Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies had been received from Councillor Narinder Garg and Councillor Kishan Bhatt.

None.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the previous meeting be agreed

The Chair introduced the item and moved straight to questions.

Members referenced the gender imbalance, noting that 80% of learners were female, and asked why this was the case; whether it reflected local or national patterns; and whether additional actions could encourage greater male participation. The gender split was broadly consistent with national patterns, particularly for courses aimed at lower-skilled adults re-entering education. Historically, more men had attended due to evening classes, but demand fell sharply post COVID and had not recovered, resulting in reduced male participation. Many learners came from communities where there was a cultural expectation that men work during the day and women attend classes while children are at school. Male learners now tended to be older, often carers or widowers, and many attended cookery and healthy eating classes to develop life skills. There had been some improvement in the gender split over time, now approximately 76% female/ 24% male.

Members asked whether the service had explored recruitment through existing learners, such as encouraging learners’ partners to attend or considering flexible timings. Word of mouth remained the primary recruitment method in adult learning. Couples did sometimes attend, often in different subjects. Despite longstanding efforts, attracting male learners had been a persistent challenge for a number of years. Officers remained open to suggestions to improve reach and engagement and further added that the imbalance was not unique to Hillingdon, but common across regions and nationally. The adult learning offer remained open and accessible to all residents.

Members commended the service and asked what would make it even better. Additional funding would enhance provision. The service had to regularly adapt to changing national and local priorities, particularly with the new government’s emerging policies. A strong focus continued on supporting residents toward employment. Education journeys for adults may take up to five years before individuals reach employment or higher-level study, making impact less immediately visible. Stronger links with employers and workplaces would support clearer pathways into work, though learners’ financial pressures often prevented them from progressing to higher level qualifications. Economic challenges increasingly resulted in learners taking immediate employment rather than continuing their studies. Officers further added that recent performance indicators were very strong, highlighting 95% retention, 97% pass rate, and almost 93% achievement. These outcomes reflected the commitment of staff and the strength of the service. A recent Ofsted visit had commended the service.

Members asked how funding from the GLA was progressing; how much funding the Council provided; and whether any other funding avenues were being pursued. Officers advised that the service aimed to break even, and the Council contributed approximately £50,000–£60,000 annually. The GLA had been a strong and supportive funder, with clear guidance and good understanding of London’s regional needs. GLA flexibility such as free courses for those earning at or below the London Living Wage had been beneficial. The GLA had mitigated national cuts by spreading reductions over two years, enabling more manageable planning. Despite good partnership working, overall funding was decreasing nationally.

Members asked  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

Officers introduced the item, outlining the recommendations to note the progress and strategic direction in delivering the Youth Justice Service’s five-year strategic plan; and to note the key priority areas guiding current and future work.

Officers outlined the five strategic priority areas, aligned to the five-year strategic plan:

1. Over-representation and disproportionality

A significant issue within the Youth Justice Service, with a co-produced disproportionality action plan now in place across the partnership.

2. Child first practice

Ensuring children are central to service design, implementation and evaluation, and emphasis on co-production and embedding the voice of the child throughout all interventions.

3. Victims and restorative justice

Offending occurred within broader community harms. Work aligned with the Council’s strategic commitments to safe and strong communities, and thriving, healthy households. There was a focus on victims as well as children.

4. Prevention and early intervention

Strengthening work prior to the age of criminal responsibility (10 years old), and aligning with wider Council transformation work, including Family First and early help. Work was also ongoing to reduce stigma on families when accessing help, particularly children who come through the Youth Justice Service.

5. Reducing reoffending

This was a core mission of the service. There had been significant reductions in first-time entrants to the Youth Justice Service, and children entering custody due to offending. There was also an increased engagement in Education, Training and Employment (ETE) for children within the Youth Justice Service.

Members highlighted that funding for Project Turnaround had ended in March 2025 and asked if there was any update with regard to future funding. Officers advised that funding would progress into the coming year and details of the funding model were awaited.

Members asked for examples of effective multi-agency practice and its impact on re-offending. Officers highlighted strong collaboration with health partners (CNWL) who support children with speech and language needs, neurodiversity, and chronic conditions. All children who come through the Youth Justice Service received a speech and language screening, enabling holistic assessment and tailored interventions. This had contributed to the reduction in numbers. Officers also highlighted the disproportionality action plan that had been co-produced with health, education, police, probation, with governance through the Youth Justice Strategic Partnership Board. This looked to address the over-representation of young people from the global majority within the Youth Justice Service. Officers further added that multi-agency activity was monitored via a High-Risk Panel and a Strategic High-Risk Group, and through reporting to the Children’s Safeguarding Board. Young people directly participated in multi-agency work, including Stop and Search reviews, and through Walking in Our Shoes training. Officers added that strong leadership by the Youth Justice Strategic Board drives accountability and change. Reoffending rates had fallen from 40.5% to 37.5% (Ministry of Justice figures), with a local estimate of 32.8%, below the London average. The AXIS Service (soft intelligence early intervention model) has contributed to a reduction in first-time entrants (from 64 in 2019–20 to 46 in 2023–24).

Members commended the report and asked whether reductions in youth offending corresponded with police data,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

The Chair opened the item, noting that a set of draft recommendations had been produced and shared with officers. Officer feedback on these had then been shared with Members.

The Chair proposed a set of final recommendations, based on the officer feedback:

1.            Develop an introduction pack for children that provides Cared For Children with all essential information to help them feel prepared and supported when starting a new placement and, where possible, during placement moves.

2.            Include a 'Voice of the Child' section in the 'All About Me' profiles.

3.            Include 'Where Are They Now' stories on the Council's website, where Cared Experienced Young People share their experiences, if they are comfortable and willing to do so.

4.            Review and develop the training programme to introduce specialist Foster Carer pathways, including pathways for carers specialising in supporting young people with complex needs.

5.            Review existing peer support initiatives and develop opportunities to strengthen engagement.

Members supported this summary, and noted that peer support (number 5) should extend to both foster carers and young people.

Members highlighted witness feedback regarding information on the website, that it could be clearer, more accessible and more informative.

Members supported the recommendation around enhanced training, noting repeated referenced in the witness sessions, and the need for specialist and ongoing development. Officers noted that there was an existing comprehensive training offer to foster carers. While training was regularly reviewed, officers remained open to further improvements. The training programme was designed to remain an ongoing, evolving area, responsive to emerging needs.

Members referred to national data suggesting that large numbers of expressions of interest translated to relatively low approvals of foster carers. Members asked if national proposals to broaden eligibility criteria may affect Hillingdon, and if local assessments were ‘too picky’. Officers noted that a national consultation was underway on the future of fostering, aimed at increasing recruitment of foster carers. While the Council welcomed national efforts to strengthen the foster care system, fostering involved ‘parenting plus plus’, supporting children with significant needs, complex needs and trauma. Safety, skills, and motivation of prospective carers remain critical. Hillingdon’s assessment process was robust but inclusive, with no exclusion based on employment status, relationship status, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or similar personal characteristics. The requirement was to approve safe, capable carers. Fostering was not always the first placement option – kinship care, family placements, and residential homes also featured within a broader placement strategy. Officers confirmed that no inappropriate exclusionary criteria were used.

Members highlighted the importance of social worker stability, noting that frequent changes could negatively impact both children and foster carers. A recommendation on this had been considered outside the scope of the fostering review because it related more broadly to social work workforce organisation rather than fostering service provision. Officers clarified that children’s social workers were allocated through wider Children’s Social Care teams, while supervising Social Workers (supporting foster carers) fell within fostering services. Supervising social worker stability was generally high.

It was clarified that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

Members considered the Forward Plan, noting that an updated version had been shared separately form the agenda.

Members referenced the Best Start in Life/ Family Hub Strategy and asked if this would be presented to the Select Committee before it was considered as a Cabinet Member Decision. Officers would follow up.

RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the Forward Plan

Members considered the Work Programme.

Members highlighted that there were a large number of items due to be considered at the March meeting and asked if some could be moved back. Officers would follow up.

RESOLVED: That the Committee considered the report