Agenda and minutes

1.1 Apologies for absence were received from:

-  Graham Hunter (Co-opted member);

-  Michael Lobenstein (Co-opted member);

-  Ernell Watson (Co-opted member).

2.1 The following declarations were received by members of the Commission:

-  Cllr Chauhan was a teacher at secondary school in another London borough and a member of the NEU;

-  Cllr Peters was a Governor at a local special school in Hackney;

-  Jo Macleod was a Governor at local primary school in Hackney;

-  Cllr Bramble was a governor at schools in Hackney.

3.1 There were no urgent items and the agenda was as published.

4.1 The last meeting of the Commission was dedicated to the assessment of off-rolling in schools.  Further to that meeting additional information was requested from HLT which had been provided and noted by the Commission. A number of recommendations will be drawn up on the basis of that evidence and submitted to the Cabinet Member for a response. 

4.2  The minutes of the 9^th September were agreed.

5.1 The Cabinet Member for Education, Young People and Children’s Social Care attended to respond to questions in this portfolio.

School Funding

5.2 The Cabinet member noted the following:

- In September 2019 the Government announced an additional £7.1 billion 3 year settlement for schools with additional money for teacher recruitment, youth centres and children who were at risk of sexual exploitation. 

-  It was still too early to identify exactly what this financial package would mean for local schools, but as the Government would be using a levelling up approach to funding under the national formula it was unlikely this would result in any significant increase given current funding per-pupil funding in Hackney.

- Hackney schools would however see some additional funding in relation to inflationary costs, which would roughly equate to a 2% rise in funding between 2020 and 2021 - which would (approximately) mean a £150 funding increase per pupil per year.

- Teacher starting salaries would increase to £30k in the future which would assist with retention and recruitment, and which will be funded by a separate grant, though it was unclear how this would be funded in the long term.

- Whilst the Cabinet member welcomed the additional resource it was noted that schools and a number of key education services had not been fully funded for a number of years which had the effect of taking money out of the system. The Cabinet member would continue to listen to Head Teachers on the funding pressures in local schools and how additional funding would address these. 

- There would also be a £200k reduction in the central services for schools budget that supports the LA and would further limit the local authority’s role in supporting school improvement.

- A range of support was available to schools experiencing financial challenge, any school deemed to be at risk of a deficit is able to have a full risk assessment and be supported in delivering a deficit / performance recovery programme. 

Questions from the Commission:

5.3 As schools were under increasing financial challenge, parents were often being asked for additional financial contributions for pupil costs (e.g. trips, uniform and some course materials).  What guidance was available for schools to make sure that they remain financially inclusive?

- The Cabinet member was not aware of any major shift toward increased parental funding, though it was suspected that subsidisation by the school for out of class activities (e.g. school trips) may be decreasing. The Cabinet member was not aware of any instances where parents had been asked to contribute toward educational materials, but would continue to engage Head teachers to identify financial pressures in schools. It was acknowledged however, that parents do experience financial difficulties in supporting the schooling needs of their child (e. uniforms, sports kit, lunches and trips).

- It was noted that schools cannot make charges where parents are on different incomes in order to cross-subsidise service provision. Schools can ask for an additional contributions to support  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.1 In 2017/18 the Commission undertook an in-depth review into the recruitment and retention of foster carers. An executive response was provided to the 10 recommendations of the Commission at Cabinet in July 2018. 

6.2 The Head of Service for Corporate Parenting attended to update the Commission on progress against the agreed recommendations.  The key successes and ongoing challenges of this work were reported as below:

- A pilot of the Mocking bird Model of foster carer support had been successfully developed (with the Fostering Network) and appeared to be working well. This model created a hub and satellite system to foster carers that provided additional expertise and wrap around support to foster carers and looked after children in the community.  Two more hubs were planned for the next 12 months.

- The Corporate Parenting service had also recruited two specialist social workers to help match looked after children with foster carers.  This will help to make sure the placement is right both for the child and foster carer and help promote placement satisfaction and continuity of care.

- In the past year, there had been a significant reduction in the use of independent foster carers to care for looked after children.

- The service has recruited over 12 foster carer ambassadors (who are experienced foster carers) to assist in the recruitment of new foster carers.  Evidence would suggest that the opportunity to speak to existing foster carers can be influential in the decision to apply to be a foster carer.

- In terms of recruitment, the service had recruited 12 new foster carers which was below the annual target of 23.  It was noted however that were no resignations within the in-house foster carer service, so there had been a net gain of 12 foster carers.  Comparatively, this figure was higher than neighbouring boroughs, where the average net recruitment was 9 foster carers.

-The number of enquiries to be a foster carer had also increased significantly, partly as a result of increased used of social media (Facebook).

- Having a spare bedroom is a key requirement for fostering, but given the scale of the local housing situation this remains a significant barrier to foster carer recruitment.

Questions from the Commission:

6.3 The Commission sought to clarify what a residential setting for a looked after child would look like?

- For clarity, residential care refers to children’s homes.

6.4 Is the foster carer recruitment process successful in recruiting carers who can meet the needs of children in care in Hackney; that is adolescents who have complex needs?

- There has been some targeted recruitment alongside other NE London boroughs to increase the number of foster carers with the specialist skills to care for adolescents with complex needs but this was an ongoing challenge for the service and also nationally.

-The service aims to train and develop the existing pool of in-house foster carers who may have more experience to meet the needs of adolescent looked after children. It was acknowledged  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1 This Children Social Care Annual Report is a standing item that presented annually (with a mid-year update) within the Commission’s work programme. The report sets out how the Children and Families Service in Hackney performed for key aspects of children’s social care provision (e.g. referrals, assessments and children entering care) together with identified priorities for the year ahead.

7.2 The Chair welcomed Sarah Wright (Director of Children and Families)

and Anne Canning (Group Director, Children, Adults and Community Health Services) to the meeting who presented the report.  In presenting the report the following issues were highlighted to the Commission:

- CFS continued to review provision in relation to the outcomes of the Ofsted focused visit in February 2019 and continued to respond to priorities in the agreed action plan.  CFS felt that there had been good progress on many of the issues identified by Ofsted.  CFS was preparing for a full 2-week onsite visit from Ofsted which was expected imminently.

- Overall the picture was of rising demand for children’s social care services with the number of looked after children in Hackney continuing to rise: it was 405 as of the end of April 2019 but was currently at 426.  The majority of young people entering care were 16 and 17 year olds. There had also been an increase in the number of young unaccompanied minors seeking asylum entering care.

- Whilst the data in the report suggests that the number of children on child protection plans had decreased in the year to April 2019, it was noted that this figure had risen considerably since that time. The service is seeking to analyse and monitor the reasons behind this increase.

- The Contextual Safeguarding project continues to be a significant piece of work for the service and is being rolled out further.  As Hackney was a leading player in the development of this new approach to safeguarding, CFS had recently hosted a conference at which a large number of LA’s attended from across the country.

- All staff were being trained in the ‘Safe and Together’ model which aims to better support those families which have experienced domestic abuse.  The focus of this model was to support the victim and hold the perpetrator to account for their behaviour and their continued role in parenting.

- There was now a dedicated unit to support unaccompanied asylum seeking children which was helping to address the traumas that some of these young people had experienced. Work was also being undertaken to develop supported lodgings for this group of young people.

- It was noted that the Young Carers service was coming back in-house in November 2019, and would be delivered by Young Hackney.

- The social work element of the Disabled Children Service was also back within CFS and a number of permanent staff had been recruited to replace agency staff.

- In terms of the workforce, social worker retention was reported to be very good within the service.

- The service  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8. Support for LGBT+ children at school – Cabinet Response

8.1 At its meeting in February 2019, the Commission assessed the support available to LGBT+ students in school in Hackney.  Recommendations from this assessment were submitted to the Deputy Mayor and Cabinet member for Education, Young People and Children’s Social Care in June 2019.  The Deputy Mayor’s response was approved by Cabinet in September 2019.

8.2 The Commission noted and agreed the response.  It was noted that the Director of Education would lead on the implementation of this work and the Commission would consider an update in the formulation of its next work programme for 2020/21.

Agreed: That a progress report be taken by the Commission in the next work programme (20/210).

9.1 The Commission noted the changes in the work programme for 2019/20 which included:

·  25^th November –  Making Hackney a child friendly borough;

·  10^th December –  Post 16 provision for children and young people with SEND;

·  24^th February –  Update from Black Men’s Project;

·  24^th February – Sex and Relationship Education Guidelines - preparedness of Schools for new.

9.2 No decision has yet been taken on the in-depth review for 2019/20 except that this will be as a ‘scrutiny in a day’ exercise.

9.3 The Commission noted that a General Election had been called for 12^th December 2019 which would place two future meetings within the ‘pre-election period’ (25^th November and 10^th December).  Initial advice was that the business of the council should continue as usual and there were no plans at present to change the date of these meetings.

10.1 A brief update was provided to the Commission on the progress of this review.  The Commission were reminded of the overarching aim of this review:

‘…scrutinise the outcomes of excluded pupils and to identify those policies and practices which best help to ensure excluded children and those at risk of permanent exclusions have the same opportunities as their peers in mainstream education.’

10.2 There project had a number of component objectives which were as set out below:

1.  To assess support available to children and their parents at risk of permanent exclusion or those at the point of exclusion.

2.  To examine Alternative Education provision in Hackney

3.  To improve understanding of the impact of being excluded on young people and their families

3. 1. Disproportionality (e.g. children with SEND, black Caribbean boys)
   2. Mental health and wellbeing
   3. Associations with youth crime, criminal exploitation and wider safeguarding concerns
4. To identify and support best practice best practice to reduce exclusions and improve outcomes of those who are in AP
   1. Behaviour strategies, reintegration, SEND support
   2. Across sectors(AP, Special school and mainstream settings) 

10.3 The Commission had undertaken a wide range of evidence gathering to support these objectives. This included:

1. Work of the Commission – young people and their parents
   1. Focus group with 8 young people who had been excluded – permanently or fixed term
   2. Focus group with 6 young people at New Regents College (PRU)
   3. Opportunistically spoke to young people on site visits (New Regents College, Hackney Quest and Hackney City Farm)
   4. Focus group with 13 parents whose children have a SEND
   5. Focus group with 10 Turkish speaking parents whose children who have a SEND
   6. Opportunistically spoke to parents on site visits (Hackney Quest)

g.  Case studies via Islington Law Centre

2. Alternative Providers:
   1. New Regents College (Pupil Referral Unit) – both attended CYPSC and site visit
   2. Boxing Academy - both attended CYPSC and site visit
   3. Inspire Directions - both attended CYPSC and site visit
   4. BSix - both attended CYPSC and site visit
   5. The Complete Works - site visit
   6. Hackney City Farm - site visit
   7. Footsteps - site visit

3. Evidence gathering within the Council:

a)  Hackney Learning Trust – has established local priorities, a strategy and action plant to reduce exclusions. Also undertaken a deep dive into exclusions data. Set up Exclusions Board to monitor and oversee exclusions strategy.

b)  Health and Wellbeing Service – including school Exclusions service.

c)  Reintegration Service (Primary) – works with children at risk of exclusion, has supported 480 children 86% it has no further contact with.

d)  Fair Access Panel – a route through which some excluded children can re-enter mainstream education.

e)  Children and Families Service – Young Hackney – strong correlation between exclusion and those who used early help service and those with open social care case.

f)  Deep Dive – a project worker employed for 6 months to undertake a detailed investigation of children who  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

There was no other business.

The meeting closed at 9.15pm.