Falkirk Council Education Services PROPOSAL FOR THE ...

Falkirk Council 

Education Services 

PROPOSAL FOR THE RELOCATION OF ST MARGARET’S 

PRIMARY SCHOOL NURSERY CLASS ANNEX IN POLMONT 

CONSULTATION REPORT 

Schools Affected by Proposal 

St Margaret’s Primary School 

Communities Affected by Proposal 

Polmont and Braes 

C:\WINDOWS\Temporary Internet Files\OLKD6\St Margaret's Consultation.doc 1

1. Background to Proposal 

Currently there are two nursery classes providing nursery education at St Margaret’s 

Primary School: 

• One is based in the school and provides for 20/20 children. It is staffed with 1 

nursery teacher and 1 early years officer. 

• The second nursery class is based in an annex of Greenpark Community Centre in 

Polmont. It provides for 30/30 children and is staffed with 1 nursery teacher and 3 

early years officers. 

The responsibility for managing both nursery classes lies with the headteacher of the 

primary school. 

When the school was built over thirty years ago, the nursery classroom was not large 

enough to accommodate all of the local children and use was made of the community 

centre in Polmont to accommodate the additional children. This was meant at the time 

to be a temporary measure. 

2. Proposal Details 

It was proposed to develop within St Margaret’s Primary School an integrated nursery 

campus providing both education and childcare for the Braes area on the lines of the 

amalgamated nurseries in Denny, Camelon and Grangemouth. This would be available 

all year round from 8.00 am until 6.00 pm for babies, toddlers and nursery-aged children 

until they start primary school. There is already an out-of-school care facility in the 

school. 

This would be a phased development as resources allow. The first stage would be 

amalgamation of the two nursery classes on the one site at St Margaret’s Primary School. 

Suitable accommodation is available within the new modular buildings at the front of the 

school, one of which is equipped as a nursery; the others would be adapted for nursery 

use. An outdoor play area will be developed with direct access from the playrooms. A 

drop-off area for nursery children will also be provided. 

From August 2011, all nursery children would attend the nursery class on the site of 

St Margaret’s Primary School. 

3. Educational Benefits of The Proposals 

The benefits to the community of developing the full proposal are significant but even in 

the short term, there are a number of advantages in amalgamating the nursery classes: 

• all of the nursery children would be together on one site with their siblings; 

• the children would be on the school campus and would become familiar with the 

school environment, staff and routines; 

• transition from nursery to primary one will be easier for all children; 

• many parents will already be dropping off and collecting primary school children 

which will assist domestic arrangements; 

• the expertise of all staff will be shared; 

• management by senior staff will be enhanced. 


4. Consultation Process 

The consultation period ran for six weeks from 27 August to 8 October 2010. 

Stakeholders 

During the consultation period views were sought from a range of stakeholders 

including: 

• parents of nursery pupils at both sites of St Margaret’s Primary School; 

• parents of interested primary pupils at St Margaret’s Primary School; 

• parents of nursery pupils who are known to the authority living in the area affected 

by the proposal; 

• the parent council at St Margaret’s Primary School; 

• local community councils; 

• local elected members; 

• Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education (HMIe); 

• trade unions. 

Consultative Document and Pro Forma Questionnaire 

The consultative document was sent to every family with a child in the nursery classes 

and the primary department of St Margaret’s Primary School, together with parent 

council, community council, parents using local playgroups, elected members and trade 

unions. It was also made available electronically to staff at St Margaret’s Primary School 

and was available on the Falkirk Council website during the consultation period. 

The document outlined the background to the proposal. It also provided a pro forma 

questionnaire for consultees to return that asked whether or not consultees agreed with 

the proposal and if they had any comments. 

The results from the pro forma survey are shown in Section 5 of this report. 

Online 'E-Questionnaire' for Staff 

Staff at St Margaret’s Primary School were invited to complete an online survey if they 

wanted to respond to the consultation. The questions asked were the same as in the pro 

forma questionnaire in the consultative document. No staff chose to respond. 

Public Meeting 

On 27 September 2010, a public meeting was held at St Margaret’s Primary School to 

discuss these proposals. The discussion which took place was minuted and is attached as 

Appendix 1. 

5. Response to Consultation 

There were a total of 26 written responses to the consultation and these are detailed in 

the following sections. 


Total Number of Respondents by Category: 

Type of Respondent Number 

Individual 23 

Organisations 3 

Total 26 

Types of Individuals Number 

Nursery parents 18 

Local residents 5 

Total 23 

Types of Organisations Number 

Trade Unions * 2 

Parent Council 1 

Total 3 

Responses from Nursery Parents 

Agree Disagree Unsure Total 

No % No % No % No % 

14 77.7 3 16.7 1 5.6 18 100 

Other Responses 

Local 

Residents 

Trade 

Unions 

Parent 

Council 

6. Report from HMIe 

Agree Disagree Unsure Total 

No % No % No % No % 

3 60 2 40 5 100 

1 50 1 50 

1 100 

A report from HMIe is a requirement of the new Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 

2010. This report is attached as Appendix 2. 


Falkirk Council Education Services 

APPENDIX 1 

St Margaret’s Primary School Early Years Consultation - 27 September 2010 

Present 

Cllr Alex Waddell, Cllr Malcolm Nicol, Cllr John Patrick, Julia Swan (Director), Nigel Fletcher 

(Head of Service), Gary Greenhorn (Head of Service), Eileen Hutton (Childcare Provision Coordinator), 

Eddie MacLennan (QIO), Iain Campbell (Headteacher), Jackie Reid (Depute). 

In attendance: 

Anna Boni HMI 

20 x parents and 1 child 

The meeting was opened by Cllr Alex Waddell who introduced the officers present. 

Nigel Fletcher presented the background to the plans and set the context within the Early Years 

Strategy. The aim was to create integrated early years centres, beginning with Denny, Camelon, 

Grangemouth and eventually in the centre of Falkirk as well. The idea was to have babies, 

toddlers and nursery age children catered for in the run up to attending primary school. 

The centres have an extended day to cope with the demands of working parents and operate for 

50 weeks of the year to provide increased service. This proposal was to create the same kind of 

centre in St Margaret’s Primary School campus; a phased development as resources allow. The 

amalgamation would bring the nursery class from Polmont into the school to bring together the 

two nursery classes. 

It was stressed that the council had decided to hold a full consultation on this proposal even 

though this might not have been necessary by statute. 

St Margaret’s is the only school in the whole council area which has some of its nursery children 

educated on a split site. This proposal would make St Margaret’s the same as every other school 

in the area where all the nursery children are educated together. It would save money but that is 

not the primary reason for doing this. There are benefits to having nursery children on the same 

site as older brothers and sisters: ie a single drop off point and it also makes transition to primary 

school much easier for the child when the time comes. Staff benefit too as they can share ideas 

and experience and this improves their professional development as well as providing better 

access to their line manager, Iain Campbell. 

The audience were offered the opportunity to ask any questions. 

What is the timescale for the first phase? 

As early as convenient: the next step would be to get approval from the Education Committee – 

this should be by the end of January so it means that it may happen by Easter at the earliest or 

more likely, at the start of the next school year. It depends on whether the work can be carried 

out in time to make the conversions. 


What will happen when there are more cars because of younger children being picked up 

as well? 

Nigel acknowledged that there would be some logistical problems. Ian Campbell talked about 

staggering the finish times and start times so that the nursery children are picked up before the 

older children come out. There still needs to be further discussion on this. Lunch breaks may be 

altered to enable this staggering to happen. Gary Greenhorn spoke about the parking and drop 

off point. He said that Education Services can commit to the cost of changing part of the school 

grounds at the back between the building and the fence, to surface this and create 12 additional 

parking spaces with a path straight in to the early years campus. This will mean that children go 

straight in to the nursery. 

A parent asked whether 12 spaces would be enough? She asked if it would be allocated and 

signed solely for nursery parents. Gary replied that he was waiting for figures and agreed that 

signs could be put up but there was no way to police the situation to ensure that parents were 

using it appropriately. The parent asked if there could be bus provision for the nursery children. 

Gary explained that free transport for nursery children is not granted. A parent asked if children 

would be insured for travelling by bus? Gary said he would check this. 

A parent asked if 12 spaces for 50 parents taking 5 minutes each to drop off children would 

work. The view is that more spaces would be needed. Any extra would be very welcome: an extra 

12 would not be enough to alleviate the problems that are currently there and may be created 

when extra children come. Gary said that he would have a look at the space again to see if more 

spaces could be created. He thought possibly 16 spaces could be created. 

A parent mentioned that the parking area was a magnet for anti-social behaviour and smashed 

bottles may make it unusable for cars if vandals are in the area. Gary has committed to clearing it 

and surfacing it with hardcore, as per his professional advice, but we cannot police the area once 

it is created. Cllr Waddell said that it all depended on finances and confirmed that Gary would 

look at the situation. He added that parents themselves cause the bedlam at pick up and drop off 

time. The parent made the point that it is far easier to pick up and drop off under the current 

situation which is why they are asking. 

A parent asked if this proposal could be discussed with John Banks in Community Services to 

identify what the impact would be for community use if the area at the back is used. Gary 

confirmed that he has had discussions with Community Services to make sure a balanced view of 

this is taken. 

A parent asked about safe access for those people walking or cycling across the area at the back 

of the school and how would that impact on them. Gary explained that they are looking at the 

design of this area to make sure that they are not adversely affected ie have to cross another road 

because of the change. 

Where is the entrance going to be? 

It would be where the entrance is just now, where there is a break in the wall and this would be 

widened to enable access in and out of the site. The wall is in fairly poor condition so this work 

will improve what is there already. 


A parent asked about allocation of spaces to the nursery – how will this be done and will 

children who have after school places be given preference? 

Eileen Hutton answered no – the main aim is to provide early years education and this will not 

be affected by any childcare arrangements in place. The Early Years Admission Policy will take 

account of the child’s age and where the child stays to allocate places. 

Will children who attend from 8.00 am to 6.00 pm be kept separate from other children? 

No - some children only come in for part of a day and these children are all in together so they 

are not segregated. Nigel confirmed that all children are being educated every minute of the day 

that they are in our care, even if that is after school care so there is no segregation. 

One parent confirmed that this would be an advantage to her if they are doing the full day in one 

place. Nigel confirmed that this is a great strength of early years provision. Julia explained the 

reason behind these changes is to create much more flexibility as each family is different and the 

service needs to be as flexible as possible to deal with this. The evidence also says that if the two 

services are integrated then the child gets a better experience. So we are trying to integrate the 

services where possible. We have a legal obligation to offer nursery education but we also have 

partners in the private sector to offer a wider, flexible service using the services they provide. 

Eileen spoke about the specific provision for babies (children under 2 years). The staffing ratios 

would be exactly the same even after the move as that is laid down by the Care Commission. 

There would be separate rooms for the babies. 

Would there be any changes to the staffing - teachers and early years officers? 

In every nursery class there is no more than one nursery teacher although the majority have a 

senior early years officer with some additional teaching input. 

Will the work be phased in terms of furniture, equipment etc? 

No – the children would not be moved in until the facilities were fully ready including 

whiteboards with the outside play area being completely finished before the children move. Gary 

pointed out the linkage between the main building and the modular accommodation – this work 

would be completed fairly quickly and done before the children move. Eileen pointed to the 

artist’s impression of the plan and showed parents the area that would be set aside for the early 

years provision. It would also include a staffroom. 

Would the new admission policy mean that it is catchment children only? 

Eileen confirmed that the admission policy review has nothing to do with this and explained that 

the policy review simply means that the catchment would now be taken into account whereas it 

isn’t at the moment. One parent was concerned that when her younger child is ready to go to 

nursery, because she lives outwith the catchment, her child would be adversely affected. 


How do the costs compare between nursery provision and childminders? Could we 

possibly have fewer childminders in the community as the new nursery provision may 

take away from their business? 

Eileen could not clarify this as childminders charge different amounts: childminding is such a big 

market that we possibly couldn’t say. Gary confirmed that the £3.15 charge currently compares 

very favourably with other local authorities. Eileen said that parents may choose to use a 

childminder regardless as they may use them for all their children. 

What is the child to adult ratio currently in the annex? It is more about the level of 

attention that the children get and if they are in a bigger environment with more people 

they may get less attention. 

Eileen said that there are 2 adults in St Margaret's and 4 in Greenpark partly because there needs 

to be specific toilet provision for children. That is the reason that there appears to be more staff. 

50 children would have 5 adults. 

The logistics of Polmont - people use the annex if they can’t come up to this side of the village. 

Nigel acknowledged that this is the case - some will be advantaged and others disadvantaged. It 

is up to elected members to take these views into consideration when they make a decision. 

Eileen outlined the advantages: transitions are easier, nursery children and primary pupils can 

interact and get to know each other before they start primary school; also the school senior 

management team is on hand. Nigel confirmed that this proposed change is nothing to do with 

any suggestion that the annex is not good in any way. 

If elected members don’t vote for this, then it will not go ahead. There is no plan B and things 

will stay as they are. Julia explained that she has a priority to protect staff in the face of budget 

cuts - not easy in the current financial climate. Julia is looking for ways to make savings which do 

not affect frontline staff. She prefers to make suggestions for savings now rather than cuts later. 

A member of the teaching staff will be saved and that person would be redeployed. 

A parent asked if we would cut ante-pre-school places. 

Julia said no as there is a legal responsibility on us to offer ante-pre-school places as well as preschool 

places, though parents may be offered ante-pre-school places in areas other than close to 

home. 

A parent admitted that she can see clear benefits of having children in the one place but 

voiced her concern that the current arrangements seem excellent and she would not want 

that service to deteriorate in any way. The parent is also concerned about the upheaval of 

moving the children possibly to the new site then months later to the primary school 

class. 

Julia confirmed that she is committed to providing the best solution with the minimum 

disruption. This would be addressed by the school management 

A parent had a concern for the wider community if the annex facilities were reduced. 

Julia said that that is a discussion that needs to be had by the community in conjunction with 

local members. 


A parent asked if any savings would be kept within Education Services. 

Julia said our primary concern is to do the best for children but we also have to contribute to the 

council savings as a whole. Protecting schools is our overall priority and 20% of managers have 

been lost at centre so far to protect schools. Cllr Waddell confirmed that we are doing our best 

to make savings with the least impact possible. 

Surely the money spent on this place, the hard surfacing, gardens, fencing etc would be 

saved if the annex was not moved. 

Gary spoke about the mobile accommodation. They have come from other sites and been 

relocated here. Falkirk’s birth rate is the second highest in Scotland so the early years sector is 

under pressure until about 2018 unless the birth rate falls. This means that we cannot cut down 

on this sector. The capital programme budget has money in it to cope with these demographic 

pressures. The revenue budget can pay for the extra staff etc. Parents from other amalgamated 

campuses have said how it is now a wonderful facility. He assured the parents that money has 

been set aside for the proposal. 

A parent asked about the life expectancy of the modular accommodation and can they 

see inside it? 

Gary said the accommodation is excellent and that parents could have a look inside if they 

wanted to. Falkirk Council schools are among the best in the country in terms of building fabric 

- top 6 in the country. The current nursery classroom in the school would be converted into two 

nursery rooms. 

How much pressure will the accommodation be under with the numbers of primary 

pupils? 

Iain Campbell said that the P6s can come into the school straight away. A parent suggested that 

the huts are more conducive to learning as they are not so open plan. 

The annex is fairly open plan but there are clear areas for reading etc – how is it going to 

work for the new class? 

Eileen said that almost every nursery class in Falkirk is in a rectangular room where staff can 

create corners using screen etc to create a learning environment. Staff can adapt the rooms to 

suit the children and the teaching. The three to five year olds will have the use of the new 

accommodation and can set it up accordingly. 

A parent asked about the square footage compared to the new accommodation and the 

Greenpark annex. 

Eileen explained that she did not have the figures but each child had approximately 2.3 square 

meters. Concern shown by the audience that space will be less and limited by the move. Iain 

explained that the new accommodation will likely be bigger and that includes outside space for 

outside learning. 


Cllr Nicol – explained that he wanted a full public consultation on this – even if not 

strictly legally required. He made the point that the school is not in the actual centre of 

the village so the proposal may have an impact on the village itself. He raised the point 

about council cuts: although there is a small cost saving with this project, he wanted 

reassurance that this is about improving education for children and that the cost savings 

are a side issue. Cllr Nicol said that he would follow what the public says in terms of for 

and against. 

Julia confirmed that this recommendation was made to improve education and the savings would 

be a bonus but not the primary reason for the move. She confirmed that all comments made 

here would be presented to Committee but that the main driver for this is not cost savings. Nigel 

spoke about this strategy having been drawn up 5 years ago with some developments suggested 

then. This was long before budgets became such a driving issue as it is now but is part of a long 

term strategy over many years. 

Will parents have another opportunity to decide what goes into the nursery – what is in 

the garden etc? 

Nigel agreed that there will be informal consultation on other issues with the Parent Council and 

parent body. This would be led by the headteacher. 

Will there be a separate play area for the nursery children? 

Eileen pointed to the plan and explained what the garden layout area would contain. There is a 

garden area set aside for the different age groups. This would provide a much better outside area 

for these children than they have at present. 

Greenpark Centre – what will happen to it? 

Gary explained that the council would need to look at that if the children were moved and make 

a decision on that. Concern was expressed that the community centre would be jeopardised if it 

is not being used by the nursery. Cllr Nicol confirmed that this issue has not yet been discussed 

as it would be pre-empting the decision on this and would make a mockery of this as a true 

consultation. 

Nigel reiterated that parents can make an individual response or that the Parent Council could 

put forward their views. 

The Parent Council then thanked the officers for coming along to this meeting and answering 

questions tonight. 


CONSULTATION PROPOSAL BY FALKIRK COUNCIL 

APPENDIX 2 

REPORT BY HM INSPECTORATE OF EDUCATION ADDRESSING 

EDUCATIONAL ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSAL TO RELOCATE 

ST MARGARET’S PRIMARY SCHOOL NURSERY CLASS ANNEX IN POLMONT 

TO THE MAIN SCHOOL SITE AT ST MARGARET’S PRIMARY SCHOOL 

Introduction 

1.1 Falkirk Council proposes to close and relocate St Margaret’s annex nursery class 

which is based in Greenpark Community Centre, Polmont, to the main school site at 

St Margaret’s Primary School. 

1.2 The report from HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) is required under the terms of 

the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010. It has been prepared by HMIE in 

accordance with the terms of the Act. 

1.3 HM Inspectors undertook the following activities in considering the educational 

aspects of the proposal: 

• attendance at the public meeting held on 27 September 2010 in connection with 

the council’s proposals; 

• consideration of all relevant documentation provided by the council in relation to 

the proposal, specifically the educational benefits statement and related 

consultation documents, written and oral submissions from parents and others; 

• consideration of further information on all schools affected; and 

• visits to the main site of St Margaret’s Primary School and the nursery class annex 

in Polmont. 

• discussion with relevant consultees, including parents of children in the nursery 

classes, member of the Parent Council. 

1.4 HMIE considered: 

• the likely effects of the proposal for children and young people of the school and 

nursery annex; any other users; children likely to become users of the 

nursery/pupils in the school within two years of the date of publication of the 

proposal paper; and other children and young people in the council area; 

• any other likely effects of the proposal; 

• how the council intends to minimise or avoid any adverse effects that may arise 

from the proposal; and 

• benefits which the authority believes will result from implementation of the 

proposal, and the council’s reasons for coming to these beliefs. 


2. Consultation process 

2.1 Falkirk Council undertook the initial consultation on its proposals with reference to 

the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010. The consultation included invitations 

for written submissions and a public meeting held on 27 September 2010. 

2.2 Currently, there are 58 children enrolled in the Greenpark annex nursery and 40 

children at the St Margaret’s Primary School site nursery. Parents of children 

attending both nurseries responded to the consultation. Of the 22 respondents, 60% 

were in favour. Positive comments included the benefit of having all nursery children 

together on the school campus. Parents felt all nursery children would have the 

opportunity to become more familiar with the primary school if they were on one site. 

It would allow children to get to know staff in the school and use some of the school 

facilities such as the gym hall and library. Parents saw benefit in being able to have 

both their primary and pre-school aged children in one location. They would also 

welcome the wraparound and care provision in the same location when that phase of 

the proposal was implemented. One key benefit highlighted by parents was the 

planned provision of a spacious and stimulating outdoor area for the proposed joint 

nursery. Parents also voiced concerns about the proposed size of the nursery and 

arrangements for travel and parking. Parents felt there might be less individual 

attention in a larger unit of 50 children rather than the current smaller numbers of 20 

or 30 in each class. They were particularly concerned about the additional travel from 

the further area of Greenpark to the school site, and no longer being able to walk to 

the nursery with their children. In turn, this raised the critical worry of how car 

parking will be addressed given the current very congested situation at the school. 

Parents were also concerned to ensure the best quality of provision for their children. 

They were uncertain on the proposals of staff reductions or which staff would be 

allocated to the new nursery. Perceived differences of quality between the current 

nurseries were raised and the hope that quality would be improved for all children at 

the new site. 

2.3 The Parent Council provided separate comments. Overall, the views expressed the 

feeling that benefits to the closure and relocation of the Greenpark site outweighed the 

negatives. Key concerns, however, were expressed. The Parent Council was anxious 

the outdoor area was ready for use at the time of the relocation, and for parents to be 

consulted during this development. Parking was a major concern for the number and 

space needed for families of 50 children at any one time. They felt the suggested new 

allocation of 12-16 spaces would be totally insufficient. Enrolment allocations were 

mentioned and the Parent Council wanted to be reassured that future allocation of 

nursery places remained unbiased and not weighted towards parents who wanted 

wraparound care as well as pre-school education. 

2.4 Nursery staff were positive about the proposal but with some concerns, mostly due to 

lack of detailed information at this stage. These included staffing arrangements and 

possible reductions in the overall number of staff when the nursery was on one site. 

Spacing was a concern for staff in the annex as they felt they already had good and 

appropriate sized play areas for the numbers attending currently. The main benefits 

would be working more closely with school staff and much easier access for 

consultation and working with those who have responsibility for managing the 


nurseries. The extended play area outside was also welcomed as long as children, 

staff and parents were consulted and took part in the planning of this new area. 

2.5 Senior members of staff in the school were very supportive of the proposals and 

welcomed the opportunity to have an even more cohesive nursery on one location 

which could be supported more effectively and efficiently. They also felt it would 

have positive effects on improving the overall consistency of quality for all children. 

The benefits to the whole school were noted with the opportunity the relocation would 

give to reorganise the primary classes and the space for expressive arts in the school, 

and for extra-curricular activities. 

2.6 Union representation was also made in the consultation. Both teaching and nonteaching 

union representatives expressed concerns. The teaching union was 

concerned at the uncertainty over the future deployment of teachers in the combined 

nursery. Currently, two teachers are employed, one in each nursery. They have fears 

that this would reduce to one and diminish the educational experience for children in 

the combined nursery. For non-teaching representation, there was no objection in 

principle to the relocation. They asked for better detail on the number of staff to be 

employed and their responsibilities within the new nursery, particularly whether any 

reductions in numbers were envisaged. 

3. Educational aspects of the proposal 

3.1 Greenpark Community Centre annex nursery serves the lower catchment area for St 

Margaret’s Primary School. At the time of the consultation, 58 children were enrolled 

in this nursery (maximum capacity is 60 with 30 attending at any one session). Most 

children come from the surrounding locality but some are brought by parents from 

other school catchment areas as being more convenient for their children to access. 

At the St Margaret’s Primary School site nursery, 40 children are enrolled which is 

the capacity for 20 attending morning and afternoon sessions. Most children from 

both nurseries go on to attend St Margaret’s Primary School but a few go to other 

Primary Schools in neighbouring catchment areas. The nurseries are working at full 

capacity this year and projected rolls see a continuation of all places being taken up. 

Placing requests come from parents in neighbouring school catchment areas where 

there are fewer nursery places available. In the proposed relocation, children in the 

annex at Greenpark will transfer to the main school campus of St Margaret’s Primary, 

bringing together the nursery children in the same location. 

3.2 Under the new proposals, all nursery children would benefit from safe and enclosed 

access to a large dedicated outdoor play area. The present enclosed, outdoor spaces 

for both nurseries are very small and limited in the learning experiences which can be 

offered. This is particularly so in the existing nursery located within the school. 

Children who would attend the annex nursery would have improved access to the 

school’s facilities, such as the gym halls and library, to enhance their educational 

experiences. The proximity of other teaching staff and those with management 

responsibility for the nurseries would improve opportunities to work, plan and train 

together. This would support the important links across the early level of Curriculum 

for Excellence, and have the potential for better sharing of practice and expertise on a 

more regular basis than the current dispersed locations allow. 


3.3 Children who would attend St Margaret’s Primary as pupils in P1 could benefit from 

improved transitions as they would be established in the same environment and 

familiar with the premises and staff in the school. There will be little effect on the 

enrolment as most of the nursery children already move on to attend St Margaret’s 

Primary School. Others would still be able to enrol at their local school in their 

catchment area. The main effect would be on the potential cohort of children who 

would enrol at Greenpark nursery annex. They and their families would be travelling 

further to access their entitlement to pre-school education. 

3.4 The community centre is the location for the annex nursery. Concern has been 

expressed by users of the community centre that other services, for example the 

playgroup, could be affected by the removal of the service. The close proximity of 

the nursery and playgroup here make it easier for parents to use both. The second 

phase of the development to provide wraparound care would also have a possible 

direct impact here. No details have been made available from the council on this 

particular impact. 

3.5 School children have the potential to benefit from the current proposals for the 

development of a new playing field for older children alongside the nursery play area. 

The relocation of the school nursery and annex nursery to the units within the grounds 

would impact on the primary classes and after school users. It would allow senior 

classes, presently housed in the units, to be accommodated in the main school 

building with other primary classes, and music and drama facilities to be located in 

the refurbished nursery class space. This area would also re-house the after-school 

club and give better, separate access for users. 

3.6 The proposed units for the joint nursery have the potential to provide better facilities 

overall for children. Appropriate preparation of all accommodation for classes and 

the nursery, both inside and outside will be required. The identified units for the 

nursery do not offer high quality accommodation for nursery education as they stand 

at the moment. However, the education authority has plans to reconfigure the 

accommodation to the appropriate standard of quality. The newest unit delivered on 

site is intended as ready now to accommodate a 30/30 place nursery. Entry and 

cloakroom areas for families and children are very restricted and could pose a 

problem through congestion, with 30 children and their parents using them at the start 

and end of each session. The authority has included this area in their plans for 

improvement. There is an adult kitchen facility but none at child height for learning 

activities. Adult and additional children’s toilet facilities, space for staff breaks, and 

for meeting parents will need to be planned within the units as they are located 

separately from the school building. 

3.7 Vehicle parking and drop-off facilities are a priority to cater for the large number of 

children who will be attending on this one site. The current Council outline proposals 

need careful consideration to support safe and easy access for 50 families with young 

children, and possibly younger siblings. 

3.8 A re-registration from two nurseries to one nursery will be needed by the Care 

Commission (or Social Care and Social Work Improvement Scotland from April 

2011). 


3.9 The council intend this as a phased development at St Margaret’s Primary School. 

The first being the amalgamation of the two nursery classes. Following that, the 

authority plans the extension of the joint facility to offer families education and 

childcare all year round from 8.00 am to 6.00 pm for babies, toddlers and pre-school 

children. This would add to the out-of-school service already offered in the school. 

The council does not have, as yet, full details on the date for the proposed transfer, 

staffing implications or how issues surrounding travel and parking will be addressed. 

4. Summary 

The proposal to relocate the Greenpark annex nursery to St Margaret’s Primary school 

offers educational benefits to the children attending this nursery and children already 

located in the nursery on the primary school site. It would rationalise the nursery 

provision for St Margaret’s Primary School and bring together all the children onto 

one campus. Children would have improved opportunities to use the school premises, 

get to know school staff and to work more closely with children in the primary school. 

This could improve transition arrangements and joint working on curricular 

developments across nursery and primary. The new facilities can offer improved 

educational experiences, particularly outdoors, for all nursery children. There would 

be benefits for primary children as well. If the second phase of the development goes 

ahead, this will offer substantial additional services to local families in the 

wraparound care of young children. This, in turn, will provide similar services 

already existing in other areas of the council. However, in taking forward the 

proposal the council needs to give further consideration to travel arrangements for 

young children and families affected by the proposal. The authority will also need to 

ensure, as planned, that the refurbishment of the identified modular buildings (units) 

on the primary school site is to the required standards to accommodate both nurseries. 

It will need to ensure children have high quality facilities to support a full range of 

pre-school experiences. The outside play area will need development in time for any 

proposed move. Parents and children should be consulted and involved in the 

decision-making process. Safe access for children and their families, with separate, 

suitable parking will be a priority before opening the new nursery. The council 

should ensure all nursery staff and parents and, where appropriate, children are kept 

well informed of the proposed development and any impact to individual conditions. 

HM Inspectorate of Education 

October, 2010

Falkirk Council Education Services PROPOSAL FOR THE ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?