Agenda and minutes

Councillor Nick Denys had advised he would be late arriving at the meeting. He subsequently joined the meeting at 7:15pm. There were no other apologies for absence.

There were no Declarations of Interest.

It was confirmed that all items were Part I and would be heard in public.

A Member said that the minutes of the Single Meeting Review item had raised some good points in relation to the review and she hoped that these would be reflected in the final report. The Member had some questions in relation to the Children and Young People's Social Care Service Improvement Plan, such as whether the Skylakes contract had ended, which she planned to submit as a Member enquiry.

Concerns were expressed that a previously requested update on school expansion was not on the agenda and it was disappointing for Members to find out about local expansion through the local press rather than via the Committee.

Resolved: That the minutes of the previous meetings were agreed.

Laurie Cornwell, Executive Headteacher at the Skills Hub and Young People's Academy addressed the Committee in relation to the major review. The key points raised included the following:

·         The Skills Hub was an alternative provision provider for pupils who were unable to attend mainstream schools due to medical reasons or previous exclusion.

·         The Young People's Academy was a special school for children with social, emotional or mental health needs.

·         With regard to the spending of pupil premium funding, there was often too much focus on GCSE results rather than on other outcomes, such as the development of pupils.

·         The schools focused on ensuring that pupils left with results that reflected their abilities and that they were able to maintain relationships, run a household and hold down a job.

·         Both schools had low figures for leavers Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET), with the Skills Hub having a figure of zero.

·         Access to external resources, such as Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) were a cause for concern. Meeting the threshold for access to services was difficult and the waiting list for service provision was long, which could exacerbate the problems that pupils had, especially where some service access was initially provided, but was then followed by a lengthy wait.

·         The CAMHS service itself was considered to be good, but it was the access to it that was problematic.

·         Cases referred to CAMHS would be closed in the case of non-attendance. This was concerning as the non attendance could be caused by the mental health issue that the initial referral had been for.

·         The schools had started to help arrange doctor appointments on behalf of parents and to attend the appointments with the parents / pupils.

In response to questions from the Committee, the following points were made:

·         It was important to demonstrate how pupils had progressed from their starting point when they had joined the school. Baseline data was important with regard to this. Cognitive ability tests were used to provide a clear picture of a pupil's progress at a particular point in time.

·         There was a wide range of academic ability across the schools. Some pupils left with functional ability in English and mathematics, while others obtained a number of GCSEs at grade A* to C. 

·         The aim was to enable as many pupils as possible to return to mainstream education.

·         There were currently around 120 pupils who were accessing special educational provision at the schools. Approximately 70% of the pupils were male and the majority were white British.

·         Some traveller children were pupils at the schools. These tended to be younger pupils.

·         The provision of additional staff training in relation to CAMHS would be welcome. Consideration could be given to employing a clinical psychologist in conjunction with other schools.

·         Education provision was too results orientated, with the focus being on GCSE attainment rather than wider education. Teacher training needed to focus on the pastoral system and stabilising children in education, ensuring that they were in a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Independent Chairman of the Hillingdon Local Safeguarding Children Board introduced the Annual Report 2015/16. It was noted that the 2014/15 Annual Report had been presented to the Committee in September 2015. It was considered that this report had been inadequate for a number of reasons, the main reason being that there had been no view from the Chairman with regard to whether children in Hillingdon were being safeguarded effectively. It was unacceptable that the Annual Report had not been produced until September 2015. It had been agreed that the 2015/16 Annual Report would be produced by the end of May 2016, a target that had been met.

It was now possible to say that children in the Borough were being effectively safeguarded. There were four main areas that had led to this conclusion:

1.    Investment in children's services, consolidation of senior members of staff into permanent positions and improvements in terms of the number of permanent staff compared to agency staff.

2.    Hillingdon Hospital, which had previously received a 'requires improvement' rating. This rating had since improved to 'good.'

3.    The Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH). In some areas, the MASH tended not to contribute much to safeguarding. Stephen Rimmer, a nationally respected figure with regard to Children's Services, had concluded that the Hillingdon MASH was one of the best that he had seen. MASH was central to the front door work of safeguarding.

4.    The Council's Early Intervention programme had moved forward more quickly than anticipated. There was buy in across the Council and its partners for the provision of Early Intervention services.

The Board had been restructured and featured members from a suitably high level within their respective organisations. The Board had established a business unit to support its work, which enabled actions to be undertaken promptly.

The finances of the LSCB had been reviewed as its previous financial management had not been acceptable. The Council's contribution was just under 75% of the total budget of the LSCB. This compared to a national average of 65 to 70%. Invoices to debtors were now being sent out when they were due and unpaid invoices were followed up. This had not happened with any consistency previously.

A Training Quality Inspector was supporting training delivered by the Board and it was anticipated that this would become a profitable activity, with the funds then being available to invest in other activities.

It was suggested that the Board Membership could include a Members of the Children, Young People and Learning Policy Overview Committee.

A Member noted that previous annual reports had included details of attendance at meetings and requested that this information be circulated to the Committee and included in future annual reports.

In response to a Member question, the Chairman of the Board advised that it had not undertaken significant work with regard to Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), but that this was being covered within the Children's Services department at the Council. Officers advised that the Domestic Violence Forum and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Officers introduced the School Admissions Update, noting that the national offer day for secondary school places had been on 1 March 2016. Every child in Hillingdon had been offered a school place. There had been an 8% increase in applications for a secondary school place in Hillingdon and officers were pleased with the relatively high level of first preference offers made. Hillingdon continued to be the best performing Borough in west London for offering one of the top three preferences and was well above the London average. It was noted that 28 Hillingdon residents had been offered a place at Pinner High School, which had opened in Harrow.

Some schools, such as Northwood, were oversubscribed, which was encouraging. This was despite a bulge class of 30 additional places ahead of permanent expansion. 190 places had been offered at Harlington School, the majority of which were for first preference choices. The number of applications naming the school as a preference had nearly doubled. This was a good achievement as the school had been significantly undersubscribed in the past. Additional places would be available at Abbotsfield and Swakeleys Schools for September 2017 and officers were satisfied with secondary capacity.

The Committee asked what the total spare capacity would be in September 2016 across secondary schools in Hillingdon and what the percentage of spare capacity was. Haydon School had 25 places. There were places at Harefield Academy, Douay Martyrs had around 4 places, Abbotsfield had 60 places, there were 15 places at Hewens, around 15 at Harlington School and 20 at Stockley Academy. Available places were well spread across the Borough. A figure for the percentage of spare capacity would be circulated to the Committee outside the meeting.

National Offer Day for primary school places had been 18 April 2016, with every child in Hillingdon having been offered a school place, with the exception of two children that had not received an offer by parental preference. 96% of applicants had been offered one of their top three schools, which was the highest in west London. Hillingdon was joint 1^st in London, with Bexley, for children receiving one of their preferences. Hillside Infant School had taken a bulge class of 30 pupils. This had been planned in case of a local increase in applications, which had materialised. Although the overall number of applications in the Borough was similar to 2015, there had been pockets of increase in some areas.

Consultation had been undertaken in relation to changing the admissions criteria for community schools and this had been agreed by the Council. The new criteria would be implemented for September 2017.

Members were pleased that the Hillingdon admission statistics compared favourably to other west London Boroughs. It was questioned whether it was anticipated that the Borough increase of 8% or the London wide increase of 3.3% for September 2016 admissions would be repeated for September 2017. Officers advised that the forecast was that an additional 19 forms of entry would be required over  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

It was requested that the budget planning report, that was due to be presented to the Committee at the July 2016 meeting, could include an update on budgeted savings made for the previous financial year.

A Member referenced the Children and Social Care Bill that was currently going through Parliament and noted that it would place additional responsibilities on Corporate Parenting Boards. It was suggested that the Committee could consider how the Council would react to this.

Elective Home Education was mentioned as a possible topic for review during the year.

Concerns were expressed that the Committee had raised concerns with regards to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) on a number of occasions and had expressed the wish to review this. However, it had not been possible to make progress on this to date. Concerns had again been raised during the witness session held earlier in the meeting. The Committee wished to ensure that appropriate action was taken.

Youth justice and probation services were mentioned as being a possible review topic, but it was noted that a similar topic had recently been reviewed by the Committee.

Resolved: That:

1.    The topics suggested for possible future review or other consideration by the Committee be noted.

2.    The Work Programme be noted.

Resolved: That: The Forward Plan be noted.