Agenda and minutes

Apologies had been received from Tony Little.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 19 January 2012 were agreed as a correct record following an amendment to the minute on the Funding for Universal Careers Guidance Update shown in italics below:

‘Officers introduced the report, which provided an updated requested by a previous meeting on funding of universal careers guidance.  The committee was advised that changes in statutory duties as detailed in the Education Bill would led to a transfer of responsibility for securing impartial careers guidance. It is anticipated that from September 2012 schools will assume this responsibility and that a new ‘all-age’ careers service would be launched in April 2012.

A member asked whether officers had been in discussion with schools to advise them of the change and that they would have to but in the services.

Officers advised that discussions had been undertaken with schools with regard to the changes.  Guidance had also been provided to them.  It was the expectation that the similar guidance would be provided to Local Authority’s (LA’s) setting out revised statutory expectations which will focus on LAs providing support to vulnerable young people and monitoring and tracking their progress.’

Officers introduced the report providing the committee with an overview of the information contained in the report.   This was a good news story in relation to the academic qualifications of a majority of children and young people in Hillingdon Schools.  

Officers explained that exam results had improved over the last seven consecutive years, attainment continuing to rise from Foundation Stage to Key Stage 4 (KS4), in line with or above the national average.   Support was continuing in schools to increase the positive outcomes for pupils in Hillingdon Schools.

The committee was informed that for the first time the report included information on Adult Learning Services and showed that outcomes in this area were continuing to rise.

In answer to a question raised in relation to the school that was shown to be inadequate, officers advised that a further OFSTED inspection had shown that this school was now satisfactory and the Teacher management was now good. 

A member asked whether it would be possible to provide the attainment figures for schools by constituency.  Officers agreed to provide the committee with the attainment figures by constituency.

In answer to a question in regards to the results by gender in Maths & English officers informed the committee that they were working with all schools to ensure that outcomes improved for all young people.  

A member asked whether there needed to be a priority given to children with special educational needs.  

Officers advised that schools were directly responsible for raising the attainment of all young people in Hillingdon Schools.  The Local Authority had regular meetings and received feedback from schools for children with special educational needs.

 A query was raised in relation to Table 11, officers were asked to check the figure in the last row of the table and inform members of the committee if this was correct.

In answer to an issue raised in relation to exam equivalents, members were informed that these were included in the figures.  The changes to the national qualifications being bought in at the end of the year were mostly included in the range of qualifications provided at Key Stage 4.   This list included alternative qualifications and a list of accredited providers that fell within these standards.  In relation to Maths, schools would be expected to enter pupils at an appropriate level on how they had performed previously and young person’s ability.

A member stated that they were delighted to see the improvement of Looked After Children, but those with Special Educational Needs were below the level expected.   The information does not show the hard work being put in this area was there anyway of showing this.

Officers advised the committee that children with Special Educational Needs had very individual statements and the information included those with severe disabilities.   Data was available to break this down further and officers agreed to provide this information to committee members.  Priorities for SEN children were identified and built in to service and team plans, this ensured future priorities were translated into  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

The Chairman welcomed the witness to the meeting to provide the committee with information about its review on adoption.

Roy Stewart a Social Work Consultant and David Fry provided the review with the following information:-

• The committee received a presentation, which covered 3 broad headings in relation to the History, Legal Framework and Policy context in relation to Adoption.
• Reference was made to the Munro and Family Justice Review (FJR), which set out a number of recommendations.
• One of the recommendations suggested that it would easy to achieve a 55 week timescale for the average adoption case.
• There were a number of reasons why this might not be achievable.
• The performance information provided included Adoption Orders (AO), Special Guardianship Orders (SGO) and Residence Orders (RO) and showed that the total number of Permanence Orders (PO) had risen. 
• The main focus of the Government review being undertaken was to speed up permanency for children. 

• The national review for permanency for children would depend on the successful recruitment of prospective adopters.
• Hillingdon was heading in the right direction on achieving the statutory timescales and acting on meeting some of the objectives in light of the national debate.
• The way in, which Hillingdon operated in relation to recruitment of adopters, would be paramount.
• The recruitment process raised a number of issues some of these were exclusions as adopters, stability of placements, pre course work to include needs of children and criminal convictions.
• Timescales for permanency was an important factor
• Permanency and placements needed to be twin tracked to ensure that there was no delay for the placement of a child.
• The first point of contact for prospective adopters was through the contact centre.
• After the initial enquiry a permanency professional welcomed the family and provide information.
• Once information had been provided to the family if they wished to continue an Adoption Team member would make a visit to undertake an early stage screening.
• The prospective adopters would then attend preparation groups to provide in depth information, which provided information on case scenarios and the types of children that come up for adoption.
• These preparation groups needed to provide information on additional needs that a child being adopted may have.
• Adoption was not always a straightforward process as there may be sibling groups, children with complex medical needs and contested adoption.
• A home study assessment was undertaken of prospective adopters that wished continue once they had attended the preparation groups.

During discussion, the following issues were raised:-

·        Were the timescale for permanency being put forward realistic.

·        The timescale being put forward made no allowance for the more complex or contested adoptions.

·        Prospective adopters may benefit from undertaking a fostering role initially.

·        Concerns about the Courts taking on the work currently undertaken by Adoption Panels.

·        If a prospective adopter’s accommodation was considered unsuitable would they be looked at as a priority either in private or social housing? 

·        Would a family be moved if they were suitable adopters but their accommodation was not suitable.

·        Were there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

The committee received a report setting out the items on the Forward Plan relating to Education & Children’s Services.

Resolved – That the items on the Forward Plan be noted.

The work programme was amended for the 20 March meeting to change the Second Review – Witness Session to ‘2’ not ‘1’.

As the next meeting was going to be the last witness session for the review on adoption it was suggested and agreed that the report on the Quarterly Child Social Care Audit Update 2010/11 be put back to the April meeting

Resolved – That the Work Programme be updated as agreed.