Agenda and minutes

 Apologies for absence were received form Cllr Joshi.

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.

During the item on New Children’s Residential Homes, Cllrs Pantling and Moore declared that they were members of the Planning and Development Control Committee and left the room for part of the item.

The minutes of the meeting of the Children, Young People, and Education Scrutiny Commission held on 2^nd November 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 2 November 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.

The Monitoring Officer reported that none had been received.

The Director of Childrens Social Care and Community Safety submits The Leicester Safeguarding Children Partnership Board (LSCPB) 2022/23 yearly report.

The Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny Commission is invited to Comment on how effective the LSCPB Yearly Report has been in setting out what safeguarding partners have done as a result of local arrangements, and to seek any further clarification needed on any areas.

The Director of Childrens Social Care and Community Safety submitted The Leicester Safeguarding Children Partnership Board (LSCPB) 2022/23 yearly report.

The Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny Commission was invited to Comment on how effective the LSCPB Yearly Report had been in setting out what safeguarding partners had done as a result of local arrangements, and to seek any further clarification needed on any areas.

The Director of Education SEND and Early Help, the Director of Childrens Social Care & Community Safety and the independent Chair of the LSCPB attended the meeting to assist with the discussion.

The Deputy City Mayor - Social Care, Health, and Community Safety introduced the report.

The independent Chair of the LSCPB presented the report and presented slides as included with the agenda pack.  Other key points included:

• The annual report of the Partnership was a statutory requirement and needed to be produced on an annual basis to demonstrate the effectiveness of multi-agency arrangements and quality assurance practices across the partnership.
• Partners included the Police, health partners and Local Authority partners, who in turn worked with other partners as detailed in the report.
• The membership of the Partnership was far-reaching and focussed on households with children.
• The report set out work around the procedures, learning and development, the approach taken to assess impact, quality assurance (including Section 11 which was noted to be a good measure across the partnership), and the audits undertaken.  This had been triangulated with the data presented.
• Further to this, the report mentioned the information sharing agreement, the Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review and importantly showed benchmarking against the learning form national reviews.
• The report also looked at work done against priority areas, safeguarding babies, child mental health and emotional wellbeing, the safety of adolescents, safeguarding children and young people form diverse backgrounds, and effective safeguarding in independent and out of school settings.
• This was a strong partnership with a clear focus on the outcomes for local children. 

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

• It was suggested that it would be useful to have a section of statistics showing incidences of safeguarding cases year on year so that it could be seen if cases were going up or down.  The independent Chair of the LSCPB agreed to try and include this in future reports.  Further to this it was suggested that numbers coming down may not necessarily be a good thing as it was important to be aware of any safeguarding issues and if the Partnership were aware of more then they could help more and help earlier.
• It was raised that the number of early help assessments had gone down whilst the number of children in need had risen, and it was asked as to whether there was any correlation between early help assessments and escalation.  With regard to this it was suggested that it was possible that a drop in early help assessments could potentially lead to children coming into the system further  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

The Director of Childrens Social Care and Community Safety submits a report to update the commission on the overview of progress in the development of two children’s homes, Holly House and Hillview.

The Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny Commission received a presentation setting out an overview of progress in the development of two children’s homes, Holly House and Hillview.

Slides were presented (attached).

Other points from the presentation included:

• There had been challenges around cost, availability and suitability of externally commissioned homes, as such, it had been thought that the best thing to do was to expand the in-house residential estate. This was part of the Placement Sufficiency Strategy which includes fostering and residential accommodation for children and young people in the care of the Local Authority.
• A report two years ago had shown accelerating costs and as such a plan had been put together to grow the estate by two children’s homes over a two-year period.
• Holly House:
  • This consisted of two semi-detached properties owned by the Council.
  • Work had started in March 2023 after planning permission had been granted (there had been no objections to the application).
  • Work had been undertaken to make two properties into one building, and final check of the construction work would be undertaken shortly.
  • The building was now a proper children’s home with all paperwork registered and the relevant documentation sent to OFSTED. Inspectors to interview managers and inspect the premises were being awaited.
  • A management team had been appointed as well as chef, housekeeper, administrator and a core care team were being recruited.  It was hoped to draw in experienced staff from other parts of the service so that it was not an all-new team. 
  • It was hoped that the children’s home would be fully functional in February 2024.
• Hillview:
  • This property had previously been a children’s home in the 1970s but had since been converted to offices and later fell into dereliction. The site was now planned to be rebuilt as children’s homes.
  • The home would include ‘deprivation of liberty’ provisions, it was clarified that ‘deprivation of liberty’ referred to certain things that some children could not do due to restrictions (i.e. restriction of access to mobile phones or the internet) if the court approved that such restrictions were in a child’s best interest. When this happened, it was usually due to a potential risk to the child from either their own actions or the actions of others.
  • It was clarified that the ‘Staying Close’ principles were an extension of the ‘Staying Put’ principle for foster care, but in this case applied to residential homes and would be included as part of the remit of this children’s home.
  • The possibility of making it a passive build had been explored, which would have made the home self-sufficient in terms of heat and energy.  However, the traditional construction method, but with higher energy efficiency had been chosen, which included features such as having solar panels and heat pumps.
  • The children’s home facility would not take up the entire site and another part was available for development or other purposes.

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

• In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

The Director of SEND, Early Help and Education submits a report on Home to School Travel for Children and Young People with Special Educational Needs & Disabilities, to provide the Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny Commission with an update on the home to school and college travel provision, and costs for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND).

The Director of SEND, Early Help and Education submitted a report on Home to School Travel for Children and Young People with Special Educational Needs & Disabilities, to provide the Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny Commission with an update on the home to school and college travel provision, and costs for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND).

The Director of Education SEND and Early Help introduced the report.  Key points included:

• There was a statutory duty to provide transport assistance to children with SEND that fit certain criteria.  The criteria in the policy were clear and the policy was consulted on publicly.
• The report looked at ways in which the Council could help children get to school. 
• The first offer was usually to offer parents and guardians a transport budget if they fit the right criteria, so the parents would be responsible for transport.  If this was not possible then buses were considered as an option.  Where busses were not an option, the cases would be assessed, and the children transported by taxi.
• Costs had accelerated, the £13.6million to transport Children and Young People in 2022/23 had come from the General Fund.  It had been identified that this was a large spend area and something that needed to be reviewed.
• There was a workstream around school transport for SEND children and the solutions were multifaceted.  Solutions considered included looking at ways the personal transport budget could be used and increasing travel training and investing in working with schools, as travel was an important life skill to build with children.
• A project to increase Designated Specialist Provisions (DSP) is ongoing, which increased opportunities for SEND children to go to specialist places at a local school.  120 extra DSP places had been delivered in Phase 1.  Phase 2 to deliver 150 additional placements is now mid-way through and a further 70-80 places had been managed so far.
• The way that the bus fleet was used was considered, with capacity building and training to help understanding of special needs.  Additionally, pickup points and the way children were getting on buses was considered.
• Schools were being worked with on creative solutions to transport children with individualised solutions around schools.
• It was hoped that the above would reduce the reliance on taxis.
• Travel costs were a national challenge and not unique to Leicester.

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

• Travel training and DSP aimed at reducing the reliance on council buses and taxis, however, it was noted that the aim to increase the in-house bus fleet was because it was recognised that there was always a need, and busses were more cost-effective than taxis.
• Regarding evidence that the facilities in schools were working, Ofsted reports had been overwhelmingly positive and supportive.  Nationally it was evident that children achieve better long term outcomes when educated in mainstream schools and there are examples of children who had previously been allocated a placement in special schools  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

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

Members of the Commission were invited to consider content of the work programme and were invited to make suggestions for additions as appropriate to be brought to future meetings.

It was requested that ESFA (Education Skills and Finding Agency) be added to the glossary.

With regard to the proposed Task and Finish Group on the DSG High Needs Block, it was clarified that feedback was needed from the ESFA which would then need to be signed off and agreed with the Chair.  Once this was done the task and Finish Group could proceed.  It was possible for the work of the group to span across the change of municipal year.

The work programme was noted.

There being no further items of urgent business, the meeting finished at 20:00.