Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've been thinking about this and I don't remember a campaign for a Harris Nunhead. Was the application for a Harris Nunhead made based on the 'excess support' for the ED Harris application. That application had double the minimum support it needed. Was that used to apply for a second primary even though no specific campaign was launched?


James, can you clarify?

That's what's Harris seem to be saying


http://www.harrisprimaryeastdulwich.org.uk/


'?When the petition for the new school in East Dulwich was put together by Cllr Barber, there was so much support that it justified a new school for the Nunhead area. This was approved last week and will open in September 2015.?

'

That isn't entirely true. Part of assessing an application is showing both local demand and local need.


My guess is that is why they are calling the school Harris Nunhead even though the support is actually excess support for the ED Harris primary that is opening on the old police site. As there is no need for two new primaries in East Dulwich, they had to make the 2nd application for an area where a shortfall still existed like Nunhead.



With that said, at the time the application was assessed James, was the DofE made aware of the LAs plans to expand Ivydale.


Also, if the current Head of Harris doesn't feel there is space, before pressuring Southwark, Harris as a minimum should put together plans to support the viability of the site to locate a primary school. Creating a surplus primary in Dulwich should not be a fall back position as there is no need and an 2nd application on that basis would not have been approved by the DofE. The limited sites can be better used for other community purposes. It is not appropriate to have a primary and secondary on the hospital site if doing so compromises the size of the secondary facilities, reduces the amount of residential development or reduces the residual NHS services that would otherwise be accommodated.



Most concerning for me though is the assumption that lots of support for a new school can automatically be interpreted as support for two schools. I think this is a dangerous assumption, particularly if the application for the new school is actually then made in a different area.

What's very odd about free schools is how many are agreed in principle without a location - schools like Judith Kerr - when location is one of the most important issues both for those signing a petition, their eventual likelihood of being able to get a place, and for the knock on effects of existing schools. In the primary sector, the site of a school is pretty much the most notable feature!

Renta, thanks for the post. Why was Hollydale undersubscribed. Based on published data 160 applications listing the schools as a 1-6 preference were made for only 45 places.



http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/6403/starting_primary_school_in_southwark_201415





Renata Hamvas Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi littlek1cker,

> as soon as it was mentioned that the proposed 2nd

> Harris Primary may end up on the Harris Girl's

> School site, I went to see the Head. She says

> there is no free space that could be used to

> accommodate the primary. Except for the South

> Nunhead area, which is close to the Stuart Rd

> Ivydale site, there is not a shortage of places in

> Nunhead, two Nunhead primaries were actually

> under-subscribed and were allocated children this

> year. The figure that you are quoting James, are

> not for Nunhead, but the whole of the Peckham and

> Nunhead Community Council area. The Harris Free

> School Nunhead was incorporated in the Pupil

> planning for this area ie assumed to go into SE15.

> If it doesn't happen at all, there is predicted to

> be a 1 form shortfall of provision by 2016 for the

> Peckham and Nunhead area. With the current

> expansions and new schools (1 FE from Judith Kerr,

> 2 forms from Harris ED and 1 form from Dulwich

> Wood extra provision)there is predicted to be

> about a 2 form of excess for the Dulwich area for

> 2016! The figures of shortfall you quote James, in

> your older post are for the entire southern half

> of the Borough and don't consider all the new

> schools and expansions! Very much greater

> Dulwich!

>

> The actual figures are in the middle of this

> Cabinet Document.

> http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/g4556/

> Public%20reports%20pack%20Tuesday%2018-Mar-2014%20

> 16.30%20Cabinet.pdf?T=10

>

> There will be an increasing shortfall of primary

> places in the north of the Borough over the next

> few years, and therefore if Harris wants to

> provide places where there is need, they should be

> looking further north within Southwark for a site.

> There is predicted to be a shortfall in Secondary

> places in the Dulwich area from 2016, that is why

> the Hospital site should be used for a Secondary

> School, a local community tailored health facility

> and some housing.

>

> Renata

Agree Fuschia. I think this is unique to big cities where primary schools really serve very small areas. In the country it matters less.


Having a feasible site that will serve the area should be mandatory.


Renta, I've read the cabinet information. It seems like either Ivydale should reduce to a single form expansion or the new Harris Munhead should be a single form primary. A single form primary May fit on the existing Harris Girls school better.


What's clear is with the expansions and new schools, there are two forms more than specifically needed for Dulwich.

LondonMix, I guess because all those people had 5 other choices and many may well have got another choice.


LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Renta, thanks for the post. Why was Hollydale

> undersubscribed. Based on published data 160

> applications listing the schools as a 1-6

> preference were made for only 45 places.

>

>

> http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/

> 6403/starting_primary_school_in_southwark_201415

>

>

>

>

> Renata Hamvas Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Hi littlek1cker,

> > as soon as it was mentioned that the proposed

> 2nd

> > Harris Primary may end up on the Harris Girl's

> > School site, I went to see the Head. She says

> > there is no free space that could be used to

> > accommodate the primary. Except for the South

> > Nunhead area, which is close to the Stuart Rd

> > Ivydale site, there is not a shortage of places

> in

> > Nunhead, two Nunhead primaries were actually

> > under-subscribed and were allocated children

> this

> > year. The figure that you are quoting James,

> are

> > not for Nunhead, but the whole of the Peckham

> and

> > Nunhead Community Council area. The Harris Free

> > School Nunhead was incorporated in the Pupil

> > planning for this area ie assumed to go into

> SE15.

> > If it doesn't happen at all, there is predicted

> to

> > be a 1 form shortfall of provision by 2016 for

> the

> > Peckham and Nunhead area. With the current

> > expansions and new schools (1 FE from Judith

> Kerr,

> > 2 forms from Harris ED and 1 form from Dulwich

> > Wood extra provision)there is predicted to be

> > about a 2 form of excess for the Dulwich area

> for

> > 2016! The figures of shortfall you quote James,

> in

> > your older post are for the entire southern

> half

> > of the Borough and don't consider all the new

> > schools and expansions! Very much greater

> > Dulwich!

> >

> > The actual figures are in the middle of this

> > Cabinet Document.

> >

> http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/g4556/

>

> >

> Public%20reports%20pack%20Tuesday%2018-Mar-2014%20

>

> > 16.30%20Cabinet.pdf?T=10

> >

> > There will be an increasing shortfall of

> primary

> > places in the north of the Borough over the

> next

> > few years, and therefore if Harris wants to

> > provide places where there is need, they should

> be

> > looking further north within Southwark for a

> site.

> > There is predicted to be a shortfall in

> Secondary

> > places in the Dulwich area from 2016, that is

> why

> > the Hospital site should be used for a

> Secondary

> > School, a local community tailored health

> facility

> > and some housing.

> >

> > Renata

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Skegness,

I get a lot of positive feedback from parents with children at the school. I think the issue probably is that it has Rye Oak and Ivydale close by which both have Children's Centres and nurseries and so parents are familiar with these schools from when their children are very young (so Hollydale gets put below them on the CAF). Hollydale, being a small school on a small site has no nursery so parents have no pre-application experience of the school unless they have older children or friends/neighbours with links to the school. For those of you with children going into reception/thinking about Hollydale, there is a preschool at the Evelina Road end of St Mary's Rd, St Mary's preschol just across the road from Hollydale. it's hours are 9.15-12.15 during term-time and they take children from 2.5 years old.

Renata

(Also posted on Haberdasher's thread)


Readers of this thread may be interested in the recent correspondence between the Harris Federation and the New Secondary School East Dulwich parent steering group. Letter from Harris attached (word document), and link to the New Secondary School East Dulwich Facebook page for our response. I'm also pasting the text of our response below in case the link doesn't work.


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1526078214279320&set=a.1519943881559420.1073741828.1476809155872893&type=1&theater&notif_t=like



Mr Chris Randall


Director of New Developments


Harris Federation


4th Floor, Norfolk House


Wellesley Road


Croydon


CR0 1LU


25 June 2014




Dear Chris,



New secondary school for East Dulwich; the Dulwich Hospital site.



Thank you for your letter dated June 13th; it provides a very concise summary of your current position in relation to the DfE?s indicative approval of your bid to open a new primary free school for Nunhead families under ?Wave 5? of free school applications.


The steering group agree with your own clear assessment that a primary school for Nunhead families located on the Dulwich Hospital site would indeed be the least ideal outcome for those Nunhead families. We also recognise that the two other preferred outcomes that you are seeking to explore - expansion on / or adjacent to the grounds of the Harris Girls Academy, or another suitable site in Nunhead - are solutions that will take a significant amount of effort and commitment to deliver.


Whilst free school applications are not site specific prior to approval, we trust that a dynamic and experienced federation such the Harris Federation would have fully appraised these site options at the point that the bid was developed. Your case for a primary school for Nunhead must have been made based on identified local support for the new school and a clear demand for future primary places in Nunhead. It would therefore fall someway short of your own aspirations; the needs of those local families and indeed the broader principles of the whole free school framework if you were unable to do so in the way you intended. This is something that you as the applicant are in a position to convey most strongly to the DfE and the EFA.


Our own campaign has gathered significant levels of local support due to the sheer numbers of families that will be directly affected by the projected shortfall of secondary school places for Sept 2016 and beyond. This shortage is now the most pressing local educational need. You will be aware that in addition to your own Harris East Dulwich primary free school approved for the site of the former police station Lordship Lane there has been another primary free school on Bellenden Road approved recently. There is also a significant programme of primary school place expansion within a number of existing local Southwark schools.


Along with the parents that make up our steering group, you will understand more than any other stakeholder that local primary and secondary schools are an integral part of any area. They are not branch outlets of franchises that can go anywhere within reason on a map. They are all unique, varied and vital parts of a local community?s infrastructure; the fabric of a specific place where young and vulnerable children live and learn. We don?t believe that this should ever be compromised for any outcome that is anything less than ideal.


But as you correctly point out you are not the decision makers, the EFA as the facilitating agency for site acquisitions and Southwark Council as the local planning authority and broader education authority are the two key stakeholders that you must engage with in order to find a way to resolve this. Your letter gives us some confidence that this is indeed your intention.


We hope that this is the start of a constructive dialogue between the Harris Federation and the parent steering group. As part of that dialogue the steering group would like to share with you the clear views of our supporting families on the type of local school they would like to see. At a recent public consultation event, held at Goose Green on May 11th, people were asked to provide feedback on what they felt was important for a new secondary school for the area. The overwhelming message (97%) from respondents was that adequate space for sports facilities and playgrounds were an important priority for a new secondary school. All respondents (100%) considered that a school should be of adequate size to ensure that it had classrooms, drama facilities, technology labs and spaces to provide a broad and full curriculum. Local opinion was overwhelmingly supportive (93%) of the Dulwich hospital site as the best/only local option as a site for a new secondary school.


The steering group believes that given the strength of local opinion, the entire site (disposed of by the NHS once they have determined their requirements for a new health centre) should be purchased for the sole purpose of a local secondary school. The site is large, but not vast.


Our steering group membership and supporters are drawn from approximately a dozen of the primary schools closest to the site. We actively support all our local schools; we also support choice when it comes to this opportunity to determine who the new provider might be to address the acute need for secondary places in the area. We appreciate that you acknowledge this yourselves; with an existing family of three academies already, you tell us you have no plans to establish a new through school or secondary school in the area.


The success and achievements of your existing schools is a credit to the hard work of pupils, teachers and staff of your federation and its ethos. We wish them all bright futures.



Yours Sincerely



C Rose


Parent Steering Group

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...