Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Susie Graves, Councillor Pandor and Councillor Safi-Ngongo.

Councillor Convery substituted for Councillor Pandor.

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.

There were no declarations of interest.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 26^th February 2024 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The Chair informed members and officers that this meeting, subject to ratification at the subsequent Annual Council on May 16^th 2024, would not just be last of the municipal year, but also the last as the Children’s Services Scrutiny Committee, as following the Council’s review into the structure of scrutiny, this committee was proposed to become the Children & Young People Scrutiny Committee.

The Chair advised that as the Children & Young People Scrutiny Committee would take on the statutory education scrutiny responsibility and therefore the remit of the committee would broadly remain the same as that of the Children’s Services Scrutiny Committee but with some additional areas of focus, including children’s health and wellbeing.

The Chair also outlined that the majority of the business at this meeting was made up of items that had been adjourned from the previous meeting of 26^th February 2024. Therefore, the items that had originally been on the work programme for this evening, the SACRE Annual Report and the Quarter 3 performance report had been moved to the first meeting of the new Children & Young People Scrutiny Committee on 10^th June 2024.

The Chair welcomed Sophie McNeill and Nick Turpin to the committee, for which this was their first meeting as sitting members. Susie Graves was unable to attend but was also welcomed. Each of the appointed co-opted members had been elected to serve four-year terms and would serve the remainder of their terms on the new committee.

None.

None.

For members of the public to ask questions relating to any subject on the meeting agenda under Procedure Rule 70.5. Alternatively, the Chair may opt to accept questions from the public during the discussion on each agenda item.

None.

The Director for Learning & Achievement and the Assistant Director for School Improvement and Pupil Progression was invited to present the item on School Results 2023. In the discussion, the following points were raised:

·         Officers informed the committee, national context Islington had second highest population density in UK, high numbers of SEN needs, highest eligible FSM in mainstream schools in country. Backdrop of what we are in, a lot to be positive in these outcomes. Broadly when compared to national, compare favourably across most key stage. Challenge is how we can improve to be above inner London.

·         Educational attainment in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) has improved on 2022 outcomes but remains just below National and Inner London figures.

·         There were performance indicators where Islington did outperform inner London.

·         Key Stage 2 outcomes exceeded National across most indicators with only the expected standard for writing just below. When compared with Inner London, reading, writing, maths and combined outcomes were broadly in-line whilst Greater Depth across all measures were below Inner London.

·         Rates of absence and persistent absence have increased across the Primary sector despite a decrease in both measures, nationally when compared with 2022.

·         Pupils achieving a standard pass (Grade 4 – 9) was in-line with National figures and above National for those pupils attaining a strong pass (Grade 5 – 9) in English and Maths. Both indicators were lower when compared with Inner London figures.

·         The number of Electively Home Educated (EHE) pupils has increased to over 300 for the first time in 2023.

·         At KS5, students across Islington performed better across vocational qualifications when compared with National and Inner London figures. The % of students achieving 3 A*-A grades at A-level was below Inner London and National.

·         The % of young people Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET) fell to 4.5% from 4.7% in 2022 and 4.8% in 2021. This was lower than the National figure but higher than Inner London.

·         96% of all school settings in Islington are rated as either Good or Outstanding. This compares with a national figure of 88% and is an improvement on pre-pandemic outcomes.

·         Primary school permanent exclusions and suspensions decreased slightly from 2022, although both indicators are higher than National and Inner London.

·         Secondary school absence and persistent absence have increased on 2022 and are above Inner London and National.

·         Permanent exclusions across Islington secondary schools have increased slightly on 2022 but remain below provisional National figures. The suspension rate has reduced from 2022 and for the first time since 2015, is lower than the provisional National figure for 2023.

·         The Islington Key Stage 4 Attainment 8 score was above National but below Inner London. The Progress 8 score for all pupils was in-line with National but lower than Inner London.

·         Black-Caribbean and Mixed-White & Black-Caribbean pupils have lower levels of attainment than the Islington average at Key Stages 2 & 4.  We know these pupils also have relatively low levels of attendance, and low attendance has an impact on attainment.

·         Officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 197.

Officers presented the item to the committee. In the discussion, the following points were raised:

·         In the three years since the scrutiny review, the numbers of children in Islington with an education, health and care plan has gone up 35%.

·         The SEND crisis was second only to attendance, and this was a particular focus of concern for officers.

·         The scrutiny review’s wide range of recommendations had impacted on different groups positively, including strengthening relationships with parents and engaging with service users more about specific concerns.

·         Officers advised that Islington was on the right side of the challenges and that it was one of the few local authorities that were in balance regarding its high needs budget.

·         Islington was one of the change partners now piloting reforms ahead of rollout and providing feedback on the proposals. Islington had also been featured in an article about the successful approaches to SEND need, which specifically highlighted strong partnerships and relationships.

·         Officers were working to ensure that all schools were fully trained in Islington’s trauma informed practice model.

·         In response to member questions about the differences between schools in terms of accepting SEND pupils due to the pupil’s funding not always covering the cost of the specialist provision needed, officers responded stating that they were working on how to share the work between schools more equally, but that the funding system, nationally, was in need of reform.

·         Members noted that the offer for SEND children needed to include a more varied offer of activities.

·         In response to members’ questions about whether staff were coping with the workload, officers confirmed that they were trying to recruit extra staff and utilising funding to do so.

·         In response to members’ questions about whether there were enough SEN places in Islington, officers stated they were confident that it was. Officers elaborated that Islington had reshaped its specialist provision in the 1990s and 2000s and had many purpose-built sites to cater for the high SEN need in the borough. The provision at Samuel Rhodes School covered all four areas of code of practice in terms of cognition and learning, the provision at The Bridge specialised in autism, and Richard Cloudesley specialised in physical and sensory need. Additionally, there was also New River College and additionally resourced provision facilities (ARPs) spread across other primary schools in the borough.

·         Members thanked officers for their presentation and response to the recommendations of the review.

ACTION

The Update on the Baseline Report for Supported Internships to be added to the 2024-25 work programme of the Children & Young People Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED

That the item be noted.

The Chair opened the discussion by thanking members, officers, and witnesses for their participation in the scrutiny review and highlighted some of the recommendations.

·       Members requested that the recommendation on allocations should be directed to Planning Officers as well as Housing.

·       Members commented that in responding to the recommendations on staff wellbeing, recruitment and retainment, officers may need to be bold in their thinking and to try different approaches.

RESOLVED:

That the Draft Recommendations be agreed.