Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Angela Picknell and Diarmaid Ward.

If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest* in an item of business:

§  if it is not yet on the council’s register, you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent;

§  you may choose to declare a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest that is already in the register in the interests of openness and transparency. 

In both the above cases, you must leave the room without participating in discussion of the item.

If you have a personal interest in an item of business and you intend to speak or vote on the item you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent but you may participate in the discussion and vote on the item.

*(a) Employment, etc - Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain.

(b)  Sponsorship - Any payment or other financial benefit in respect of your expenses in carrying out duties as a member, or of your election; including from a trade union.

(c) Contracts - Any current contract for goods, services or works, between you or your partner (or a body in which one of you has a beneficial interest) and the council.

(d) Land - Any beneficial interest in land which is within the council’s area.

(e) Licences- Any licence to occupy land in the council’s area for a month or longer.

(f)   Corporate tenancies - Any tenancy between the council and a body in which you or your partner have a beneficial interest.

 (g) Securities - Any beneficial interest in securities of a body which has a place of business or land in the council’s area, if the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body or of any one class of its issued share capital. 

This applies to all members present at the meeting.

None.

None.

RESOLVED:
That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 November 2015 be confirmed as a correct record and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The Chair reminded members of the forthcoming scrutiny visit to meet staff working in the Alternative Provision service.

It was agreed that Item B3 on the agenda, Impact of Special Educational Needs and Disability Changes on Children and Families, would be deferred to a future meeting to enable the Committee to question the relevant officers.

None.

None.

Alan Caton, Independent Chair of the Islington Safeguarding Children Board (ISCB), presented the report which summarised the Board’s safeguarding work in 2014/15.

The following main points were noted in the discussion:

·         The ISCB had a statutory duty to coordinate the safeguarding work of local agencies and to ensure that local agencies were effective in their safeguarding work.

·         It was advised that 2014/15 was a challenging year in which local agencies had to consider how to best safeguard children in light of increasing financial pressures. Despite this, it was reported that the timeliness of statutory assessments had improved, which was a priority for the year. 

·         The ISCB was pleased that independent assessments of Early Help services indicated that they were effective in helping to reduce demand for statutory services.

·         The ISCB welcomed two new lay members in 2014/15 and they had made a positive contribution to the work of the Board. It was also noted that a number of agencies had increased their involvement and were chairing ISCB sub-groups.

·         The Independent Chair outlined the priorities of the Board in improving the collective effectiveness of agencies. These were: (i) addressing the impact of neglect on children, including by helping them to become more resilient; (2) addressing the consequences / harm suffered as a result of domestic violence, parental mental health and substance abuse; and (iii) identification of children who are vulnerable to sexual exploitation and holding perpetrators to account.

·         The Committee noted the safeguarding work undertaken with local schools, including the Chelsea’s Choice production.

·         It was noted that the ISCB had approached other strategic partnerships to ask what steps they would take to contribute to the priorities of the Board.

·         The Committee was advised of several ISCB-led audits, including an audit of FGM which found weaknesses in information sharing. As a result a number of cases were reviewed and a follow-up audit found that improvements had been made. 

·         The ISCB had a responsibility to review child deaths. There were 18 such deaths in 2014/15, an increase on the average of 14 deaths per year. The reasons for these deaths ranged from young children having serious medical conditions, to older teenage victims of knife crime. The ISCB was concerned about gang violence in Islington.

·         The Committee considered the future priorities of the Board. The ISCB was working to encourage universal services to engage with Early Help services and to support all agencies in taking ownership of safeguarding matters. The Board had a particular interest in private fostering arrangements and was working with health agencies and schools to identify children in such arrangements. The ISCB also wished to gain a greater understanding of serious youth violence; and would be working with children to shape local services.

·         The Committee noted the work of ISCB to target child sexual exploitation. In particular, the Board was working with partners to achieve greater use of intelligence to better target offenders. 

·         The ISCB was concerned about the relatively small numbers of offenders being prosecuted for neglect offences.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95.

The Committee received witness evidence from Sarah Bealey of the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School on pupil outcomes and accountability and the policies and practices of schools.

The following main points were noted in the discussion:

·         The view of the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School was that the quality and range of alternative provision had improved in recent years. There were a greater number of options available, although it was noted that some of those were further outside of the borough.

·         The Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School was acutely aware of their accountability for pupils on alternative provision and had an active role in monitoring pupil progress and the quality of providers.

·         The school was keen to work with providers to improve the quality of their teaching. It was explained that some providers provided quality vocational courses however found teaching a core English and Maths curriculum to be challenging. Providers had been invited into the school to observe lessons. The school considered such partnership working to be very important.

·         The school considered alternative provision to be good value. Although alternative provision was only used as a last resort, the school appreciated that for a minority of pupils who struggled with mainstream education it was essential.

·         The average pupil referred to alternative provision from the school was white British and had a multitude of issues. The smaller, more nurturing environment available in alternative provision was praised. It was commented that schools did not have the resources or capacity to provide this environment and without alternative provision there would likely be an increase in exclusions. 

·         Whilst it was recognised that not all pupils achieved positive outcomes, it was commented that alternative provision was central to improving the outcomes for some pupils. An example of a former Elizabeth Garrett Anderson pupil progressing from alternative provision to university was given.

·         The experience of the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School was that alternative provision was most effective for pupils at risk of exclusion, those who were disengaged from education, who were not attending school regularly, or were from dysfunctional families. It was commented that these pupils often benefitted from engagement with Early Help services.

·         A worry was expressed that a number of pupils entering alternative provision had been mid-phase admissions to schools. It was commented that moving schools during GCSE studies was often difficult for pupils and additional support was needed to make such transfers work.

·         The school considered the academic quality of providers to be very important. Although pupils on alternative provision often required additional educational support, some pupils had strong academic abilities and the potential to attend university. It was important to challenge pupils to ensure that they were able to re-engage with education later in life.

·         It was queried if pupils admitted to schools mid-phase or through the Fair Access Protocol were placed on alternative provision as a method of easing the burden on schools to integrate potentially difficult pupils. In response, it was advised that this was not the case at the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson  ...  view the full minutes text for item 96.

RESOLVED:

That consideration of the item be deferred to the May 2016 meeting.

Councillor Joe Caluori, Executive Member for Children and Families, provided an update to the Committee on his recent work. The Committee questioned the Executive Member on the following topics:

·         Councillor Wayne queried if the recent inspection of the youth offending service represented a fair evaluation of the service and what the council would be doing to make the required improvements identified by the inspector. In response, it was advised that the conclusions of the report were fair and the council would be working to improve its relationship with the police as a result. In particular, the council and police needed to be more direct with each other about local issues. The co-location of the police and youth offending service would contribute to this, as would greater information sharing. It was hoped that a better relationship with the police would lead to more comprehensive intelligence on youth offenders.

·         Councillor Wayne asked a supplementary question on the council’s relationship with the new Borough Commander. Councillor Caluori advised that the Borough Commander had been in post for around six months and was willing to work with the council on youth offending. Councillor Caluori also emphasised the importance of working with schools, as they had regular contact with pupils and parents and were a good source of information.

·         The Chair commented on the great work of Cathy Blair, the Director of Targeted and Specialist Children’s Services, who was to retire at the end of February. In response to a query about the recruitment of a new director, it was advised that further information would be circulated outside of the meeting. The Committee resolved that their thanks to Cathy Blair be noted.

·         The Chair asked for further information on the council’s selection by the government as a ‘Practice Leader’ for child protection social work. Councillor Caluori advised that the council was considered to be a pioneering authority and had been granted £2million to make further social work innovations. This was intended to set a path for other authorities to follow. Officers would be presenting their work to other local authorities.

·         A member of the public asked about the impact of individual elector registration on young people. It was queried how many 16 to 19 year olds had dropped off the electoral register and what the council was doing to encourage registration. Councillor Caluori advised that he did not have information to hand however a response could be provided outside of the meeting.

·         A member of the public asked about school class sizes and if there was a school places crisis in Islington. In response, it was advised that one new school was due to open in future, the City of London Primary Academy, however there were no current plans to open other new schools and any population increase was expected to be counteracted by expanding existing good and outstanding schools. Councillor Caluori further explained that Islington did not have a school places crisis; however there was some uneven distribution of schools in the borough, with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 98.

The Committee requested further information to assist the Alternative Provision review. In particular, information was requested on school referring numbers, demographic information, pupils admitted mid-term or under the Fair Access Protocol, outcomes and performance data, “life chances” and destinations for those on alternative provision, what schools do before referring pupils to alternative provision, a list of providers and courses, and attendance statistics.

Officers advised that a plan for providing this information would be reported to the next meeting.