Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed those present and led introductions.

Apologies were received from Councillor Barnes.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

Members were asked to declare any interests they may have had in the business to be discussed.

Councillor Pantling declared that she was Chair of Governors at Eyres Monsell Primary school.

Councillor Pickering declared that she was a Governor at Rolleston school.

Councillor Dr Moore declared that she was Chair of the Advisory Board at Millgate School (Discovery Academy Trust).

The minutes of the meeting of the Children, Young People, and Education Scrutiny Commission held on 19^th September 2023 are attached and Members are asked to confirm them as a correct record.

 AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny Commission held on 19^th September 2023 be confirmed as a correct record.

None.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any petitions.

The Monitoring Officer reported that none had been received.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any questions, representations, or statements of case received.

Representations were received from students of Ash Field Academy, Principal of Ash Field Academy, Tracey Lawrence and Unison representative for staff at Ash Field Academy, Tom Barker.  The Chair confirmed that they each would speak during the item Call-in Ashfield.

The Strategic Director for Social Care and Education submits a report to provide an update on the Executive decision taken by the Assistant City Mayor for Education on 28 September 2023 relating to withdrawing the funding for the Residential Provision at Ash Field Academy totalling over £400k per annum, with effect from 1 September 2024.

The Children, Young People, and Education Scrutiny Commission is recommended to either:

a)    Note the report without further comment or recommendation. (If the report is noted the process continues and the call in will be considered at Council on 23 November 2023); or

b)    Comment on the specific issues raised by the call-in. (If comments are made the process continues and the comments and call in will be considered at Council on 23 November 2023); or

c)     Resolve that the call-in be withdrawn (If the committee wish for there to be no further action on the call-in, then they must actively withdraw it. If withdrawal is agreed the call-in process stops, the call-in will not be considered at Council on 23 November 2023and the original decision takes immediate affect without amendment).

The Monitoring Officer submitted a report informing the Commission that the Executive decision taken by the Assistant City Mayor for Education on 28 September 2023 relating to withdrawing the funding for the Residential Provision at Ash Field Academy totalling over £400k per annum, with effect from 1 September 2024 had been the subject of a seven-member call-in under the procedures at Rule 12 of Part 4D, City Mayor and Executive Procedure Rules, of the Council’s Constitution.

The Chair clearly outlined the process that she would follow in determining how to resolve the call-in.  The Commission was recommended to either:

a) Note the report without further comment or recommendation. (If the report is noted the process continues and the call in will be considered at Council on 23 November 2023); or

b) Comment on the specific issues raised by the call-in. (If comments are made the process continues and the comments and call in will be considered at Council on 23 November 2023); or

c) Resolve that the call-in be withdrawn (If the committee wish for there to be no further action on the call-in, then they must actively withdraw it. If withdrawal is agreed the call-in process stops, the call-in will not be considered at Council on 23 November 2023 and the original decision takes immediate affect without amendment).

The Chair invited the proposer of the call-in, Councillor Bajaj, to the table and allotted them five minutes to make their case. The proposer raised the following points:

• The call-in was aimed to examine the impact of the withdrawal of funding upon the students, carers and families.
• The withdrawal of funding would jeopardise the service provided of overnight accommodation for four nights a week.  Vital support would be taken away.
• The residential service was vital for students to grow independence, spend time with friends, build confidence and learn skills.
• Further to this, the residential service provided a much-needed break for parents who could be reassured that their child was safe, enjoying their time and being educated.

The Chair invited the seconder of the call-in, Councillor Haq, to the table and allotted them five minutes to make their case. The following points were raised:

• The forecast for the school’s finances showed a £600k deficit in this financial year and a £800k deficit in the 2024/25 financial year.  Energy costs had increased, and the cost of nursing had increased due to a shortage of staff.  In addition to this, the treatment and accommodation of various medical conditions was costly.
• The Academy were trying to save £400k. 
• The costs of transport to and from the residential service were raised and the impact on transport in the city should the journeys have to be made separately and independently was highlighted.
• Many parents relied on the service for respite and care which could also allow them to care for other children they may have.  Therefore, it was necessary to continue supporting parents.  If families could no longer look after a child, then there would be a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

The Director for Social Care and Education will provide a verbal update to confirm the detail of the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) report, due to go to the December meeting, and will also refer to undertaking some informal Scrutiny work on this matter.

The Director for Social Care and Education gave a verbal update to confirm the detail of the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) report, due to go to the December meeting.   He also gave an outline of informal Scrutiny work on this matter.

The Principal Education Officer joined the meeting to assist with the discussion of this item.

Key points included:

• The Local Authority had overspent on the High Needs Block and was now subject to discussions with the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) who required the Council to provide a recovery plan. 
• There was currently a forecast overspend of £11.1m for the current financial year.
• There were pressures due to not having the correct level of funding and a high level of demand regarding SEND children.
• The recovery plan had been submitted by 15 September following which the ESFA were met with to discuss the proposals.
• Data was provided on the future prediction on the number of children based on demographics and school placements.
• Models had needed to be presented showing what the data would look like both with mitigations and without mitigations.
• Feedback on the meeting with the ESFA was still being awaited despite chasing.  It was difficult to know whether the plan would be robust until feedback was received.

In response to questions, the Commission were informed that:

• The majority of local authorities were overspent with different councils at different levels of overspend.  Information on this would be provided as part of a report to be brought to a future meeting.
• If action was not taken on the overspend, commissioners from the DfE would make decisions on behalf of the Council.
• There was a burden on SEND placements and support in mainstream schools and the budget was not increasing.  The ESFA had required the Council to look at everything they did.  The Council were looking at every way they could support children in schools.
• There was pressure on schools in terms of the number of children in schools needing a plan, and the Council were in a similar situation to the situation across the country.  Starting from a low base in terms of supporting, there were a lot of children with needs.   There was a legal duty to educate children and there was less money and more demand.
• There were many children awaiting health assessments, including on conditions such as ADHD and autism.  Many children in schools were struggling and many had a plan but no formal diagnosis.  There was an 18-month wait for speech and language therapy.
• The ESFA had asked the Council to produce a forecast based on current demands and what this would look like in terms of the money needed. This was a particularly high amount.  The Council were then asked to look at the figures taking mitigating actions into account.  There was a need to ensure that the right organisations paid in order to bring down the overspend.
• Children could have good outcomes without an education healthcare plan.  There was lots of good  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

The Commission’s Work Programme is attached for information and comment.

Support for some informal scrutiny on how the High Needs Block was used and the effectiveness of its use was voiced.

It had been suggested that once feedback was received from the ESFA, a list of measures would be put forward.  It was further suggested that instead of reviewing everything, it might be that a certain aspect is chosen to examine.  It was suggested that this might help assist the informal scrutiny work.

It was clarified that such any group that undertook some informal scrutiny would need to set a finish date.

The Chair further clarified that if the Commission decided upon it, such informal could be set up immediately following the receipt of feedback from the ESFA. And carried over into the next municipal year if required.

The Work Programme was noted.

In response to a query regarding the connection of heat pumps to schools, the Principal Education Officer would find out the details and convey them.

There being no further items of urgent business, the meeting finished at 18:57.