Agenda item

The Director of SEND, Early Help an Educations submits a report to update the Commission on the numbers of children on roll, attendance and those missing education. The report summaries a presentation of data on the known education provision for children in Leicester up to the end of the 2022/23 academic year.

The Director of SEND, Early Help an Educations submitted a report to update the Commission on the numbers of children on roll, attendance and those missing education. The report summarised a presentation of data on the known education provision for children in Leicester up to the end of the 2022/23 academic year.

The Director of Education SEND and Early Help attended, and the Service Manager of the Education Welfare Service attended remotely to assist with the discussion. 

Slides were presented as in the agenda pack.

Other key points included:

• There had been a gradual increase in the number of children on school rolls.  In addition to this, there were 2202 in independent schools.  These numbers were stable.
• In terms of comparator data, the Leicester school population was increasing by 15% in comparison with 8% nationally and 9% for the East Midlands.
• There had been a slight reduction in state-funded primary numbers, but the latest indicators showed that these numbers were going back up.
• There were now more academies and a reduction in Local Authority maintained schools.
• In terms of safeguarding for Electively Home Educated (EHE) students, most of those known about had a good or excellent education.  There was a process for dealing with situations where information was not shared by parents and sometimes there was a legal process to ensure that EHE students improved or returned to school.  Sometimes these culminated in a School Attendance Order.
• Regarding absence rates, Leicester generally followed the national trend, however, sometimes absence was in excess.  In terms of primary school attendance, there were sometimes increased levels of absence, but these were generally close to the national average.  There was usually less absence in secondary schools.
• Persistent absence was a key statistic.  Persistent absence equated to children missing one day out of every two weeks.  Ofsted were keen to consider this in their inspections.  Another important statistic was severely absent, those missing 50% or more of school days.
• It was clarified that ‘Absence due to Holiday’ did not always involve an actual holiday.  It was noted that schools should only grant a leave of absence in exceptional circumstances.
• The rate of Holiday Penalty Notices was high.  Absence due to holiday was partly explained by the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and people being unable to travel during that time.  Additionally, Covid staffing levels were part of the reason between the difference in requests for penalty notices and those issued in 2021/22.
• Sometimes when children were taken away from school they did not return to school, and as such they needed to be tracked to ensure that they were safe where they were. If children could not be tracked by schools, then the Council became involved and work was done with schools to ensure that children were accounted for.
• In terms of exclusions and suspensions, it was currently difficult to compare with the national data as it would probably not be published until July 2024.
• Leicester City Council (LCC) Schools did not suspend as regularly as others in the region or nationally as they looked at other ways to address issues.  However, the rate had gone up this year and it was difficult to determine what was driving this.  More permanent exclusions were predicted before the end of the academic year.  Special schools did not often exclude pupils and Primary schools did not generally exclude pupils.  Exclusions were lower than the national figures but still a concern.  Head teachers had the power to exclude, and this would not change.
• Of 455 children investigated in terms of whereabouts in 22/23, 266 had returned to education and the main three outcomes for the majority of the others were home educated, in independent schools, or abroad.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• It was difficult to explain the year-on-year increase in primary school absences and primary schools had been worked with on the issue.  It was suggested that it was possible that some of it may have been related to habits developed when children were at home during the Covid-19 pandemic.  It was also noted that historically primary schools had authorised a lot of absence, and this had changed some years ago.  Schools were working hard to keep children in school and using all legal tools to challenge families over absences.
• A lot of time was spent looking at data on children missing from school linked to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, and this would be published in 2024.  Children who had fallen off the schools’ census between Jan 22 and Jan 23 were reviewed.  Schools had tracked children and where they could not they were referred to the local authority where they were tracked.  All schools must inform the local authority when a child comes off their roll, including independent schools.  When children were abroad this presented problems as families were not always willing to share information or the information was limited.  However, there had not been any concerns about these children.  It there was a record of a child in a database, there were ways of identifying them and picking up their case.  The system was robust.
• A comment was raised about possible causes of children missing school being among family attitudes such as parents thinking of school as negative, the delivery of the curriculum, the quality of leadership and management, and the management of bullying in schools.  It was acknowledged that the causes behind absence were a complex picture and difficult to resolve, however, it was important that attendance was prioritised.
• Legally, the money from the holiday penalties could only go into the administration of the system, which was very costly.
• It was desirable to manage SEND children in mainstream schools and meet their needs.  School staff were worked with to educate them and give them better support to prevent exclusions.  Exclusions in SEND children were lower partly because schools were supported to be inclusive.  There was a range of SEND children and some may exhibit challenging behaviour and as such could be excluded at times, however, most of the time their needs could be met.  Sometimes it was difficult to include SEND children due to the adaptations needed, time, resources and staff knowledge needed, however, a great deal of effort was made to keep them in school.
• With regard to a concern raised about SEND pupils being off-site during an Ofsted inspection at an academy, such concerns could be raised with the Regional Schools Commissioner, however, specific examples would be needed.
• In terms of deterrents for absence due to holiday, it was difficult to analyse their impact.  However, when penalty notices were analysed prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, in around 90% of cases the child was not taken out of school the following year.  Penalty notices were a way of giving a sanction without going to court.  If they did not work i.e. parents repeatedly took their children out of school, then the parents/guardians were taken to court.  Parents and guardians were being encouraged to cut short trips where they had planned to go away for a long time so as to get the child back in school.  They are now being given notice to change their plans and get the children back to school with the warning that prosecution may be considered if they didn’t.  For many, the prospect of going to court was a deterrent.
• In terms of the results of EHE children, there was no current formal record of results for EHE children.  It was thought that whilst many did not take exams, many did, and where data could be obtained it appeared as though EHE children were obtaining a lower number of GCSEs and lower grades.  It was suggested that this could be an area for the government to look at in the future as this could provide better analysis.  It was difficult to compare EHE children to school-educated children as parents of EHE children did not have to follow the national curriculum.
• In regard to the higher proportions of suspensions and exclusions within certain ethnic groups, this was one of the areas of focus of the Racial Literacy training currently being delivered to all secondary schools in Leicester.  Primary schools were also looking to develop this.
• A breakdown of absences by Ward could be provided once the census data was obtained although it was important to bear in mind that children often travelled to school outside their ward.
• It was rare that a school would not request a penalty notice for absence due to holiday.

AGREED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That comments made by members of this commission to be taken into account by the lead officers.

Cllr Pantling left the meeting during the discussion of this item.