Agenda and minutes

1.1  Apologies for absence:

·  Cllr Ifraax Samatar

1.2   Apologies for lateness were received from:

·  Cllr Anya Sizer 

·  Deputy Mayor Bramble

1.3 The following members connected virtually:

·  Cllr Anya Sizer;

2.1 There were no late items and the business of the meeting was as published.

3.1  The following declarations were received:

·  Jo Macleod was a governor at a local primary school.

·  Chanelle Paul was a governor at a local secondary school.

To review the report on all pupil movement in Hackney 2022/23.

4.1 Following the completion of the review of the Outcome of School Exclusions' in December 2021, the Commission recommended that all pupil movement data is submitted annually to the Commission.  This helps the Commission to retain oversight of why pupils may be moving to or from mainstream education in Hackney, their characteristics and their subsequent education destination. 

4.2 Further to the investigation by the  Commission into the ‘off-rolling of pupils from local mainstream schools in 2019/20, this report also helps to identify those schools where there is above average pupil movement at years 10 and 11 and the challenge provided by the local authority to those schools.

Questions from the Commission

4.3 Children with SEND make up a significant proportion of this cohort of young people missing from education.  What assurance do officers have that the final education destinations of children missing education (CME) are appropriate for their needs?  Are officers confident that all EHCP annual reviews are taking place?

§  CME who have SEND are generally those with an EHCP or on SEND support.  Children with an EHCP are closely monitored as this system requires an annual review of their education, so the service generally is able to maintain contact with parents and to suggest alternative education settings.  Children with SEND who are CME are supported under the universal offer for schools.

§  It was also noted that there were experienced teachers within the CME team of HE who could provide expert advice on the inclusive adaptations that schools may be able to provide to support children with SEND to attend.

§  Annual reviews are delegated to educational settings to undertake under the oversight of the SEND team.

4.4 Is there any data on how long children are generally missing from education?  How many of those children missing from education are long term cases?  Is there any correlation with the SEND status of children and long term missing from education?  Is there any data or assurance that these children have up to date EHCP plans?

§  The authority maintains a substantial data set on CME as it is statutorily required to report on this area of education. There are two CME data sets; those children within the Charedi community and standard dataset which covers all other children. For the latter, 96% of children are placed in alternative educational settings within the statutory timeframe.  Of the remainder, most of these relate to transfers overseas which whilst assurance has been provided by the school, there is no corroborated data or evidence to support this.  A small number of these cases relate to the team's investigations to verify the existence of children in relation to benefits assessments.

§  The Head of SEND reported that it is a duty for the LA to undertake annual assessments of EHCP, but this is delegated to schools and settings (and overseen by the LA).  When a child is not in school, this duty falls back to LA.  As there are over 3,700 children with an EHCP  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To note and assess:

-  The update report on the Commission’s Scrutiny Review of ‘The Outcome of School Exclusions;

-  Progress in the development of a local School Inclusion Charter.

5.1 The Commission completed a review of The Outcome of School Exclusions' in December 2021.  The review made 18 recommendations to the Council.  Responses to the recommendations were approved by Cabinet in March 2022.  The Commission reviewed progress in the implementation of the recommendations in 2023, and agreed a further follow up within 12 months of that date. Members of the Commission scrutinised the further update report, including plans to develop an Inclusion Charter, and question officers present.

Introduction from HE officers

5.2 The Inclusion Charter is now called the Charter for Hackney Schools for Race and SEND (based on feedback from schools).  This is a practical response to local educational inequalities and disproportionalities in relation to race and SEND.  The Charter is not an isolated tool, but will work in conjunction with other priorities.  The Charter is for school leaders and school governors and was launched in late November.  A live document will go online which captures good practice.  The Charter is not a ‘bolt on’ but will align with existing curriculum and  teaching in schools. The Charter aims to enhance the voice of black and global majority children and those children with SEND.  The headline data shows that schools are successful, but not all children enjoy this success. Officers will continue to work closely with local heads and Professor Paul Miller in developing the Charter.

5.3 The re-engagement unit (REU) has been up-scaled to cover secondary schools.  This was a traded offer, but has now been funded as part of a universal offer to local primary and secondary schools. There were over 300 referrals to this service, 40% of which were for secondary school aged pupils, and this cohort continues to grow (as the service was originally for primary school aged children). Having been in operation for 10 years, the REU has long standing relationships within primary schools and employs a multidisciplinary team to engage with and support children with a wide range of needs (CAMHS youth work, education, social care).  The REU also provides training to help build capacity within school to manage children’s concerns.

Questions from the Commission

5.4 Whilst it is encouraging to note the work of officers to help address school exclusions, the most recent data continues to show that Hackney has among the highest rates of permanent and temporary exclusion in London. Are we seeing any benefits from the work to stem permanent school exclusions?

·  The DoE acknowledged that despite significant local investment, exclusion numbers were not where the authority wanted them to be.  It was emphasised that there was no reluctance to engage by local school leaders and all were committed to reducing school exclusions. The authority has sought to reset the approach locally and made a number of developments including the extension of the REU which has had a significant diversionary impact and helped to maintain children in school.  The authority is also continuing to look to other authorities to understand what can be learnt in tackling school exclusions which can  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To update the Commission on plans to develop a new Alternative Provision Strategy for Hackney.

6.1  Hackney Education is developing a new Alternative Provision Strategy for children who are unable to receive education in mainstream schools. Officers presented the report which included the principles, plans and timelines for the development of this strategy.  Key points from the presentation included:

·  AP has meant many different things to different sections of the education system over many years which has impacted development;

·  On the whole AP has been on the periphery of local education systems but this needs to change with a more integrated role;

·  The AP strategy will repurpose what is already available, and make sure there are more options available to young people which are flexible and responsive to their needs;

·  There must be a graduated alternative provision system to extend the options for schools so that more on-site and off-site options are available to children.

Questions from the Commission

6.2 How will the new strategy ensure that Alternative Provision commissioned and utilised for young people will be of high quality and configured to meet their needs? What systems will be used to review and monitor the quality of Alternative Provision? Will this be a shared QA system with other LA’s?  Will this also include the physical state of some of the buildings used by AP?

·  The current QA framework used by the authority needs to be improved. There are 13 national benchmarks which cover relationships as well environmental issues.  In collaboration with the PRU, a more localised set of standards have been developed which will be consulted upon and trialled over the next few months to March 2024.

·  It will be important to move forward from behavioural policies toward relational policies, which encompass and work across all tier 1, tier 2 and tier 3 educational settings so that there is a unified and consistent approach.

·  The DoE noted that all 151 local authorities will need to have regard to the National SEND and AP Action Plan and will be redesigning provision in this context.  There will be an expectation that all schools will go through a graduated response before any decision is made about exclusion.

6.3 One of the failings of the current system is that there is very little connection between mainstream schools and alternative provision.  How will the new alternative provision strategy support greater collaborative and partnership working between schools and alternative provision? How do you expect schools to respond to this strategy and their response will be critical to this success?

·  There is a real need for guidance for the maintained sector in how it interrelates with the AP sector, and there is some expectation that AP should lead on this agenda.  School engagement will be the catalyst for change. There has also been some assessment of the role of the Fair Access Panel, in the hope that its brief can be expanded to encompass children from a managed move or referral to the PRU, EBSA and other areas where the needs of children needs to be addressed in deciding the next  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To review the Commission’s work programme for the remainder of 2023/24 and to note roll-over items to 2024/25.

7.1 The main changes to the work programme were summarised by the scrutiny officer:

·  The main items for December were confirmed, including the outline for the Commission’s work on School Behaviour Policies.

·  In January 2024, the Children Centre item will be replaced by Cllr Bramble’s Q & A of the Cabinet Report will now be published in January, not December.

·  As a consequence, the EBSA item will be moved to March from February 2024, and Disabled Children Service to May 2024.

7.2 Given the forthcoming Mayoral and General election, a forward work programme has been developed to 2024/25 to help bring continuity and assist planning for council officers.

7.3 Members of the Commission were requested to submit their comments on the consultation response to the Sexual and Reproductive Health Strategy by December 4th 2023.

8.1 The minutes of the last meeting held on the 14th September were noted and agreed.

Agreed: Members agreed the minutes of the 14th September 2023.

Date of next meeting confirmed for 18^th December 2023.

The meeting concluded at 9.45pm.