policy Framework) The Housing Strategy is a key policy framework document and provides the borough's strategic direction and priorities for housing services. Cabinet will approve commencement of formal consultation process. This is policy framework document under the Council's Constitution so it will be subject to statutory public consultation including by the relevant select committee, before further Cabinet, and ultimately full Council, consideration. All 25 June 26 November TBC TBC Debbie Weller Dan Kennedy Public 84a Local Plan - Draft for consultation (policy framework) To seek Cabinet agreement to undertake a public consultation on the Local Plan at Draft Plan stage in line with Regulation 18 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations. This is policy framework document under the Council's Constitution so it will be subject to statutory public consultation including by the relevant select committee, before further Cabinet, and ultimately full Council, consideration. All 25 June Date TBC TBC TBC Gavin Polkinghorn Dan Kennedy Public 26 Biannual Performance Report Cabinet will receive its biannual report performance report for the current year, looking back on how the Council is delivering on key service metrics and the Council Strategy - and looking ahead at planned actions. All 25 June TBC TBC Ian Kavanagh Matthew Wallbridge Public 3 Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers 63 Carers Strategy Update Cabinet will receive a progress report on the Carers Strategy and Delivery Plan and the priorities going forward. N/A 25 June TBC TBC Gary Collier Sandra Taylor Public SI Budget Outturn 2025/26 Cabinet will review the Council's budget outturn position for the previous financial year. All 25 June TBC TBC Andy Goodwin Steve Muldoon Public SI Corporate Disposals Programme 2026/27 As part of the Corporate Disposal programme, Cabinet will consider recommendations on property and land disposals for the financial year and make the necessary decisions on sites to be declared surplus and provide delegated authority to enable the implementation of any decisions made. Various 25 June TBC TBC Andrew Low / Richard Mortimer Dan Kennedy Private (3) SI Minor Property Transactions A regular report to Cabinet on minor property matters that may arise during the course of the year that require a Cabinet decision. These will relate to discounted leases to voluntary sector organisations and/or any easements, wayleaves and leases relating to utilities in order to support the Council's capital programmes and other such similar matters. All 25 June TBC TBC Andrew Low Dan Kennedy Private (3) 66 Reports from Select Committees A report from the Select Committee into Homelessness and the customer journey All 25 June TBC TBC Democratic Services N/A Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC 25 June TBC TBC Democratic Services TBC Public 4 Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers 93 Stronger Families / Family Help Strategy The Cabinet Member will consider a strategy that aligns with emerging national reforms and strengthens the delivery of early help and family support across the borough. The strategy aims to modernise practice, improve operational effectiveness, and ensure services remain responsive to the diverse and evolving needs of children and families. A central element of this transformation is the redesign of the Stronger Families Early Help service in line with the Family Help model. This model emphasises earlier, more effective intervention; seamless multi ‑ agency collaboration; and the empowerment of families to build resilience and reduce the need for statutory involvement. It also seeks to improve access to the right support at the right time, while embedding a child ‑ centred and whole ‑ family approach within all areas of practice. All June TBC TBC Antony Madden / Vali Danciu / Tehseen Kauser Julie Kelly Public 104 Landlord Service Annual Complaint & Service Improvement Report 2025/26 Cabinet will review the Landlord Service Annual Complaints and Service Improvement report before submission to the Housing Ombudsman. N/A NEW ITEM 23 July TBC TBC Sam Strong / Debbie Weller Dan Kennedy Public JULY 2026 5 Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers 94 Hillingdon Parking Strategy The Cabinet will consider a Parking Strategy following public consultation. A parking strategy will seek to establish a framework through which the Council will provide a fair, accessible, and sustainable parking service that supports residents, local businesses, and visitors, while contributing to Hillingdon’s wider transport, economic, environmental, and land use goals. All 23 July TBC TBC Richard Webb Dan Kennedy Public 24 Temporary Accommodation Action Plan Monitoring Cabinet will receive a quarterly update, or at a frequency as determined by the Cabinet Member, on progress on the delivery of the Temporary Accommodation Strategy and Action Plan presented to Cabinet in February 2025. This will be aligned with the Homelessness Prevention and Rough Sleeping Strategy and the Medium-Term Financial Strategy, which is to include details of actions taken to bring empty homes across the Borough back into occupation. All 23 July TBC TBC Debbie Weller Dan Kennedy Public SI Corporate Disposals Programme 2026/27 As part of the Corporate Disposal programme, Cabinet will consider recommendations on property and land disposals for the financial year and make the necessary decisions on sites to be declared surplus and provide delegated authority to enable the implementation of any decisions made. Various 23 July TBC TBC Andrew Low / Richard Mortimer Dan Kennedy Private (3) 6 Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers SI Minor Property Transactions This monthly standing report to Cabinet covers operational property matters requiring approval. These may include: granting discounted leases to voluntary organisations; approving easements, wayleaves, or utility leases supporting capital projects; authorising academy school property issues; and agreeing leases for temporary housing or other service-related property needs. All 23 July TBC TBC Andrew Low Dan Kennedy Private (3) SI Consideration of setting a licensed deficit budget for any schools in the Borough A standard report each year, where Cabinet may consider whether it is required to set any licensed deficit budget for any schools that have applied. TBC 23 July TBC TBC Luisa Hansen Steve Muldoon / Julie Kelly Public SI Monthly Council Budget - monitoring report The Cabinet receives a monthly report setting out in detail the Council’s revenue and capital position. All 23 July TBC TBC Andy Goodwin Steve Muldoon Public SI Reports from Select Committees Reports, findings and recommendations for consideration by the Cabinet, when referred from the appropriate Committee. All 23 July TBC TBC Democratic Services N/A Public SI Public Preview of matters to be considered in private A report to Cabinet to provide maximum transparency to residents on the private matters to be considered later in Part 2 of the Cabinet meeting and agenda. TBC 23 July TBC TBC Democratic Services TBC Public SI Urgent Cabinet- level decisions & interim decision- making (including emergency decisions) The Leader of the Council has the necessary authority to make decisions that would otherwise be reserved to the Cabinet, in the absence of a Cabinet meeting or in urgent circumstances. Any such decisions will be published in the usual way and reported to a subsequent Cabinet meeting for ratification. The Leader may also take emergency decisions without notice, in particular in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic, which will be ratified at a later Cabinet meeting. Various Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC Cllr Ian Edwards - Leader of the Council TBC TBC Public / Private Schedule of Individual Cabinet Member Decisions that may be taken each month (standard items non key-decisions) 7 Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers SI School Governing Bodies, Instruments of Government and Governors / Authorising Academy Appointments To approve appointments, nominate appointments and make reappointments of local authority governors and to approve any changes to school governing body constitutions. To also authorise any Member to be a Governor or Director of an Academy. N/A Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC Cllr Susan O'Brien - Children, Families & Education Children, Families & Education Helen Boundy Public SI Release of Capital Funds The release of all capital monies requires formal Member approval, unless otherwise determined either by the Cabinet or the Leader. Batches of monthly reports (as well as occasional individual reports) to determine the release of capital for any schemes already agreed in the capital budget and previously approved by Cabinet or Cabinet Members TBC Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC Cllr Eddie Lavery - Finance & Transformation (in conjunction with relevant Cabinet Member) All - TBC by decision made various Public but some Private (1,2,3) SI Petitions about matters under the control of the Cabinet Cabinet Members will consider a number of petitions received by local residents and organisations and decide on future action. These will be arranged as Petition Hearings. TBC Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC All TBC Democratic Services Public SI Local Safety Schemes and Parking Revenue Account funded schemes To consider petitions received and decide on future action TBC Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC Cllr Jonathan Bianco - Corporate Services & Property Corporate Resources & Infrastructure David Knowles / Steve Austin Public SI To approve compensation payments To approve compensation payments in relation to any complaint to the Council in excess of £1000. n/a Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC All TBC various Private (1,2,3) 8 Status Ref Business Item Further information Ward(s) NEW ITEM CABINET meeting Cabinet Member Shareholder Committee Full COUNCIL Cabinet Member(s) Responsible Relevant Select Committee Report Author Corporate Director Responsible Public or Private (with reason) Decision-Maker Cabinet Member Lead & Officers SI Acceptance of Tenders To accept quotations, tenders, contract extensions and contract variations valued between £50k and £500k in their Portfolio Area where funding is previously included in Council budgets. n/a Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC Cllr Ian Edwards - Leader of the Council OR Cllr Eddie Lavery - Finance & Transformation / in conjunction with relevant Cabinet Member TBC various Private (3) SI All Delegated Decisions by Cabinet to Cabinet Members, including tender and property decisions Where previously delegated by Cabinet, to make any necessary decisions, accept tenders, bids and authorise property decisions / transactions in accordance with the Procurement and Contract Standing Orders. TBC Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC All TBC various Public / Private (1,2,3) SI School Redundancy Payments To consider requests for School Redundancy Payments and decide whether to approve them on behalf of the Local Authority TBC Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC Cllr Susan O'Brien - Children, Families & Education Children, Families & Education Abi Preston Private (1,3,4) d External funding bids To authorise the making of bids for external funding where there is no requirement for a financial commitment from the Council. n/a Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC All TBC various Public SI Response to key consultations that may impact upon the Borough A standard item to capture any emerging consultations from Government, the GLA or other public bodies and institutions that will impact upon the Borough. Where the deadline to respond cannot be met by the date of the Cabinet meeting, the Constitution allows the Cabinet Member to sign-off the response. TBC Cabinet Member Decision - date TBC All TBC various Public SI = Standard Item that may be considered each month/regularly The Cabinet's Forward Plan is an official document by the London Borough of Hillingdon, UK 9

Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public WORK PROGRAMME Committee name Children, Families & Education Select Committee Officer reporting Ryan Dell, Democratic Services Papers with report Appendix A – Work Programme Ward All HEADLINES To enable the Committee to note future meeting dates and to forward plan its work for the current municipal year. RECOMMENDATION That the Children, Families & Education Select Committee considers the report and agrees any amendments. SUPPORTING INFORMATION The Committee's meetings will start at 19:00 and the witnesses attending each of the meetings may include representatives from external organisations, some of whom travel from outside of the Borough. Forthcoming meeting dates are as follows: Meeting Date Room 14 April 2026 CR6 16 June 2026 CR5 16 July 2026 CR5 22 September 2026 CR5 12 November 2026 CR5 14 January 2027 CR5 11 February 2027 CR5 11 March 2027 CR5 13 April 2027 CR5 PERFORMANCE DATA N/A. RESIDENT BENEFIT The role of the Select Committees is to make recommendations on service changes and improvements to the Cabinet, who are responsible for the Council’s policy and direction. Select Committees directly engage residents in shaping policy and recommendations and the Committees seek to improve the way the Council provides services to residents. Children, Families & Education Select Committee – 12 March 2026 Part I – Public FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications arising from this report. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS There are no legal implications arising from this report. BACKGROUND PAPERS NIL. APPENDICES Appendix A – Work Programme

February March April May June July August 05 12 14 No meeting 16 16 No meeting Review: Fostering Policy Review Discussion & Guidance X X Topic selection/ scoping stage Witness/ evidence/ consultation stage Findings, conclusions and recommendations FINAL recs Final review report agreement X Target Cabinet reporting X Regular service & performance monitoring Reports/ minutes from the Corporate Parenting Panel X X Corporate Parenting Panel Membership to agree + subs X Corporate Parenting Panel - update to Terms of Reference Overview of Corporate Parenting Responsibilities X Hillingdon's Youth Offer & Delivery Model - review of implementation of Cabinet decisions from Sept. 2023 X Care Strategy for Children and Care Experienced Young People Youth Justice Service Strategy 2024-2029 (& update) X Families First Reforms and Children's Wellbeing & Schools Bill Learn Hillingdon Self-Assessment Review (annual) 24-25 School Place Planning: School Organisation Plan update X School Admissions update X Hillingdon Music Hub Annual Report To include in Standards report Hillingdon Local Area SEND and Alternative Provision Strategy for Children and Young People 0-25 Years 2023-2028 (& update) X SEND Sufficiency Strategy (& update) X Annual Standards of Education in Hillingdon Report 2024/25 (to include an update on progress of the Education Strategy priorities) 24-25 Business Intelligence Bi-Annual Performance Monitoring Budget & Spending Report X X X X Cabinet budget proposals 26/27 Minutes of the AGM X Cabinet Forward Plan Monthly Monitoring X X X X X One-off information items Children's Social Care Children's Centres delivery model and Early Years Nurseries - review of implementation of Cabinet's decisions Sept. 2023 School Admissions Arrangements - Whitehall Infant/ Junior Move-ins to the Borough (in-year admissions) Outcomes of consultations regarding: (i) Proposed closures of the Physical Disability (PD) Special Resourced Provision (SRP) at Coteford Infant School (ii) Proposed increasing of the age range for the Assessment Base at Ruislip Gardens Primary School (iii) Proposal for some community schools to lower their age range to take two year olds. Outcome of the consultation for the proposal to amalgamate Grange Park Infant and Nursery School and Grange Park Junior School The proposal to amalgamate Harefield Infant School and Harefield Junior School Update on the Dedicated Schools Grant Proposed Changes to Published Admission Number of Field End Infant School Outcome of the consultation on lowering the age range of Whiteheath Infant School Proposal to Amalgamate Whitehall Schools X Children & Families Support Services Early help/ support available to young people | Services available to low-income families Business Intelligence Council Strategy 2022-2026 consultation Select Committee Terms of Reference update Scrutiny Introduction (Democratic Services) Witness session on Higher Education - Orchad Hill College Witness session on Higher Education - Uxbridge College Witness session on Higher Education - Brunel University London Place2Be (external witness session on children's mental health) Past review delivery Stronger Families Hub: 2022/23 - 2023/24 Fostering: 2025/2026 Adult & Community Learning Review: 2021/22 Persistent Absenteeism: 2024/25 2026/27 Education & SEND Finance Education & SEND 2025/26 Children, Families & Education Select CommitteeService Areas MULTI-YEAR WORK PROGRAMME 2022-2026 Children's Social Care Children's Social Care Education & SEND Democratic Services External Democratic Services Children's Social Care