Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors B Adams and C R Oxby and Added Members Mr P Thompson and Dr E van der Zee.

There were no declarations of interest at this point in the meeting.

RESOLVED

            That the minutes of the meeting held on 15 April 2016 be signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

(To receive a report which invites the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee to consider the Executive Councillor report on the Post 16 Transport Policy Statement which is due to be considered by the Executive Councillor for Adult Care and Health services, Children's Services on 1 June 2016)

The Committee was invited to consider a report on the Post 16 Transport Policy Statement which was due to be considered by the Deputy Leader of the Council on 1 June 2016.

The Committee was advised that the Council provided subsidised transport for learners of sixth form age (extended to age 21 or 25 for learners with Learning Difficulties or Disabilities (LDDs)) to a school sixth form, college of further education or other approved setting.  The cost to the authority of providing this transport was over £2.8m per year (2015/16 forecast), and the authority recovered a proportion of the cost through the charge to parents or students, which is currently £418 per annum (£423 per annum if paid in instalments).

Transport was provided as the Council had a duty to "ensure access" to further education and training opportunities (DFE Guidance on Post 16 Transport to Education and Training, February 2014).

The report considered by the Committee set out the Council's proposed Post 16 Transport Policy Statement as required by section 509AA of the Education Act 1996.  The statement continued the provision of previous years, but included an increase in the charge for Post 16 Transport to £500 from September 2016 to July 2017 and £570 from September 2017 to July 2018.  It was noted that the proposed charge was subject to a survey consultation carried out between 22 February and 19 March 2016.

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         Concerns were raised regarding families who were in financial difficulty, as the charge had increased by 20% but it was thought it was unlikely that bursaries given to schools would have increased by a similar amount.

·         There was a suggestion that schools and colleges that received bursaries would need to shift their priorities to help those families which struggled to pay for transport.

·         There were also concerns regarding those families who may be on middle incomes, but had more than one child to support.

·         It was queried whether there was any analysis of how schools used their bursaries, and what the take up rate was.  However, members were advised that this information was not freely available, but it was for the school or college to decide how to use the bursaries.  It was also noted that schools and colleges were required to display what assistance was available on their website.

·         It was commented that a lot of the funding that used to come to the county council, now went straight to the schools and colleges.

·         In a recent spending priorities consultation which was carried out by the County Council, spending on Post 16 transport was not identified as a priority by the majority of respondents, however, it was commented that it would be a priority for those families with children in post 16 education.

·         It was commented that the Council was now in a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

(To receive a report which invites the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee to consider the Executive Councillor Report on the Future Provision of Specialist Speech and Language Therapy Services in Primary Schools which is due to be considered by the Executive Councillor for Adult Care and Health Services, Children's Services on 10 June 2016)

The Committee was invited to consider a report which set out a proposal to change the way in which speech and language therapy services were delivered within school settings in Lincolnshire.  Members were advised that the proposal would see the closure of three dedicated speech and language units located at Fosse Way primary, Lincoln; Monkshouse Primary, Spalding; and Mablethorpe Primary, Mablethorpe.

It was reported that for children at primary age, the authority currently commissioned the above schools to provide at a single location the educational and therapeutic support to children with complex speech and language difficulties.  There were 23 children at these schools who received intensive speech and language therapy and educational support services.

Members were advised that the alternative model would be 'needs led' and individual children would be taken through the assessment process for an Education Health and Care Plan (ECHP).  It was proposed that Speech and Language Therapists, together with Specialist Teachers (for Speech and Language) would assess the needs of children and then work with the local mainstream primary school to implement strategies and support packages to aid their development.

The Committee was provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         Members were advised that as the number of children affected by these proposals was so small, officers had been able to engage with families on an individual level.  Some families indicated that they wished their children to stay at the school they were on roll at whilst others would prefer to attend a more local school.  It was recognised that there would be a need for transitional arrangements.

·         The majority of schools supported a more inclusive approach.

·         One member commented that this felt like the right thing to do as they felt that children should be educated in their local area. 

·         It was commented that some of the children in the units had been allowed to reach a point where they were failing in mainstream school before there was any intervention. 

·         It was agreed that children staying in mainstream school was the right approach, but concerns were raised regarding how the model would be implemented, for example recruitment, capacity etc. and whether this would lead to a diluted offer.  Members were advised that these services would be provided through LCHS, and discussions in terms of recruitment had been positive, and it was hoped the services would continue to be delivered within the existing budget.  It was also noted that this model was now embedded within secondary schools

·         The contract currently required 50% of the time in the school classroom and the other 50% in the unit, regardless of whether the child needed to spend that amount of time in the unit.   Under the proposal, there would be additional teaching assistant capacity, and services would be delivered mainly through interventions funded by the EHC plan.

·         It was commented that the speech and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

(To receive a report which sets out the work undertaken across Children's Services in response to questions 1, 2, 3 and 17 of the CfPS Guide for Councillors on Safeguarding Children)

Members were reminded that on 9 October 2015 the Committee was asked to consider and comment on the CfPS 21 questions guide for Councillors on Safeguarding Children.  It was agreed that officers would provide the Committee with assurance in respect of the questions set out in this guide.  Consideration was given to a report which set out the work undertaken across children's services in response to questions 1, 2, 3 and 17.

These questions were as follows:

·         Question 1 – What level of challenge is there in local safeguarding arrangements?

·         Question 2 – How are those in leadership roles for local safeguarding arrangements held to account by the wider system?

·         Question 3 – How do local commissioning arrangements, strategies and frontline services for children and families take into account the latest safeguarding guidance?

·         Question 17 – Is there evidence of strong leadership of local safeguarding arrangements from:

Ø  Local authority members

Ø  The Director of Children's Services (DCS)

Ø  The Lead Member for Children's Services

Ø  The Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG)

Ø  The Police

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised included the following:

·         One member commented that they sat on the LSCB scrutiny sub group and the adoption panel and through this involvement they were assured by the local safeguarding arrangements.  However, it was felt that this assurance may not be seen by those on the scrutiny committee, and so there was a need for a means of reporting through to the Committee.

·         It was queried who the independent chairs were and what qualifications they had.  Members were advised that they were qualified registered social workers and sat independently to the lead officer for safeguarding.  There was a clear handbook on how they must operate, as well as clear escalation processes and a very comprehensive programme of training and support.  They were all qualified and experienced social workers.

·         Members queried whether the independent chairs were genuinely independent if they were employed by the authority.  However, it was reported that they had the statutory right to go outside the local authority if they were not satisfied that the authority had acted appropriately.

·         It was suggested that focus group of staff should be set up to test whether the answers given in the report were correct.  It was commented that this was a very important issue.  Members were advised that the Senior Scrutiny Officer would contact members regarding the arrangements.

RESOLVED

1.    That the comments made in relation to the responses to the questions be noted.

2.    That a focus group be arranged with staff to enable triangulation of evidence presented, thus supporting further challenge and assurance.

(To receive a report which provides an overview of the first full academic year following implementation of the Special educational Needs and Disability (SEND) reforms; comparative financial information between 2014/15 and 2015/16; a brief update on activity so far this current academic year and information on key lessons learned to date)

Consideration was given to a report which provided an overview of the first full academic year following the implementation of the Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) reforms; comparative financial information between 2014/15 and 2015/16; a brief update on activity so far this current academic year and information on key lessons learned to date.

The SEND Team Manager introduced the report, and provided a further update to the meeting and some of the points highlighted included the following:

·         The main change had been the change from statements to Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans.  It was highlighted that this was not just the new ones, but also the children transitioning from existing statements.

·         The introduction of the option of personal budgets had also been a new challenge, and the need to be transparent about how they were spent.  This had led to closer work with families.

·         There was now more emphasis on outcomes and how young people were supported to meet their aspirations.

·         There had been three main areas of work which were the production of new plans, working under a different timescale, and the transferring of existing statements into EHC plans.

·         There had been an average of 50 new requests per month for EHC needs assessments, which was an increase.  It was reported that in Lincolnshire, 26% of requests for an assessment were refused, but officers were looking at how they could work with those families to ensure that SEN provision was sufficient.

·         In the first year there were 938 children to transfer from statements to EHC plans, and there were still 85 which were outstanding, however, it was believed that they would be completed shortly.  For this year (2016/17) there were 1895 to transfer, and this number was currently on target.  Next year (2017/18) there would be 530 to transfer, and these were mainly for those children at secondary school.

·         Members were advised that a working group and a parent carer forum had been set up, which had good attendance.  There was also a steering group which was the more strategic group.  It was noted that there was very good attendance across all partners, and officers were hearing on a monthly basis how the implementation was working.

·         Considerable training and development had been carried out.  The SEND reform grant was being used to support this, and a tribunal officer had also been appointed.

·         There was continued work with children and families.

·         Officers had worked with families and young people on the redesign of the EHC plan, and what was working, and what was not.  It was noted that the special schools continued to transfer their statements to EHC plans, and the authority now had a dedicated officer to work with the special schools.

The Committee welcomed Coralie Cross, the Vice-Chairman of the Parent Carer Forum, and her daughter Emma to the meeting.  Members were provided with an update on how the reforms were being implemented from the perspective of a parent and young person and some of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

(To receive a report which provides key performance information for Quarter 4 2015/16 that is relevant to the work of the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee)

Consideration was given to a report which provided key performance information for Quarter 4 (2015/16) that was relevant to the work of the Committee.  The Council's Performance and Equalities Manager provided an online demonstration to the Committee of how members would be able to view the new style of reporting in a secure area on the Lincolnshire Research Observatory (LRO) website.  Members were advised that following approval from the Executive, this information would be made available to the public.

It was reported that this Committee received information on additional indicators to those which were included in the Council's Business Plan.

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was commented that the new system was very helpful, and it was queried whether in the future, the Committee could move to just receiving a link to the information instead of a paper report.  Members were advised that the new system was part of an aim to go paperless in the future.  However, if this would be a barrier to scrutiny, it would need to be looked into further.

·         It was suggested whether members should just be given a date when the paper versions of the information would no longer be provided, and those members who currently struggled with the new system could be supported through the process.

·         Children making expected progress in Maths between Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 – it was felt that as this was below target, there was a need for councillors, as corporate parents, to challenge this robustly.  Members were advised that officers were working on developing maths hubs, as there were experts within schools.  It was a strategic priority in teaching schools and CPD programmes were being designed around this.

·         SATS would be challenging for all schools, but would not be used to make standalone judgements.

·         National research had been carried out in relation to progress of Looked After Children (LAC), and it been found that LAC in the right conditions made better progress than their peers.  It was recognised that harm could have been done to their progress before they went into care.  It was reported that it was more important to understand whether a LAC was making better than expected progress whilst in care.  The research had identified 18 different recommendations and a working group with the DfE had been set up to look at how they could be implemented.  Work was taking place regarding developing a universal way of measuring progress across the country to allow benchmarking to take place.

·         It was reported that 4.5% of young people between 16 – 18 were classed as NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training), and it was queried how many young people this actually was and what action could be taken to address it.  Members were advised that there was a particular issue with young people who  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

(To receive a report which invites the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee to consider a report on the Review of the Council's Home to School Transport Policy in relation to Discretionary Grammar School Transport – Final decision which is due to be considered by the Executive Councillor for Adult Care and Health Services, Children's Services on 3 June 2016)

The Committee was invited to consider a report on the Review of the Council's Home to School Transport Policy in relation to Discretionary Grammar School Transport – Final decision, which was due to be considered by the Deputy Leader of the Council on 3 June 2016.

The Committee was advised that the Executive received the final report arising from the scrutiny review at its meeting on 5 April 2016, and delegated the Executive's response to the final report to the Deputy Leader of the Council.  The Deputy Leader of the Council was invited to the consider the final report and recommendation put forward and decide whether to accept either of the two options outlined in the recommendation.

Members of the Committee were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

• It was queried whether where a child was entitled to free transport to their nearest school, could parents pay the extra cost for transport to a grammar school. It was reported that children could only have free home to school transport to where they were registered to be at school.
• One councillor expressed their support for option 1, whereas another councillor highlighted that they supported option 2.

·         It was highlighted that a key element which needed to be taken into consideration was the sustainability of the entire education system in Lincolnshire.  It was commented that it was important that the viability of other schools was not harmed. 

·         It was noted that the Committee had discussed the Scrutiny Review report in detail at its meeting on 4 March 2016 where the report and recommendation was supported by a majority vote.

·         Members agreed there were no further comments they would like to add since the committee's previous discussion on 4 March 2016.

RESOLVED

1.    That the Committee support the recommendation to the Deputy Leader of the Council as set out in the report.

2.    That the comments made be passed to the Deputy Leader of the Council in relation to this item.

(To receive a report which enables the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee to consider its own work programme for the coming year)

The Committee received a report which enabled it to consider its own work programme for the coming year.  It was reported that there were no amendments to the work programme.

Members were advised that an e-mail had been received from Andrew Garbutt regarding the next meeting of the Youth Cabinet on Thursday, 2 June 2016 in Grantham, and it had been queried whether any of the local members on the Committee would be interested in attending.  It was taking place from 1pm – 4pm at Grantham College and would cover media training, devolution and the EU Referendum.  Councillors L and R Wootten indicated that they would like to attend.

RESOLVED

1.    That the content of the work programme as set out in Appendix A to the report be agreed

2.    That the content of the Children's Services Forward Plan, as set out in Appendix B to the report be noted.