Appendix 7 Greenfields and Hazlewood: Stage 1 Pre-Publication Consultation Outcomes
Cabinet agreed at its meeting on 22 September 2025 to authorise the commencement of an initial pre-publication consultation with schools, parents and other stakeholders in relation to the proposal to merge Greenfields Primary School and Hazlewood Primary School. This would mean the closure of Hazlewood Primary School and an increase to admissions at Greenfields Primary School to accommodate the combined pupils. The merged school would retain the original Greenfields Primary School DfE school number and be based on the Greenfields Primary School site.
Responses from stakeholders to the Pre-Publication Consultation were provided online via the following link:
https://haveyoursay.northtyneside.gov.uk/hub-page/education-review-2
All responses to this anonymous questionnaire were dealt with in accordance with the Authority’s privacy notice, which can be found here in the privacy statement.
https://www.northtyneside.gov.uk/data-protection-and-privacy/privacy-statements
The Authority reviewed all responses in detail.
1.1 Consultation Questions
The following questions were used to gather views from stakeholders.
|
Q1. Are you responding to the questions about the proposal to merge Greenfields Primary School and Hazlewood Primary School mainly as a:
|
|
Q2. Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to merge Greenfields and Hazlewood Primary Schools?
|
|
Q3. Having read the proposal in the background documents and the options appraisal, do you have an alternative option to the merger of Greenfields and Hazlewood Primary Schools?
|
| Q4. We would like to know what your suggestion is and how you think it could be achieved – please explain in the space below: |
| Q5. We are keen to understand how a proposal to merge the schools could affect you, your child, or your family – please explain in the space below: |
1.2 Consultation Responses
- 158 people participated and completed the Greenfields and Hazlewood survey.
- 165 people downloaded a document, with 343 visiting multiple project pages.
- Overall, 1,069 people were aware of the Greenfields and Hazlewood consultation (visited the site more than once).
Please see Appendix 8 for full responses to the pre-consultation questions. These responses are as written by respondents to the pre-consultation questions, the only amendments made are to maintain confidentiality and remove any information that could identify any individuals when the documentation is published. The full unedited text has been made available to and considered by the decision maker.
.
Chart 1: Make-up of respondents (158 responses):
Chart 2: Do you agree or disagree with the proposal (158 responses)
Q.4 Suggested suitable alternatives
Question 4 asked people to suggest any alternatives they might have. However, many of the answers were more about their general views on the proposals. These views are reflected in the themes shown in the tables below.
Table 1: Q4. Suggested alternatives – Greenfields and Hazlewood (respondents could make multiple suggestions)
| Theme | Count |
| Keep both schools open and separate | 36 |
| Rebuild or repair Hazlewood | 32 |
| Keep Hazlewood open due to its positive ethos and sense of community – leave it as it is | 23 |
| Concerns with loss of identity, overcrowding and fairness | 22 |
| Look at alternative proposals such as multi-site model (Federation etc) | 15 |
| Schools give identity and have positive impact on local community | 14 |
| Develop funding and financial responsibilities to keep schools open | 12 |
| Concerns with maintaining SEND support | 12 |
| Have two schools on one site (co-location) | 11 |
| Give parents choice of schools | 10 |
| Criticism of council strategy | 9 |
| Concerns with job losses and fairness | 8 |
| Look at Academy / Multi-Academy Trust option | 6 |
| Future growth and housing development in the area will create need for school places | 4 |
In addition to the 152 completed surveys received where respondents were asked for any alternative options, we also received separate correspondence from a number of individuals as well as Hazlewood Primary School (staff and Governing Body) and from a union representative.
All the suggested alterative options received in addition to the survey responses are captured in the themes above (as in they were all suggested in at least one response to Question 4) but are encapsulated in the alternative suggestions provided by the school here below:
|
School Option 1: Hazlewood CPS to Join a Multi-Academy Trust (MAT)
|
| School Option 2: Hazlewood CPS Relocation to Greenfields Site (Retaining DfE Number) |
| School Option 3: Full Merger of Hazlewood CPS and Greenfields Primary School |
| School Option 4: Investment in the Rebuild or Refurbishment of Hazlewood CPS |
|
School Option 5: Retain Hazlewood CPS as a Distinct School
|
As stated above, The Authority reviewed all responses in detail and all alternative suggestions were duly considered.
Q5. Further comments
At the end of the questionnaire, people were asked how the proposals might affect them, their children, or their families. The answers have been grouped into key themes, which give a general idea of what people said — these are shown in the tables below.
Table 2: Further comments on proposals to merge Greenfields and Hazlewood (respondents could make multiple suggestions)
| Theme | Count |
| Concerns with future class sizes and quality of education/fear of overcrowding/disruption to learning /negative effect on learning | 99 |
| Hazlewood has good ethos and positive community impact | 74 |
| Impact on children's wellbeing and mental health | 45 |
| Concerns with council transparency and costs/criticism of council strategy | 34 |
| Concerns with the impact on SEND and vulnerable children | 33 |
| Parents should be given choice of schools | 30 |
| Travel & accessibility issues | 30 |
| Impact on staff jobs and redundancy | 21 |
| Look at alternative models / proposals (e.g. phased closure /shared site) | 19 |
| Bullying & safety concerns at Greenfields | 12 |
1.4 Review of Main Themes
The tables below summarise and address the most common themes, and provides a response to any suggested alternatives.
Suggested alternatives
| Theme | |
|
Keep Hazlewood open due to its positive ethos and sense of community – leave it as it is
School Option 5: Retain Hazlewood CPS as a Distinct School |
Pupils at Hazlewood Primary School are being educated on a site which is not sustainable for the longer term due to structural problems with a large part of the main building.
Hazlewood Primary School main building has significant structural issues with no long-term solution in place, despite lobbying from the Council for government funding support since February 2024. In spring 2024 the Council spent £2.3m on a two-storey modern modular unit to accommodate pupils, which was installed in summer 2024.
In Spring 2025 the Council added reinforcement to the school hall and kitchen to return these areas to use. This fix has a lifespan of approximately five years. Neither of these of these remedial solutions are viable, long-term solutions.
The Council must act to stabilise education in the area for all pupils now and in the future. It needs a plan to stop the on-going uncertainty for the community, which is creating instability for pupils and staff, despite the continued efforts of school leaders and the Council.
Between February 2024 and summer 2025, the Council has been meeting with Department of Education senior officers in education, engineering and finance. It has lobbied the previous government and current government with the consistent view of getting help with short-term costs (such as paying for the marquee at Hazlewood ) and funding for a longer-term solution.
A range of options have been put forward to the Department for Education which included options for remediation and a rebuild of the school.
A proposal to rebuild the school would have followed full guidance and criteria. This means an assessment of pupil numbers and birth rates would have been completed, which would include the latest birth rates for North Tyneside and the local planning area (for Hazlewood this is the North West Planning Area). These birth rates confirmed a fall for the fifth year in a row (October 2024), in line with the national pattern. The latest available data (up to spring 2025) is showing a similar downwards trend.
The births between September 2024 and March 2025 are consistent with the same low period last year. The first two terms (Autumn and Spring) saw only 7 more births in 2024/25 compared to 2023/24 so it is safe to assume the birth rate will be very similar to last year.
These falling pupil numbers, alongside ’s proximity to Greenfields, which has the capacity to accommodate pupils from both schools, would have an impact on the Department for Education’s decision to fund a new school for the area.
It is the Council’s belief that it would not be deemed good use of taxpayer’s money to fund a new school building for when Greenfields site is so close and big enough for both school communities.
|
| Keep schools separate |
There is a reduced and declining pupil population in the community, and there will be increasing surplus places based on pupil projections. The school sites are within approximately 800m of each other.
Greenfields Primary School accommodates an extensive site with large formal and informal play areas. The building and grounds are sufficient in size to accommodate the anticipated pupil population – 2.5 forms of entry initially. Greenfields Primary School is operating on a site too big for the number of pupils it admits each year. This imbalance places increasing pressure on the school’s financial stability.
Even with investment, Hazlewood Primary School site is not sufficient in size to provide accommodation for a combined cohort from both schools, which would exceed 1.5 form entry. The majority of Hazlewood Primary School’s main building remains closed due to weak concrete creating safety issues and no long-term solution has been identified by the DfE.
Despite the Authority’s continued efforts to secure support from the Government to address the significant structural and safety issues with the school building, no viable solution has been found. This continued uncertainty creates instability for pupils and staff alike. This is not something that the Authority can allow to continue. The Authority believes that the proposed merger would sustain high quality education in the community, provide greater stability for all local pupils, improve financial sustainability, and support the provision of a high-quality education for everyone.
If left unchanged, the risk is that the two schools would continue to grow in deficit, and this in turn would limit their ability to sustain high quality education.
|
|
Rebuild or repair Hazlewood
School Option 4: Investment in the Rebuild or Refurbishment of Hazlewood CPS |
The Council estimates it could cost at least £7m to build a new school at. The cost of a new school is typically high, and usually paid for by the government, not local authorities. The Council does not have sufficient funds to pay for any new school in North Tyneside. Between February 2024 and summer 2025, the Council has been meeting with Department of Education senior officers in education, engineering and finance. It has lobbied the previous government and current government with the consistent view of getting help with short-term costs (such as paying for the marquee at Hazlewood) and funding for a longer-term solution. A range of options have been put forward to the Department for Education which included options for remediation and a rebuild of the school. A proposal to rebuild the school would have followed full guidance and criteria. This means an assessment of pupil numbers and birth rates would have been completed, which would include the latest birth rates for North Tyneside and the local planning area (for Hazlewood this is the North West Planning Area). These birth rates confirmed a fall for the fifth year in a row (October 2024), in line with the national pattern. The latest available data (up to spring 2025) is showing a similar downwards trend. The births between September 2024 and March 2025 are consistent with the same low period last year. The first two terms (Autumn and Spring) saw only 7 more births in 2024/25 compared to 2023/24 so it is safe to assume the birth rate will be very similar to last year. These falling pupil numbers, alongside ’s proximity to Greenfields, which has the capacity to accommodate pupils from both schools, would have an impact on the Department for Education’s decision to fund a new school for the area. It is the Council’s belief that it would not be deemed good use of taxpayer’s money to fund a new school building when Greenfields site is so close and big enough for both school communities. |
| Develop funding and financial responsibilities to keep schools open |
It is important to note how school funding works and the respective role of the school and the Authority. School funding is the responsibility of the DfE; either by direct funding agreements with Academy Sponsors or delegated via local authorities to schools where budget management is the delegated responsibility of each governing body.
Since 2017, there has been a move towards a National Funding Formula (NFF) approach to determine how funding is allocated to schools. In North Tyneside, the NFF approach has been applied since 2021/22, and is agreed each year by the North Tyneside Schools Forum (a representative group of school leaders and governors) before being ratified by Cabinet. This means that the Authority neither directly funds nor determines how much money is allocated to schools.
|
|
Have two schools on one site
School Option 2: Hazlewood CPS Relocation to Greenfields Site (Retaining DfE Number)
Co-location/ cohabitation
|
As with the option of joining or becoming a MAT, the Authority does not have the powers to direct this option. It would be a matter for the Trust and the governing bodies of the respective schools to consider and determine whether sharing the physical school site and building between two separate schools would be a workable and desirable solution.
The Authority does not believe that this option would help with community cohesion at the current time and would potentially create a divide within the community. In addition, it would be more expensive to retain two schools rather than one merged school - even though premises costs would reduce, staffing costs would remain the same as they are.
It is noted that the current North Tyneside Scheme for Financing Schools does not contain provisions which would allow the Authority to impose a condition on particular schools to share facilities. To re-write the scheme would require significant consultation with Schools Forum and it is unlikely that such a provision would be agreed. The Scheme has only recently been adopted by the Schools Forum and the current guidance says:
In making any changes to their schemes, other than directed revisions, local authorities must consult all maintained schools in their area and receive the approval of the members of their schools forum representing maintained schools. Local authorities must take this guidance into account when they revise their schemes, in consultation with the schools forum.
|
| Give parents choice of schools |
For the schools where merger with another school is proposed, all children would be automatically allocated a place in the merged school. If parents were content with this, they would not be required to do anything further.
Parents may choose to apply for a school place in an alternative school at any time, which they can do via the in-year transfer process. |
|
Look at Academy / Multi-Academy Trust option
School Option 1: Hazlewood CPS to Join a Multi-Academy Trust (MAT)
|
There is always an option for a school to join an existing Academy Trust. Academies are state-funded schools that are run independently and get their money directly from the Government. Before taking on a school, a trust would look at finances, pupil numbers, results and more to see if it’s viable.
The Authority do not have the powers to action this proposal and this is not something that the Authority can mandate schools to do.
|
| Future growth and housing development in the area will create need for school places |
North Tyneside’s population is changing. Birth rates have fallen steadily since 2018/19 and there are now around 300 fewer children born each year. That’s the equivalent to 10 fewer classes annually. There are now too many schools for the number of children in North Tyneside. Housing delivery by private sector developers, especially on the Authority’s strategic housing sites at Murton Gap and Killingworth Moor, have experienced reduced build-out rates which are below the annual target identified in the Local plan 2017. This, together with delays in the expected submission of planning applications is delaying the anticipated increase in pupil numbers. Also, new homes do not always mean new children of education age. On average, each 100 homes create 32 pupils across all twelve-year groups. Current projections show that the total number of pupils new developments would bring remains lower than the current birth rate decline. In the period 2010 to 2024 there has been a net increase of 7,777 dwellings across the Borough, with an average build per year of 555 dwellings. This therefore suggests that despite that level of new homes, the decline in the birth rate and pupil population continues.
|
| Look at alternative proposals such as multi-site model (Federation etc) |
See response above regarding co-location.
As with the option of joining or becoming a MAT, the Authority do not have the powers to action a proposal around a Federation. This would be a Governing Body decision and is not something that the Authority can mandate schools to do.
|
| Concerns with loss of identity, overcrowding and fairness | See Response below to same issue raised in Q.5 |
| Schools give identity and have positive impact on local community | See Response below to same issue raised in Q.5 |
| Concerns with maintaining SEND support | See Response below to same issue raised in Q.5 |
| Criticism of council strategy | See Response below to same issue raised in Q.5 |
| Concerns with job losses and fairness | See Response below to same issue raised in Q.5 |
|
School Option 3: Full Merger of Hazlewood CPS and Greenfields Primary School
|
Department for Education (DfE) guidance provides two options for merging or amalgamating two or more existing maintained schools. One is to close both existing schools and open a new one (option one), and the other is to close one school and merge it with another (option two). The DFE refers to both options as an amalgamation and a merger in the DFE Guidance October 2024 Opening and closing maintained schools (see section on Amalgamations on page 25).
Both options were considered during the decision-making process and have been carefully reviewed during the ongoing consultation.
The Authority chose to consult on the proposal to close one school and merge it with another for the following key reasons:
|
Q5. Further comments
At the end of the questionnaire, people were asked how the proposals might affect them, their children, or their families. The answers have been grouped into key themes, which give a general idea of what people said — these are shown in the tables below.
| Theme | Response |
| Concerns with future class sizes and quality of education/fear of overcrowding/disruption to learning /negative effect on learning |
Greenfields Primary School building has the space to comfortably accommodate all pupils from Hazlewood Primary School, which for 2025/2026 is projected to be 256 pupils and decreasing each subsequent year as births in the area fall.
Larger class sizes do not necessarily mean a reduction in the quality of education. The school would organise teaching and support for the number of pupils it has in each year group. No school would take on more pupils than they can support, and decisions would be made by school leaders to prioritise education. There is national legislation for a maximum of 30 pupils in a class for five to seven year olds. There is no maximum size for the remaining years of primary, pupils aged seven to 11, or for secondary education, pupils aged 11 to 19. Class sizes may increase but would not exceed these legal limits. Class structures would be reviewed by school leaders to ensure children’s learning and wellbeing remain priority. Schools would not admit more pupils than they can safely and effectively support.
|
| Hazlewood has good ethos and positive community impact |
The Authority believes that the proposed merger would sustain high quality education in the community, provide greater stability for all local pupils, improve financial sustainability, and support the provision of a high-quality education for everyone.
If left unchanged, the risk is that the two schools would continue to grow in deficit, and this in turn would limit their ability to sustain high quality education.
The Authority recognises that work would be needed to support the school communities to integrate. This would be led by the school’s leadership team and governing body with support from Council officers, offering advice on best practice. Examples may include working with all pupils to look at what the merged school community means to them and gathering their thoughts and ideas; opportunities to bring the pupils together before the change is implemented including welcome meetings and shared curriculum based projects; establishing a new joint school student council with representative from both schools; working with new joint school student council to look at matters which could include the name of the school, uniform, values that are important to the pupils to combine their thoughts and ideas; opportunities to celebrate the history of each school before any location change takes place; visits to the school site for those students relocating to a new school site; talking to the pupils about transition and understanding more about what they would like this to include. It is important that pupils from both schools can work with school leaders (and governors) to influence and shape the identity of the merged school.
|
| Parents should be given choice of schools |
For the schools where merger with another school is proposed, all children would be automatically allocated a place in the merged school. If parents were content with this, they would not be required to do anything further.
Parents may choose to apply for a school place in an alternative school at any time, which they can do via the in-year transfer process |
| Impact on children's wellbeing and mental health |
The Authority recognises that a consultation of this nature will be a concern for local communities however the current educational and financial position is not sustainable. The Authority aims to have a system of education that brings about the highest possible standards of education for all children and doing nothing will not achieve this in the rapidly changing educational landscape. The Authority understand the impact the consultation may have on those impacted. Our Connect Mental Health Team works directly with schools and can provide additional support to pupils, colleagues and are available to parents. School leaders, education services and support networks would work together to ensure transitions are thoughtful and inclusive for every child. There would be additional support for children with SEND. SEND Support Service and Educational Psychology teams can work with a child’s current and future school to create a personalised transition plan. Visual timetables and sensory-friendly tours may be used to reduce anxiety. Staff who know pupils well would be involved in handover planning. Joint events and transition days help children meet new teachers and explore the new environment gradually. Schools would try to keep friendship groups together during the transition where possible. |
| Concerns with council transparency and costs |
The Council estimates it could cost at least £7m to build a new school at Hazlewood. The cost of a new school is typically high, and usually paid for by the government, not local authorities. The Council does not have sufficient funds to pay for any new school in North Tyneside. The Council has lobbied the Department for Education for funding on a regular basis from February 2024 to summer 2025. No long-term funding has been secured. The Council must act to stabilise education in the area for all pupils now and in the future. It needs a plan to stop the on-going uncertainty for the Hazlewood community, which is creating instability for pupils and staff, despite the continued efforts of school leaders and the Council. Despite the Authority’s continued efforts to secure support from the Government to address the significant structural and safety issues with the school building, no viable solution has been found. This continued uncertainty creates instability for pupils and staff alike. This is not something that the Authority can allow to continue. Cabinet agreed at its meeting on 22 September 2025 to authorise the commencement of an initial pre-publication consultation with schools, parents and other stakeholders in relation to each of the four proposals. It is a statutory requirement for the Proposer (in this case the Authority,) to consult any parties it considers appropriate before publishing statutory proposals. The Pre-Publication Consultation ran from 2 October 2025 to 13 November 2025. The Stage 1 Pre-Publication Consultation was carried out in full accordance with DfE statutory guidance. The Authority is conscious that while many staff and parents understand the reasons for the Pre-Publication Consultation, it recognises that there is also understandably a great deal of emotion connected to any change within a school and its place in the community. Throughout the process the Authority has sought to respond to concerns with transparency, for example through the survey, responding to resident enquiries and Freedom of Information requests and uploading documentation and FAQs to the Engagement Hub. In considering the concerns raised during the course of the pre-publication consultation period, the Authority was able to publish additional information at various points and to also update the FAQs in response to responses received to the survey. Whenever an FAQ was updated, this was made clear on the Have Your Say page to ensure it was obvious which ones were new or had been updated. Newsletters were sent out which informed those who had registered and/or already submitted a response that there had been some updated information and FAQs added to the Authority’s Have Your Say consultation page. |
| Travel & accessibility issues |
The merged schools would be accommodating the number of pupils their buildings were originally designed for. The location of the merged schools within their catchments has been taken into account in the proposals. 800m (half a mile) is considered an acceptable distance for a primary age pupil to walk to school.
Statutory guidance states that the reasonable distance for children under eight years of age to travel is two miles and for those over eight years of age is three miles, to their nearest school with places available. Assistance with travel may be available in specific circumstances and each child’s circumstances would be considered individually. You can read our home to school transport policy here.
|
| Bullying & safety concerns at Greenfields | Both schools have excellent teaching staff who have pupils’ welfare as their top priority. School leadership and governing bodies would work to ensure that the nurturing ethos of the schools continues if the proposal moves forward. |
| Concerns with the impact on SEND and vulnerable children |
It is understood that change can be particularly challenging for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), including those with SEN Support Plans and Education Health and Care Plans. School leaders, education services and support networks would work with children, young people and families to have in place the transitional support needed, which is thoughtful and inclusive for every child. Support may include:
|
| Look at alternative models / proposals (e.g. phased closure /shared site) |
See above Regarding phased closure, as part of the consultation, there was a large number of responses received regarding the implementation approach that would be adopted if the proposal is taken forward. The Authority recognises the benefits that the delayed implementation that could have and, as such, if the decision to move forward is taken, this would be at a later date (September 2028) compared to the indicative date included in the pre-publication consultation documentation.
|
| Impact on staff jobs and redundancy |
Maintaining a high-quality education for young people is our priority. The Authority is working alongside school governors, who are either the employers, or have delegated powers, on staffing issues. As no decisions have been made regarding the proposals, no employment decisions have been made regarding what happens to employees at the schools. All decisions regarding staff and employment are managed by the Governing Bodies, who would take appropriate advice and guidance from their HR support.
Any decisions in relation to employment would follow relevant employment legislation and would be consulted on, where appropriate.
Where a school accesses HR Services through North Tyneside Council, the Schools HR Team offers dedicated support to Governing Bodies during the Education Review consultation. This includes:
|