Transcript

Transcript

Welcome to the Children's Education Overview and Scrutiny Subcommittee. Thank you for attending this evening. As you might have noted from the papers and the agenda, tonight we have a very special focus on the education outcomes of our children. So just a bit of housekeeping as usual, by attending this meeting you might be picked up on the recordings. Council recordings are covered by the privacy notice, which can be found at www.barnet.gov.uk. Can I remind you if you want to speak, to press the icon. And when it turns red, you will be heard. And when you no longer want to speak, to just touch the icon again. So we'll go ahead with our first agenda item, which is the minutes of the last meeting. Do members have any comments regarding the minutes? No? Okay, we'll take those as agreed and we'll move on. We have just had one absence from Naomi Phillips. Are there any other absences? No? Okay. Okay. We'll move on to declarations of interest. Do members have any? Yes, Councillor Conway. It's not necessarily a declaration, but just to put on record that in regards to Agenda 6, Appendix C, I am a head teacher of a Jewish school. Thank you. That's been noted. Any other declarations? No? Okay. We have no reports of the monitoring officer, no public questions and comments, so we will move straight over to Agenda Item 6. Which is, hello, welcome. Please take a seat. Do not worry. You're literally only two minutes late. And you've come at a good time because we're just moving on to the members item. And we have a special members item this evening from our co-opted members representing faith groups. They've very kindly taken the time to prepare briefings for the committee, given an overview of the religious schools in Barnet. So we're going to give you each two or so minutes, if you'd like, to just give us a brief introduction. And then we're going to open it up for questions. So I will pass over. Yeah, Anne, would you like to go first? No pressure. I constantly do this. Right, thank you very much. As you can see from my paper, I have spoken about Catholic education generally in England. And I've outlined it under a number of headings, which I thought may be of interest to members of this subcommittee. I think the thing that I would like to stress, just a couple of points really, is that there are a huge number of Catholic schools in England, 2087, were recorded in 2023. And that's maintained schools, of which there are also independent schools. In addition to that, I've outlined the reason why they were set up, something about the history of Catholic education in this country, admissions, staffing, governance, and also the additional Ofsted inspection, which denominational schools undergo. I would just like to add a footnote to what I have written, and that is with reference to schools in Barnet. In Barnet, there are 10 primary schools and four secondary schools, which are Catholic. One of the secondary schools is a grammar school for girls, and another one of the secondary schools is an academy. The 10 primary schools of the 10, seven have nurseries, and all 14 schools have been judged good or outstanding by Ofsted. The outcomes for pupils are excellent, attainment, attainment, and progress in the main is either in line or above the national average. That's basically all I have to add, and I'm very happy to take questions if anybody has any. Thank you so much, Anne. We'll move on to Nigel, and once you've both had a chance to introduce, then we'll pass over to questions. Thank you very much, Chair. Thank you very much, Chair. Thank you for leaving this item until I'd arrived and sat down and opened up my laptop. Yes, I wanted to present a paper about the Church of England's schools, and so I too, like Anne, came with a bit of history. We've been going over 200 years, and we've been building up schools. Nigel, I'm so very sorry. Councillor Mayer, I'm really struggling to actually pay attention to what he's saying, because I can hear a lot of chatter. If you have a question, do you mind holding it just until Nigel is finished, and then I'll pass over straight to you? Is that okay? Thank you. Thank you. We have schools throughout the country in large numbers, as Anne has for the Roman Catholic schools. The numbers in Barnet, unfortunately I got the heading slightly wrong, because I referred to the numbers of schools in London, and that was meant to be the numbers in Barnet. So 12 primary schools and two all through schools, and I'm governor of one of those in Hendon, St. Mary's and St. John's. The distinctive thing about Church of England schools is that we do not consider ourselves actually to be faith schools, because we are not in the business of converting our children. A large percentage of the children in our schools are not Christian. They come with other religions or no religion, and they come because they like the ethos of the school, and the ethos is to produce children who have a love of learning, and who have a sense of what their place is in the country and in the community, and to give them some sort of moral background. We, of course, teach them the Christian faith, but we follow the school curriculum, and we teach other faiths as well. And we have a great emphasis on British values, the values of law and justice and democracy and treating everyone, regardless of gender, as equal. The results we produce, we think, are quite good, and I produce the statistics for Barnet of 2023, which is the last year, which was available when I put this paper together. And to a large extent, our results, as you will see from that table, are above average, above the national average, and in line with the Barnet average, which, as you've seen from other papers, is very high in the country anyway. So that's my brief introduction, but I'd be happy to take questions. Unfortunately, Rizal was also going to give a bit of an introduction, but she's not here yet, so I'm happy to open it up to questions. Councillor Baker? Hi, this might be a strange question, because it's actually just occurred to me. But what happens if children who have gone to a school because they're a certain faith decide that they no longer identify with that faith anymore and they don't want to be, say, a Roman Catholic or Church of England and have chosen another faith? Well, in that case, I mean, very often the school wouldn't be aware of it. It would be a private decision, but they certainly wouldn't lose their place. They could continue on, yes. But the Catholic Church's view is that once a child is baptised into the Catholic Church, they're a Catholic whether they continue to practise or not. The answer for a Church of England is that they get into school either qualifying as attending churches with their parents or because they are close enough to qualify on the community basis. Once they're there, they're there. It doesn't matter to the school whether they change their views, whether they become Christian or cease to be Christian or become Muslim or whatever. they are welcome in the school and they will be taught in the school. Councillor Woodcock-Fernamon. Thank you both for your presentations and to Rizal. I think it's really wonderful as a borough that we can have this conversation talking so positively about both faith and diversity within our school system. Obviously, we are an exclusively body of the Education and Children Department of the Council. Are there more things that the Council could do to be proactive in supporting either the schools to best practice their educational outcomes or their faith outcomes if you want to put it like that, or better interactions between the schools and their wider society that this committee could present to the department? Well, certainly, having been a head teacher in Barnet, I felt very well supported by the Education Department in Barnet. Also, as a governor of Barnet School, I was chair of governors of a school and then federated with the Infant School. Again, Neil will vouch for this, I felt quite supported when I wrote. I got an answer and something was done, and in preparation for Ofsted and such occasions, we had a lot of correspondence and support from the authority. So, I mean, I can't, as I'm not a practicing head teacher now, I don't know what they might need at this moment in time, but certainly, historically, my experience was a very positive one, which is why I'm sitting here today. I will echo that, and my experience also has been a very good assistance from the local authority, as well as necessary. I remember interviewing a head for a new head in a primary school many years ago, and Neil attended the interview, if I remember correctly. No, no, you had managed to pass beyond that point at Moss Hall. So, we've got only praise, really, for the local authority and their support. We recognize currently there's a really big strain on the SEND pupils and getting EHCPs, but we've talked about that last time, and we'll be talking about it again today. I suspect we don't think we suffer any more from lack of attention, as it were, from Barnet than any other school does. It's just a really horrible situation. So, many thanks to the local authority, and we feel supported, I think. I hope the other faith schools do as well, so that we feel we contribute to the community in Barnet, which is cohesive, thanks to the work we're trying to do, and people get on, and pupils get on very well. Yes, I would echo that. Yes, Councillor Conway? Can I just add on to that with potentially my head teacher's hat on rather than a counsellor? But as a head teacher of an independent school of Barnet children, but children who are not in the estate system, Neil has put together an independent school standard partnership board meeting, which I think is majorly supporting the independent schools who are going through a challenging time at the moment, with being able to see the support that Barnet can offer and be able to answer questions and give advice to also those who are not states but are still dealing with Barnet children, so that has been really, really helpful. That's wonderful to hear. Great news. Yes, Tamsin? I just had one question. I might have missed it. I wondered what the percentage of faith schools to community schools is in Barnet, and is that different primary and secondary? Yes, please. I'll have to look it up. I don't know off by heart. So in primary, we've got 90 schools in total. 10 of those are Catholic schools, as Anne said. I actually make it 13, Nigel, that we've got Church of England primaries. It depends whether you count the all through school, because it's got a primary, obviously. Right. 11 Jewish voluntary aided schools, 18 are academies, and 37 are community schools. I'm happy to send this round, Tamsin, afterwards, the list. Secondary, we've got 26 secondary schools, and we've got three all through schools, so right from primary through to secondary. Only one community school remaining in secondary, three Catholic voluntary aided schools, one Catholic academy, as Anne said, two Jewish voluntary aided schools, and 19 academies in secondary. And then the all throughs, we've got two Church of England voluntary aided schools as all throughs. Right, so I know that you're here. So Anne and Nigel have presented, but I just wanted to ask you, you're still very welcome to give an introduction to the briefing that you very kindly put together. Sure, happy to. Thank you so much. So full disclosure, all the details are taken from a report that Neil very kindly and ably put together for me. And I guess the only two points I kind of wanted to draw attention to is just A, how high performing all of the Jewish schools in the state sector are, and how impressive that is, and how the independent schools, the independent Jewish schools, while they have their specific challenges, which I alluded to in the reports are doing excellently with safeguarding. And in response to all of the new government policies, we definitely have a few who are looking to move into the state sector, and hope to continue the trend of excellent performing Jewish schools. I know that we have one school that currently has an application in, and say thank you to all of the people within the education team at Barnet who are dealing with that. And hopefully we can overcome some of the challenges for any of the other Jewish schools who look to move into the state sector. Thank you. Thank you. I'll just open up for questions. Yeah, Councillor Hutton and then Councillor Lemmon. Okay, Councillor Lemmon, you're very welcome to go first. I'll go first. Yeah, I think it's a question for all of you. Thanks, by the way, for your presentations and reports. And for each of you, to what extent would you expect there to be children not of a particular faith in your school, and how that affects their teaching at all? They may not be... In the primary level, children are not pushed to declare their faith, and they're therefore not treated any differently from any other children. I think that... Does that help? At the secondary level, they may declare their... They may or may not declare their faith. It may be a moving situation, as Councillor Baker suggested. Again, it doesn't affect the teaching. They're treated as human beings, as students, and they will have different skills and characteristics, and that the teachers know how to handle that. And what would you say is the percentage of those who follow a faith and those who do not? In Church of England schools, the percentage will be less than 50% of overall pupils and students. In some schools, it would be high, but in most schools, it's below 50%, 20% to 30%, I would say, on average. I don't know whether Neil would correct me on that. Do you have any statistics? And with regard to Catholic schools, until about 10 years ago, they were predominantly Catholic and practicing Catholic. But in recent years, the percentage has reduced, but I think it would be more than 50% in the London, in Barnet Catholic schools. And obviously, you know, further afield, in other parts of England, it may not be 50%. So it's a bit variable. But in terms of how children who are not of the faith are treated, they are treated like anybody else. The teaching is exactly the same as everybody else. They do RE, and in our RE programs, not only do we do the Catholic faith, but we do the other faiths, and also views of those who don't have a faith. So it's very broad. And we embrace the difference, I think it's fair to say. The Jewish schools in Barnet have close to 100% of the children, Jewish children. The primary schools are mostly, as a generalization, one-form entry primary schools, and they've really been set up to serve the communities that they serve. And that's within the independent school sector. The schools are much larger, but again, they've been set up to serve the communities that they're in. So they're comprised of 100% of that faith, and often quite specific, you know, quite specifically catering to the communities in their area. Of the secondary schools, there's one that embraces more of a multicultural approach, even though the majority of the students there are Jewish students. At the moment, with the rise in anti-Semitism, a lot of Jewish families feel much safer in Jewish schools. As part of the work that I do with Another Hat On through PAJA is the Partnership for Jewish Schools. We've been marking, looking at the demand for Jewish secondary school places. And this year we've seen a very marked increase in that, which we attribute much more to the rise in anti-Semitism, because I think the impact of all the policies surrounding independent schools are more likely to impact the next lot of admissions that are coming up. Every school treats everyone with respect, as per all the protected characteristics. So whoever is in their school will be treated exactly the same. Thank you. I think Councillor Hutton, you had a question, and then we'll move on to the next item. Thank you, Chair. Yeah, I think those are the three main faith schools we have in the borough. I was wondering if there are any other faith schools, different faiths, if I meant, and if a religious organisation wanted to set up a school, do they register under it, and do we know if we have any registered different types of schools, different religions? So we have one Greek Orthodox secondary school, St. Andrew the Apostle. So that's the only state school that's not Catholic, Jewish, or Church of England as a faith school. We don't have any other state faith schools, but we do have one Muslim independent school, Barnet Hill. It's called Barnet Hill Academy, even though it's not an academy. Barnet Hill have made an application previously to become state funded, to become voluntary aided. They didn't meet the criteria at the time, but we believe they're going through the process of looking to see whether they can meet the criteria. It would be really good to have a Muslim state school amongst the Barnet family of schools, so we would welcome that. But currently, no, we've got the Church of England, the Catholic, Jewish, and one Greek Orthodox. Thank you, and thank you once again for taking an attempt to prepare that briefing for the group. Right, I'm moving on to agenda item seven, and that's going to be the papers with regard to education standards in Barnet 2023 to 2024. So, I'll just take the time to firstly thank all the teachers, school staff, and council officers, and students who are working hard to maintain the excellent results that we see in Barnet. Whilst we commend the achievements, of course, as a committee there is always room for improvement, and we're here to be a critical friend, so let's really take the time to review this area. I'd also like to thank the committee members who took the time out of their diaries to attend a meeting with the Bell's senior leadership team, and I think they're going to be given a bit of time to tell us about how that went. And thank you to Neil and the team for taking the time to host the session and give the presentation. So, Councillor Hutton, Nigel, or Tamsin, you are very welcome to provide a very brief feedback from the session. It is almost impossible to summarise the session because I think it was seven senior leaders were made available to us for a Zoom meeting. We touched on a multitude of areas. Everyone talked about their area of responsibility. It was extremely in-depth and extremely helpful. I'm sorry more of us couldn't have been there. Thank you very much to Neil and to Kim and to all the team who were there. I think some were online. Neil circulated a PowerPoint of his part of the overview, explaining how Bell's is a company owned by Barnet, set up in 2020. And so I probably won't talk about that at all. Then we also heard from the finance manager who talked to us about the big expenditures, about the expenditure with Send Transport and Services, about the high needs budget, and as we all know, the increase in the number of EHCPs. And then also talked about the statutory override, which I think is also in some of the papers that we'll be discussing later. Alison Dawes talked to us about all her areas of responsibility, which included education welfare, school admissions, school condition funding, business support, post-16 support. We talked a bit about school place planning with her, about the 18% drop in pupil numbers in inner London, and that's about 7% in outer London. And the estimates are that the numbers will not rise significantly until the end of the 2030s. But she emphasised that that's very much an art and not a science, and various things could influence that. It talked about the strain on existing schools, and particularly how the fall-in role is difficult for one-form entry schools, and how schools are having to see what they can do to make themselves financially secure. And that that had been a trend since 2016, which is now in primary schools, which we're now seeing impacting on secondary school. We were able to ask about virtual schools, and how looked-after children were provided for by the virtual school. We looked at school improvement, and then Kim and Karen talked to us about SEND, about the three teams within SEND, about the SEND assessment and placement team, the resource issues. I think you talked about there being 600 cases per caseworker, and I think about 300 is recommended, which really sort of brought home to us the, you know, the real issues, the 24% increase in EHCPs. We were also able to discuss a little bit about using sort of AI support, and a pilot, I think, that Bells is looking at, to try and assist some of that, although clearly that's not going to make up from 600 cases when it should be 300. And we're sort of just very aware of the risk of high, the high risk of parent dissatisfaction because of that, and the increase in tribunal numbers. I mean, there was so much that you covered, and you covered it in great detail, and let us ask questions. We were talking about the specialist inclusion services, and really promoting inclusion in mainstream, which again, I know we're going to talk about today, and also about needing more satellite provisions. And then I think you were talking about the last thing I thought that was significant about really promoting independent travel because of the budget constraints of the SEND transport, and I think you've now taken on a trainer, which is a new role to try and really sort of push independence and travel rather than relying on that funding. I don't know if anyone else has got more to add. I just really thank you for making so many senior people available and being really informative. Yes, I'll echo that on behalf of the committee. Thank you so much for taking the time to provide that. For members who weren't able to attend, please do have a look at the slide deck. Yep, Nigel, please go ahead. I just wanted to support that. I couldn't possibly add to the detail which we've already heard, but the overall impression was a dedicated team we heard at length from some of the senior members of Bells. We understood clearly that they have their finger on the statistical situation across the borough, how many children are coming through, how we should plan for schools given the numbers coming through, how we should deal with those with SEND issues and the EACP problems. We heard in detail about how that was being handled. Of course, it's not satisfactory, but what would be satisfactory would be a lot more provision from the central government. So we understand that. Thank you, Nigel. Okay, I'll hand over to Neil Marlow for an overview of the report. Thank you, Chair. I don't know if this committee remember this time last year when I presented the Education Standards report, we had a cast of thousands, if you remember, including some children that were talking about what it's like to be a young person in the Barnet School. And we had other members of the Bells team who were here talking about their individual areas. I decided not to do that this year. If you remember, it took quite a lot of time, Chair, to hear from the children, didn't it, last year? So I thought maybe we could do that every other year. So next year, we can invite some children back again to talk about their experiences of being a pupil in the Barnet School. So sadly, it's just me today, not the wonderful children we had last year. So as we always do, it's an opportunity for you to see what the outcomes are for our young people in Barnet. Obviously, that's what we come to work for every day. That's what we do a day job for. And that's what we came into education for, is to make a difference to the children and young people. I'm really proud of the schools and settings that we have in Barnet. They do a wonderful job. Of course, some are better than others, but generally, we've got a really strong education system. And that's demonstrated by the strong outcomes that we have year on year at the end of every key stage. So this standards report goes through the key aspects of outcomes at different key stages and breaks it down into analysis of different groups to then see where there potentially may be some differences with regards to outcomes and achievement, and then leads on to the priorities that we need in going forward to try and improve. Because a good service, a good education system is never complacent. A good school is never complacent. Even if Ofsted come and say that they're outstanding, it still doesn't mean they're perfect. An excellent school is one that wants to continue to get to be better. So if I just take you through just some key highlights of the report, and then I'll open it up to questions, Chair, if that's okay. Talking of Ofsted, as you're probably aware now, Ofsted don't have a single judgment anymore for schools. They haven't since September. And Ofsted are at the moment consulting on a new framework for September, which will involve report cards. So when Ofsted come into our schools this year, they're not giving an overall judgment to say whether the school is good, outstanding, requiring improvement, etc. But still the historic judgments from their last Ofsted is still there. So the percentage of good and outstanding schools that we have is still incredibly strong, 96%. All of the schools that we've had inspected this year have either maintained their standards or improved on their standards, which is the new Ofsted term rather than good or outstanding. So it's maintained or improved on their previous judgment. So it's a strong position with regards to Ofsted inspections in school. Attendance and exclusion is generally a positive picture. Our primary attendance a number of years ago was a real concern. We were very low comparatively for our primary attendance. We've worked hard over the last few years to bring that up. So primary and secondary attendance is now in the top 10% of the country. It's special schools and pupil referral units where we've got a concern about attendance. It's very difficult to compare special school to special school, particularly pupil referral units, pupil referral unit, because they're all so different. But all we can do is just work with those individual schools through our education welfare team and our attendance officers to then support those schools in trying to get the best attendance possible. I'm pleased to say that special school attendance did improve in 2024, but comparatively, it's not as high as our primary and secondary attendance is. Exclusion rates for primary and secondary is very strong in so far as very good, very low. So that's both suspensions and permanent exclusions. In early years, at the end of reception, children do have an assessment to see whether they've got a good level of development. You may remember last year, we were very pleased about a good level of development because it took a significant rise in 2023 to going back above national when we dipped below national in 2022. We were concerned would we dip back below national again in 2024. So I'm pleased that we actually didn't do that, but actually went further away from national, so continued that positive trajectory upwards with regards to a good level of development. And that includes also children who are disadvantaged and children who have English as an additional language. You may remember this time last year, I was asked a question about the achievement of English as an additional language children. And then there was a supplementary report that was put in after the meeting. So we've included that this year within the report for this year where we have that data. In primary schools, once from Key Stage 1 onwards to Key Stage 6, there's no longer any Key Stage 1 data. This time last year, I reported about the end of Key Stage 1 assessments. The government have taken that away now, so there's no published data at the end of Key Stage 1. So the first published data we get for primary schools after the good level of development at the end of reception is at the end of Year 6, so just before they move on to secondary schools. And that's an assessment in the reading, writing, maths, science and spelling, punctuation and grammar. All of which are very strong at the end of Key Stage 2 and just below the top ten of the country with regards to reading and maths overall for all pupils. And also strong generally for our groups as well. We don't have progress scores this year for Key Stage 2. Up until this year, we've had a progress score from the end of Key Stage 1 to Key Stage 2. The reason we haven't got it this year is because, if you remember, something happened four years ago from 2024, which was the pandemic, so there weren't any Key Stage 1 assessments. So that's why for this year and next year, there won't be progress scores for Key Stage 2. We then break down Key Stage 2 into different groups. So all of our ethnic groups achieved above the national average for that group. But we do have some ethnic groups that are comparatively performing less well than others, particularly our black pupils. And within that, that's our black Caribbean pupils, and our mixed pupils, and within that, that's our black and white Caribbean pupils. Even though those pupils achieved higher than black pupils nationally and black and white Caribbean pupils nationally, still comparatively to other ethnic groups in Barnek, their achievement is low. So that's obviously a priority for us. But it was pleasing to see that actually the improvements in those groups was actually greater than the improvements for other ethnic groups. Our children at SEN at Key Stage 2 perform really well, as do our children with English as an additional language. At the end of Key Stage 4, it's the GCSEs, and GCSEs are measured on a number of different metrics, one being Attainment 8, where we are fourth best in the country for Attainment 8. It was a drop from third to fourth, so please don't beat us up about that. We dropped one place, I'm sorry about that, but we're still fourth best in the country. And we did also drop one place with progress as well, from second in the country to third in the country. But it's still something that you as councillors and members of the committee should be incredibly proud of. By the time the young people get to 16, they're leaving their Key Stage 4 and going into Key Stage 5 with some significantly strong results. And that includes English and Maths at Level 4 above, and also English and Maths at Level 5 and above. Disadvantaged pupils also do really well at Key Stage 4 as well. And again, with regards to ethnic groups, it's the Black Caribbean pupils and all mixed white and Black Caribbean pupils that are performing less well, but still comparatively better than those pupils nationally. And also, English and additional language, we haven't got the data yet being published for Key Stage 4, and we don't have any published data yet for looked after children, so both of those will be supplementary reports that will be circulated. At Key Stage 5, there's two routes to follow. One is an A-level route, A-level pathway, which the huge majority of our pupils and students in Barnet follow. And those that are following an A-level route do really well. The ranking with regards to the end of Key Stage 5 with A-levels is incredibly high in the top 5% of the country. Those that follow a vocational route rather than an A-level route, and we had quite a lengthy discussion about this last year, if you remember, don't do as well. And I remember sitting here saying it will be better next year, and I'm pleased to say it is better next year. It's still nowhere near as good as it needs to be, but it's going in the right direction. So the downward trend looks like it has been, it's now going back up again. And there's been a large focus from our team in Bells on supporting those schools that are delivering vocational qualifications to make sure that they've got the best provision possible. And so 1.6 in the report then goes on to the areas that we have identified as priorities going forward based on that achievement data, but also our other information that we have about the schools. So I think that's a, I would say a quick summary, sorry, but it was longer than I thought it was going to be. But there's a lot to talk about, a lot of key stages, but hopefully people had an opportunity to read the appendix, which is the full version of all of the data. And I'm quite happy to take any questions from that. Yep, Councillor Baker and then Councillor Hutton. Okay, I've got a couple of questions. Okay. Firstly, when you are mentioning disadvantaged pupils, how is that measured? So some pupils are entitled to pupil premium, which means they're entitled to a free school meal. So if a parent is on benefits, then they can show the evidence to the school, it means their child will get a free school meal. Okay. And a free school meal child then also, as well as having a free meal, they then, the school gets additional funding called pupil premium, which comes into the school to recognise that those pupils will need some additional resourcing to be able to support them in their education. So the disadvantage are those who are pupil premium. Okay. I get that. My second question is, you've mentioned ethnicity here in quite a lot of detail. I think it would be really important to see some data in terms of gender and achievement as well. Yes. And how, because that can sometimes cut through class in terms of black females often used to do a lot better than black males, and white males lower than, say, Asian males. So I think that kind of information would be quite important. I think you're exactly right, Councillor Baker, and we'll do that in a supplementary report. We will, we used to, we used to report on gender, but it didn't actually used to go into the detail and looking at genders and cross gender with ethnicity as well. So I think that's a really good point. And also gender with disadvantage as well. So we'll, we'll, we'll send a supplementary report on that. My other thought was, have you got, in terms of post 16, the A level and the vocational qualification or achievement rates, have we got any value added data on that? Because I'm quite aware that a lot of the schools in Barnet are high achieving schools. Some have entrance exams, so you would expect them to have quite high achievement rates. But is the value added there as well? There's, the value added is at key stage four, which is the progress eight, which we do well about. Yes. The individual schools have their, can, can work out their own value added, but that's not something that the, the DfE publish any value added data. I thought it was coming out this, this March. Because they, they stopped doing it over COVID and this year is the first year since 2019 that I thought they were producing it. I think it's only available for individual schools though. I don't think we get it as a borough wide, but I can check on that. Okay. Thank you. That's, that's a, that's a, because that's, obviously that's really important to, to be able to measure the progress that, that students are making from one, one key stage to another. And my final question, sorry, it's all about page 30 and 31 here. Is that, is that, have you got any breakdown in terms of achievement rates for SEM pupils, what their specific needs are? Is it that you've got children that are performing higher on the autistic spectrum disorder compared to ADHD? Because I'm just thinking of, because I'm just thinking of services linking to HCPs, how that would. We haven't got any data on that. We haven't got any data on that. I can, I can see whether we can, can get that data. We can't get that data. It's too complex. Is it? There would be a primary need that every child would have, those who've got an EHCP would have a primary need and a secondary need. We can see whether there is any, we can get any analysis of primary need and date and achievement. Okay. I have to write all this down, Councillor Baker, because there's a lot of actions from me. Okay. I'll stop now. I'll stop now. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Hudson. Thank you, Chair. I had a couple of, of questions. One was, do we have any idea what the report card is going to be, what they're talking about, the report card may look like? I mean, I assume there'll be some statutory things like safeguarding will be on there, I assume, and there might be other things. I've got a couple more, but do you want me to give them three questions or should I let you answer that one first? Let me answer that then. That's a quick one. There's a consultation out at the moment by Ofsted, so anyone can respond to it. And I'd encourage the committee to all look at, if you look on the Ofsted website or search for Ofsted consultation on the new framework. There's a new framework coming out in, it was due to be September, but they're now not bringing it out till November to give time to make sure all the inspectors are trained. It's going to be a big departure from the current framework because it's going to have report cards. And there are some, there are some, I think it's seven or eight, Chris. Can you remember? I think it's seven headings that there are that the schools will be judged on from a ranking from a school causing concern up to exemplary on each of these seven areas. And there might be eight including them. Ah, so they're still going to be similar then? Yes. In that respect. Report cards, it seems. We had, I went to a briefing across London by the HMI of London the other day and it seems that parents are liking what the proposal is, but teachers are not liking what the proposal is. So Ofsted are very clear to say that everything about the way that they are inspecting will remain the same. It's just the actual judgements that they have at the end will look different because of the report cards. If you remember the report cards isn't Ofsted's idea. The report cards was the government's idea which was in the manifesto, which is why Ofsted have now taken that on. So there is a consultation. It finishes on the 28th of April. And so then in the summer term, they'll be coming out with what it's going to look like. Have local authorities been invited to submit ideas? Or what we think that, you know, should be? Anybody can respond to the consultation. Individuals can. Local authorities can. I can send around a link, Chair. I'll add that to my actions. My other question was, when we're looking at Key Stage 5 and A levels and the vocational, is there any, do we know if students mix the two? Like, for example, in the olden days, you could do A level, two A levels and an AS level in a language, for example. Do we have, know what institutes in Barnet are doing? Are there any evidence of there being, just to broaden qualification really, mixing A level and vocational? There's nothing to stop a school doing that, or a young person doing that. It's just the timetabling of it, that they have to make sure that that will fit in with regards to the timetabling. So, it is happening in Barnet schools that some children are taking BTECs as well as A levels. Yeah. Okay, I had Nigel and then Councillor Woodcock-Vellerman. Firstly, I think I'd like to help Neil Marley on the question that Councillor Baker raised about statistics of children who are autistic, because at the Bell's presentation, we were told, I wrote down anyway, autistic children are, in Barnet, 19% of the SEND children. It's not as high, perhaps, as you might think. Well, maybe you should, yes, tell me how I got that wrong. No, you haven't got it wrong, but it is about how schools put the primary need, so if they put SEMH first and autism second, then we won't get that data. So, schools need... Here's a quiz, what does SEMH stand for? What SEMH stands for? Social, Emotion and Mental Health. Social, Emotional and Mental Health. We're expected to know that. Okay, so, if I could ask my question now. All right, thank you very much for 1.6 on your report. Yep. Was that she wanted some achievement data linked to the primary need, so not that how many percentage of our special needs are autistic, but how are our autistic pupils achieving in our schools, which we will try and look to see whether we can do. I.e. a breakdown of SEMH children. Yes. Going... Just... My question is around your 1.6 in your report, which, as you pointed out, is the areas for development. They were the areas for development, if I read it right, for the year 2425. And you're, in effect, reporting, I think, on how it's gone to some extent. There are a lot of areas there. And I appreciate that you need to have a lot of areas, because some schools will need to focus on some of them, but not... And some will focus on the others. But from the point of view of your work at Bell's, do you have a sort of top list of priorities that you will focus on, that you can tell us these are the really important things? I don't know, something less than half a dozen, because you can't focus on 15 in the same way that you can focus on six. You're right to say that, generally, the headings are the same as they were the previous year, although we've taken out year one phonics, that used to be a priority. And because now the phonics results are in the top 10%, we've now removed those. What's different is the narrative below the headings, because it's, for example, for attendance, it's only particular schools, the pupil referral units that we're looking at attendance, for example. It's really difficult to say what's the top priority. We can't be complacent about any of those things. Each of those things has an action plan of what we're going to do to try and improve on that. But, of course, speak to different people, and different people within Bell's will be working on different ones of those priorities. For example, the vocational results at Key Stage 5. I'd love to be sitting here to say that, actually, we're doing really well with regards to all of our pathways for our young people, and at Key Stage 4 as well. So those who can't follow a GCSE pathway, have they got another pathway that they can follow at Key Stage 4 rather than GCSEs, and then continue that into Key Stage 5? We're not very good at that in Barnet. Our schools think of themselves as GCSE and A-level schools, and we've done a lot of work to try and change that culture in our Barnet schools. I think, of all of the things, I think that's the thing I would like to achieve most of all, is having that pathway for everybody so that everybody's got that opportunity to have a curriculum that suits them and achieve within that. In what sense do you pass down to the schools what your priorities are, so that they know what your priorities are? I mean, I'm conscious as a governor that we look at the statistics of our own children and see where we're from, and we compare them with other schools, because there's that data tool that you can compare yourself with any school or the whole borough. And we then choose the priorities that the governing body thinks are important. For example, if attendance is not doing well, we say that that's got to be a priority next year. What are you going to do about it? And we monitor the progress as governors there. So do you pass down what the priorities are and monitor the progress in the way that governors are trying to do it? Well, not only do we pass it down to schools, schools co-produce these priorities with us, because we have a Schools and Settings Standards Partnership Board that has primary heads, secondary heads, special school heads on that board, one of the PRU heads on that board as well. And it's them that come up with the priorities for us each year, and then we use our meetings with senior leaders to then talk about the priorities. That's excellent governance at your school. That's what we expect governors to do, is looking at their own individual data and then seeing what the priorities are in their school. It would be wrong for us to say St Mary's needs to be improving their exclusion rate if St Mary's don't have any exclusions. So governors need to bespoke it for their own school. You'll notice that governance isn't one of our priorities, Nigel, because we've got some strong governance in Barnett, so it doesn't need to be one of our priorities going forward. I think all this needs to be taken in the context that Barnett schools are achieving a great deal, and as your report shows, we're in the top ten percent, five percent, whatever, of many, many statistics. It's a remarkable achievement, thanks to lots of people. Thank you. Last two questions. Councillor Woodcock-Vellerman and then Rizal. Thank you, Chair. Some of this report is written saying Barnett pupils, and some say pupils in Barnett. I think it would be useful to just have clarity on whether the report is talking about pupils who reside in Barnett who may go to schools anywhere in the country, or Barnett schools, which is my understanding of what it is. But I just think it would be useful to set that out in future reports that it's clear it's about the schools rather than the pupils who reside in the borough. I presume that's correct. Yeah, so then my actual question is on the vocational qualifications. If we're looking at the schools and saying that we're, you know, obviously we've had a slight improvement this year, but we're, you know, we're full well below the national average, or below the national average, maybe it's a better way of putting it, then is that more about the fact that students who want vocational education don't seek out Barnett schools, and actually that's less of a problem, it may be less of a problem if they are finding adequate or good vocational qualifications in neighbouring boroughs or outside of London, and actually our pupils who reside in the borough, who we're all counsellors for, are still getting good vocational education elsewhere, and actually the need for that in Barnett is lesser, because they have other places to go, or is it a priority because we're concerned that the pupils who reside in the borough don't have those opportunities? It's the latter. We're concerned because there aren't those opportunities in Barnett that we feel they should be, and you're right, some of our students do have to go outside of the borough to then go to colleges, Oakland's College for example, to do the sixth form there, rather than the provision within Barnett, because the schools don't offer those provisions within their schools, so that's something we are working with them on. This time next year we will have the excitement of the T level results for the first time, so we did a lot of promotion with schools to take on the T levels, so it will be interesting to see what the first outcomes are for T levels, and that then may grow, so then other schools taking on those T levels, and so that could change that culture of the A level being the only way. So is it therefore the view of Bells and the department that we should be providing as many types of vocational qualifications as possible, specifically in the borough? Based on what you said, it seems yes, but I would imagine that there's lots of courses that we wouldn't expect people in Barnett to do, because the jobs that then would be provided for those vocational qualifications would probably take place far, far away from Barnett, and we wouldn't therefore expect people to study tannery here in Barnett, and then go to live in Northampton afterwards. So I just want to understand, in terms of the priority of the breadth of vocational qualifications, how important that is to the borough specifically? It's the breadth, and the decision is that often the barrier is the cost of that for a school to put on a provision of a BTEC, where they might only have three or four students in that school who want to do that BTEC, so it's not economic, financial sense to them to do it. Some other authorities have been successful in, maybe you can say, Chris, whether you've seen this in other authorities, but they've been successful in having collaborative sixth forms, so students, if they don't have the qualification in the pathway in the school that they're in, can then do maybe an A-level in that school, and then can go to another school and do a BTEC in the other school. But it's a timetabling nightmare, and Barnett is a big borough, and so we have had some schools that have tried that, Coctaw with St Mary and St John's, and Hendon tried that, but it just didn't really work. I don't know if you've seen it anywhere successfully, where there's been a collaborative sixth form, Chris, on your travels? Well, in a couple of years' time, I hope to be able to say, come and see my trust, because we're just about to launch a joint sixth form initiative. We've got one very successful outstanding secondary school in the trust, 300 in the sixth form, and two 11 to 16 schools, all within about a mile of each other, which makes it a lot easier. And we're doing a sixth form offer with a full range to the three schools, which include the full range of academic and vocational qualifications. So it is possible, but it's complex and logistically very difficult, and if schools are a long distance apart, it makes it even more so. Proximity is the key, really. Thank you. And lastly, we have a question from Ryzel. Thanks so much. The attainment and all this data is really, really impressive. And whilst a big kudos goes to all the support from Barnet, it's also the teachers who are delivering at the forefront. And I can see on page five of the appendix that there, I mean, across nationally, there are recruitment and retention issues. And I saw there was a line that said we need to develop a strategy to encourage more staff to join Barnet schools. And I just wondered if that was more of like an expression of a wish that something that needs to happen or whether there has been some thinking about this that could be shared. Also happy at some point after if there isn't any progress that's been made, just share some thinking that we've had in the Jewish school sector as well, for better or for worse. Yeah, I mean, recruitment, retention is good in Barnet. When people come to Barnet, they tend to stay in Barnet because they realize that it's a collaborative borough to work in and that it's a supportive network of schools. The difficulty is with the recruitment coming into Barnet. And there's a number, well, a positive with Barnet is it's a big borough. So there's a lot of schools to choose from. So people can know that they can move around different schools and there's opportunities. The diverse nature of our education landscape is a real help. So if people want to come and work in a Jewish school or come and work in a Catholic school or Church of England school, whatever, they know that they've got a variety of different types of schools, schools within Barnet. But a barrier to coming and working in Barnet is financial because Barnet is an outer London borough and outer London teachers get less money than inner London teachers. So Brent, for example, which we border on, Haringey, which we border on, Islington, Camden are all inner London boroughs. And so teachers can go and work there. And sometimes sometimes you're working in Barnet and you're actually closer to the middle of London than you are when you're working at a school in Brent. Yet we're outer London and Brent is inner London and they'll earn three or four or five thousand pound more as a starting salary in those schools. So we have to attract them in other ways, which is to say you're coming into a very supportive network. You're coming into a very successful, successful education system. And you asked about strategies. What we've been doing over the last few years is going out into universities and seeing students and literally with banners and pens saying, come and work for Barnet, because this is what you're going to get when you come and work for Barnet. So that's generally been successful. But it's been it's a struggle. And school governors will know here now the struggles of finding finding teachers, particularly in secretary schools, in particular subjects as national shortages. And that obviously is highlighted in Barnet as well. Councillor Longstaff, I know you wanted to ask a question before we move on. Yeah, sorry. Thank you. And thanks for the figures. And well done to everybody involved in the schools, as was being said. But I always look towards the future. And I know we're not really talking about the future. But I wanted to know what you thought about the changes to the offset ratings, the removal of advanced mathematics support program, and the other changes that have come through on the bill that was passed yesterday. And I wondered how you see that affecting Barnet over the next 24 months. There's some there's some elements of that children, children's wellbeing and schools bill that will have an impact on us, not particularly with regards to overall achievement. So not really related to this apart from there's there's if it's still in that bill, there's there's some things about trying to level the playing field with regards to academies and non academies. So academies having to follow teachers paying conditions, for example, academies needing to follow the national curriculum, for example. So if that does get through the through the House of Lords and comes out comes out at the other end in the way it was intended, then that may have may have an impact of some schools. I mean, there'll be some negative impacts with that, because I know some academies have told me that they would really struggle, particularly particularly, particularly interestingly, Jewish academies. I've heard Razor would really struggle with that because of because of having to having to teach that all of the breadth of the national curriculum. They would then struggle to be able to do the Kodesh teaching as well as the whole whole range of national curriculum subjects as well. So that could have could have some impact. But with regards to the Ofsted changes, whatever comes in, we will support our schools with that. And I don't I don't see any reason why our schools would would fail under a under a different framework. They're good schools. So they'll be good schools under whatever framework often come and come and inspect them in. And what was the other one you mentioned? I don't know about that. Sorry, further maths A level is continuing. It's not been discontinued. I mean, the curriculum review that's been running concurrently has also just been published today. So a lot of that is still working its way through all the systems at the moment. I don't know that it's fair to expect the Bonnet staff to have like the professionals to necessarily have all the answers when the government hasn't given us all the answers yet. Sorry, that's OK to jump in and say that because like they do an excellent job. Yeah, I think that's the thing that was published yesterday was the first draft of the of the curriculum review, which, to be honest, counts as long as I haven't read yet. So I don't know what the impact is going to be on Bonnet schools. But as soon as I've read it, I'll let you know what I think we appreciate you haven't had much time. But thank you, officers, for the report. Before we move on, does the committee agree to the recommendations as set out in the report? Fabulous. OK, we will move on to agenda item eight, which is special educational needs and disabilities update. So I'd like to once again thank officers for responding to the concerns that some of you may remember were raised at the last meeting about SEMD services. I'd like to welcome Kim Miller, who has recently become interim head of the SEMD team, and will give a brief overview of the report. So over to you. Thank you, Chair. I'm pleased to be here tonight to present this report, which provides a summary of the national and local context for SEMD and alternative provision in light of the request from the committee to receive further information about the Public Accounts Committee report from January 2025. The report also sets out key national concerns in relation to SEMD, which you can see in a summary of in Appendix 2. Furthermore, the report outlines the actions we are taking to improve our local offer to meet the needs of our children and young people with SEMD, and those who are educated in alternative provision and recommendations for consideration. I'd like to highlight briefly the key areas in this report. Over time, several reports have highlighted concerns regarding the reforms and long-term sustainability of SEMD and the SEMD system as evidenced in this report. The PAC report highlights the national recognition that SEMD systems require substantial reforms to more effectively meet the needs of children and young people, meet the expectations of families, meet the expectations of families, and be financially sustainable. Through Barnet's lead role within the SEMD and Change Partnership Programme, which is the national initiative to test change to the SEMD and alternative provision system, this puts us at the heart of learning and influence for the future of SEMD systems nationally and in London. Despite these challenges, Barnet is a high-functioning local authority in relation to SEMD, achieving 100% compliance within our 20-week statutory deadline for EHCPs, significantly outperforming the national average. Barnet, with partners including health, social care, and our parent and carers are working together to meet needs and identify SEM early. We continue to invest in early intervention, and as a result, Barnet has high rates of mainstream inclusion, which contributes strongly to the high attainment and progress for pupils within SEMD. Progress can be seen in the MIME report, which is Appendix 1. In line with the national issues, there are challenges locally in terms of waiting times for diagnosis and therapies, but health colleagues have invested in these areas to reduce wait times. However, this remains an area of focus. The PAC report also highlights the considerable changes for parents and carers navigating the SEMD system. Although Barnet's tribunal rate is 3.6%, which is above national average, Barnet has gone on to resolve 87% of appeals without the need for a full tribunal hearing. Furthermore, through the CHANG program, we are trialing dispute resolution and mediation, which is giving us greater insight into the best way to support families. The report highlights the financial strains for local authorities. Nationally, with a high demand for the high-needs budget, Barnet anticipates a CRICA of 3.8 million overspend with their designated school grant. Reserves will be exhausted by 2025-26. So, there is continuous review of the spend in Barnet and investment in early preventative services aiming to reduce long-term costs. Another area I'd like to highlight is the work that has been undertaken to enhance and refresh the alternative provision offered locally. Paragraph 2.6.1 outlines the local authorities' duties and the cohorts that make use of the alternative provision. We are justifiably proud of our pupil referral units and the independent review that has been undertaken by the CHANG Program Partnership, which has highlighted potential ways we can serve our children, young people and families more effectively. Later this spring, we are refining the range of potential exciting options that will enhance our current offer. We will be working with stakeholders to ensure that our alternative provision offer remains agile and future-proofed. We look forward to providing an update of the progress of that project in due course. By implementing the Alternative Learning Pathway Barnet model, enhancing early intervention services and strengthening partnerships, Barnet is proactively addressing these challenges to deliver improved outcomes for children with Z. as well. Any questions? Any questions? Does the committee have any questions regarding the update? Yes, Councillor Lemon and then Councillor Longstaff. Yeah, I've got a few actually. So you made the point about meeting the statutory 20-week target and it's basically double the national average. What's that down to then? Is that just that our staff are more productive or is there more to it than that? I think it's about targeting and prioritising it which we've done over the last couple of years and have worked really hard to get to those timelines. Also because it really supports parents' experience to meet those timelines so it's been a priority for Barnet. Just on that, it's always been that way Councillor Lemon. So back in 2016 when Cambridge Education came into a partnership with the council to run education services, the figure then was down about 35%. And so it's been a real priority since 2016 to now to get that up higher. And I think now for about the past three years it's been 100%. And as Kim said, it's just that we prioritise that. And we'll hold our hands up. We prioritise that at the expense of some of the other things that those caseworkers should be doing. And as you heard Sam's reporting back, our caseworkers have got cases of 600 cases each. So to be able to then respond to parental requests, complaints, concerns, they can't do that as much as we would want them to do. Because we're prioritising that 20-week assessment because we know that that's going to make the difference to the children who are being assessed. OK, so it's about prioritising as well as... Yeah. OK. I have a second question if that's all right, Chair. On the Appendix A, the dashboard, on that, I'm just looking at under A identification, in line with the England trend, the number of residents from the EHCP in Barnett has continued to rise, reaching 3.089 in 2024. What's that risen from? Which page are you looking on? So in the dashboard, page three, the top of page three, it talks about the number of residents with the EHCP has reached 3.089. But it doesn't say how much of an increase that is. I suppose what I'm leading to here is, is that increase getting worse over time, i.e. what's the forecast for next year, for this year? So the forecast of increases in EHCP is forecasted to rise, continue to rise, so it's not slowing down. OK. And in that case, what sort of pressures are you putting in terms of finances for the next year, 25, 26? Huge pressures, and that's the pressures on the high-needs block. So for the first time, for a long time, or maybe ever, the high-needs block is projected to be in deficit at the end of this year. So we're expecting a 3.8 million deficit at the end of this year. So that will be eating into the reserves that we have. There will be an increased deficit next year, which will eat into the rest of the reserves, hence why Kim said that by the end of 25, 26, those reserves will have run out. That's why we're having to do some innovative and radical things now to try and slow down that increase. And so the idea is to have earlier intervention, to give the funding to the schools at an earlier stage, so that children's needs can be met earlier, then avoids the need potentially for an EHCP. And as you know, when a child has an EHCP, they've potentially got an EHCP to the age of 25 now, with the SEM reforms that came in. We're not the only borough to be suffering this way. In fact, it's quite remarkable that we've got to this year, in the first year that we're being in a deficit. You've probably heard of other local authorities who have had to have something called the safety valve and the delivering better value from the department because they just went into deficit years and years ago, and the department came in and tried to support them in trying to see what they could do. There's no magic answers. And as Kim's report shows, there's a lot of reports that have come out saying that the SEM system is broken internationally. And so that was why we were asked to write a report and say, well, what are we doing in Barnet to try and make it as less broken as it possibly can be within Barnet? It's a really difficult task. It's a real challenge. Thank you. Before I pass on to the next question, I just wanted to take the time to also recognise that we have Joe Sullivan Lyons, or is it Leon Sullivan, sorry? Lyons, okay. I noted you had put your hand up, but then you put it down, so I assume Neil and Kim already answered probably what you were going to suggest, but just so the committee knows. Thank you so much. I had Councillor Longstaff next, I believe. Yeah, thank you. I just wondered, it's odd, really, because the item talks about one umbrella, clear oversight, best use of resources, improved outcomes and opportunities for pupils. But I wondered, why didn't you do this five years ago? If it's so, why is it now, and this is meant to be better than the previous system, is what it actually says within it. So how come it's taken so long to reach this point? What was wrong with the previous system? Are you talking about alternative provision? Yes. So there's a number of things in the report. So one of the things is we're looking at alternative provision. Now, one of the reasons why we haven't done that previously, I mean, it's not that our alternative provision is broken at all, it's just that we feel that we should do it, we can do it much better than we're currently doing. Nationally, everyone's looking at their alternative provision because the DfE came out with their SEND and alternative provision improvement plan, which is why we are the lead borough for London in running the change partnership program, looking at the ideas from the department of what can be done. And one of those ideas is to do a review of your alternative provision and then to have these three tiers of approaches with alternative provision, which is in the improvement plan. So that was the catalyst for us to then look at what we're doing and see, well, could we do it better? And I'm hoping the report highlights that there's some real strengths in what we do. You know, both of our pupil referral units are good or outstanding, one's outstanding and one's good. They're delivering a really strong provision, it's just we feel we can do it even better. It goes on to talk about in 1.9.2, this will allow the opportunity for ongoing strategic decision making to meet the changing profile of the cohort. And I just wondered what exactly, who's making these sudden strategic decisions and changing directions? Because that's, but if you change the strategic decision, you change the strategic direction. So we've done an alternative provision review. The alternative provision review has come out with some options and the options are within the report. What we're now doing is looking through those options, working with stakeholders to see which one of those options is the best way forward. So there will be a change of direction. It won't be a huge change of direction. There'll still be alternative provision, but it will be what's the way of delivering it in a better way than we're currently doing. Thank you. Anne, are you next? Yes, my question refers to the waiting time for the under fives and those above fives for, you know, an autism diagnosis and also the waiting time, which is longer than two years, for ADHD diagnosis. Now, I note that a lot of money has been injected into the various funders. I'm sure the authorities are doing everything they can. I just wondered what else is going to be done because I know as a governor in primary school, the difficulty for staff and the challenges that children who may have these needs present. And, of course, it does hinder their development educationally. So I just wondered what else is planned. So, obviously, the wait times are difficult and actually not as high in Barnet as they are nationally, so we're relieved by that. If you have a look in the report, it talks about providing more mainstream support for neurodivergent young people, which is actually our young people waiting for those diagnoses, as well as the fact that some of the specialist inclusion services will offer support and do offer support prior to or without a diagnosis. So we are supporting our mainstream schools with inclusion and with extra support strategies and guidance to be able to understand and work with the young people in spite of or not in spite of the wait times and the diagnosis. Also in Barnet, we have a, I don't know if you can say the new Barnet Autism Hub, Family Hub, and that will be supporting families without a diagnosis. So if you are, and think that your young person is neurodivergent, if you suspect that your young person has autism, you can go to the Autism Hub and get advice, support, and signposting. Thank you. Yeah, just to add to that very briefly, sometimes we forget that actually those conditions are a medical condition, as defined by the World Health Organization, and we don't diagnose autism or ADHD. That's a medical diagnosis. So the wait times isn't for intervention from the Bell staff. It's a wait time for diagnosis. And so the key aspect of the answer is that, you know, where it is suspected, because you'll know as an ex-ed teacher that you can probably recognize children with those conditions, but you're not able to diagnose them. So what you do then is have a conversation with Kim and the team, and they'll pick it up as a child you might suspect, you might suspect have those conditions. So the wait time refers to the medical diagnosis, not to our intervention. Thank you for those questions. Thank you, Kim, for providing the update. Officers, Joe, for joining us on this item. I'm going to move us on, I'm afraid. Before I do, can I just ask the committee to note the recommendations as laid out in the update? Thank you. So now I'll move over to agenda item nine, and that's the family services quarterly update. You will know what this is. This report gives us an update on family services progress and asks members to scrutinize the performance data. So I'll pass over to you, Chris, to introduce. Hi, everyone. So as per our usual reporting cycle, we've got a quarterly update. This report covers the Ofsted Action Plan. We agreed last time that we would bring updates to the opening scrutiny committee. And last time we were here, we spoke about the four areas within the Action Plan, and we provided some updates for you on what's happening in those four areas. The reason why we did further updates is because we had our annual engagement conversations with Ofsted. We had two. We had one. We had our very first engagement conversation around SEND with Ofsted inspectors. And then the next day we did the engagement conversation about children's social care and education. They covered, in that meeting, they covered our steps, which has come to the overview and scrutinally previously, and that's our self-evaluation. That sets out our priorities for the next 12 months. They were satisfied with the way that we had set out our self-evaluation. They also are, you know, concentrated on the Action Plan. They wanted to know what updates we had, what we had achieved since the inspection last June, which is now starting to feel a bit a long time ago. And we were able to report that we had completed some of the changes, some of the reviews of the service areas in early health to make sure that there aren't any delays in terms of the referrals and the interventions to our families who need our early health and intervention. We had made changes to the LADO process to make sure that the children's files are kept up to date on the LADO referrals and the outcomes. We have looked at our safeguarding strategy to make sure that the return to home check-ins, I'll get the term right, we've just changed it. I keep on thinking it's like return home interviews, it's not. It's the return home check-ins, that's what children have asked us to call them. We've put new systems in place to make sure that they are done timely and that we also are making sure that we do an analysis of why children are not taking up some of those interviews or check-ins and then we also are looking at the work that we're doing around the transition work with our care-experienced young people. They really wanted us to have a look at why some young people don't know where they're going at 18. And I think that sometimes the plan is that they don't know because they might be going to university and they're waiting for their place, but they need to know their plan. And I think one of the things that the work that we're doing on transitions has really highlighted the anxiety that young people feel during that period of time. So there's a lot of work going on with our colleagues in adults as well as early help around really understanding how we can make sure that we do a wrap-around and we make sure that that period from 17 to 1920 hasn't got those cliff edges that really build up those anxieties. So that all was discussed with Ofsted. Chris, I don't know whether you want to add anything. I thought it went all right. Well, I think it went very well. So, of course, you know, if you're a football fan in football terms, Barnett is a top-four team. All right? But the challenge is staying there because if you're a Manchester United supporter, you'll know that it's very difficult to stay there. So that's where Barnett is and as a newcomer to Barnett, you know, what I'm confident in is that, you know, I can't claim any credit for that. Of course, I can't. I've only been here two minutes. But we have solidly good services across the board. There are no areas within children and families that I look at and I think, well, this is broken or this needs fixing. They are solidly good across the board. And that's what those four meetings and the fourth one is about our preparations for the care reforms. So the things that lie ahead of us. Again, our preparations for that are on the curve at least, if not slightly ahead of it. So I think you can take comfort that we're doing well, but without being complacent. And the role that you play in that is making sure that you keep us on our toes and keep supporting and challenging that in the way that you do. So you should take credit for that too. Thank you. Thank you. There were lots of positives in that report as well. Stella, if you can just note there, the preparation for care reform is something that we can pick up at a future meeting to just hear an update. Okay, I had lots of hands up. Councillor Longstaff, was it Councillor Hutton had you put your hand up as well? Okay, so you can go next. Thank you, Chair. Just a quick question. It just struck me as rather odd that there's been a substantial reduction in cases requiring panel reviews in the time list of early health support, 60% reduction. I just wondered how on earth you managed to reduce it by 60% and why didn't people notice beforehand that they were wasting their time in a panel review that didn't need to go ahead? On page 107, progress as of February 25, it talks about what you're doing regarding reviewing the early health panel process with key stakeholders. And there's just one line without any further text to it that says there's been a substantial reduction in cases requiring a panel review of 60%. Yeah, and this says progress as of February 25. No, but we're discussing the previous paper. Or is it included in the same paper? It is included in the same paper. So, can I just get you to pop your mic off? Yes, I've been switching it on and off. So, part of the work that they did in reviewing the panel process was to actually have a look at which children are actually reviewed by the panel and also which children can actually be supported by a lead professional outside of that panel. So, I think that with any type of review you will have a look at the referrals much like we do in MASH and any process where we get contacts in, we have a look and see what are appropriate and what haven't been. So, I think that 60% sounds high. Yes. So, I think that it would be good for us to actually bring you a breakdown of that 60% so that we can tell you why they weren't appropriate for that panel. Thank you. Yeah, I think a written response would be a good thing. But if Donna were here, who heads up Early Help, I think she would say part of the reason, I'm sure she said this to me in briefings that she's given me, was that we've looked at the length of time that we deal with families. And I think there is a kind of human tendency if you like a family and you work with them for a while to kind of hang on to them. Whereas, I think a much more disciplined approach would be to say, we need to resolve A, B and C in 12 weeks and then we need to move on. And so, you then get the flow through and that's how they've managed to reduce the wait time in some ways as well as broadening that pool of professionals to hold the case. But I'm going on a fairly flaky memory here. So, we'll get a fully written response to you. Apologies. Thank you. Councillor Hutton. Thank you. On the children's residential homes, unless you've mentioned it and I missed it. It says for Egerton Gardens, Austed registered, grading to be confirmed. And do we have any update on St James? Because that cost us money, didn't it? With that one being late, as I understand it. Yeah. I mean, we're in between a rock and a hard place here because until the homes are registered, if we place children there, we're placing them illegally. So, we are dependent upon Ofsted coming to register, go through a process of registration of those children's homes to make certain that they meet the standards that Ofsted require for a placement. We did raise this at the annual conversation and urge them to come. And I think we're going to get a little bit of preferential treatment if I read the music behind the words because they recognise that we've invested in these children's homes. And unless they're registered, we can't use them unless we place the children illegally. And then the director of children's services, whoever they are, are personally liable, not the organisation, the DCS. Is there anything we can do as a committee? We did ask them to expedite the registration process and they agreed to do that. But there is a long waiting list and they're having to do all the private sector as well as public sector provision. But we were given that promise, weren't we? Can we send them the bill? Yes, we were told that we would be prioritised and we are in communication with the Ofsted inspectors who do that and really what we want is for them to just come and visit, to do that registration visit. That doesn't mean that we immediately get a grading because they then have to come back a few months later for an inspection. But if they come for that initial meeting, that initial inspection of the property, then that's fine. Then we can start placing children there. But we're in regular contact with them. Councillor Woodcock-Vellerman and then I had Tamsin, was it? And then Councillor Lemmon and then we'll move on to the next agenda item, if that's okay? Thank you, Chair. I'm asking a question again about dental checks. I thought you might think that I might. Again, I think this is not the first time that we think, according to the report, that there's a recording issue into this. So I guess question one is, as currently looking into this, if we've got any updates on it. But I'm struggling to understand why we think we often have recording issues, specifically on this one relatively minor statistic within the wider report. Because it is still important and I would like to see that number grow. We've looked at this and, yes, we have a conversation on a regular basis. The issues with dental checks is that the actual visit to the dentist is reliant on the foster carers or the residential units actually arranging the appointments. The difference with the health assessments is that it's channeled through the LAC Health team. So what happens is that when we go onto a child's file and when we do the audits, we can see that the children have gone to the dentist. We can see that they've had their checks in the case notes. But what happens is the social worker doesn't go to the health tab and click on the right button. So we actually spoke about this at the corporate parenting advisory panel, the last one this year. And so Kate Jeffries, the head of service for corporate parenting, has now once a month put time aside. And it's not just about dental checks but it's about record keeping where all her teams come in and they look at and they update the records so that we can have that flow. It's also about social workers coming into the system understanding what buttons to press so that we can actually draw the data off the system in the correct way. I think it will never be 100% because some of our children who are placed out of borough are battling to get registered. So there is still an issue. However what we do now is that we let our LAC Health team know and the LAC Health team then can put pressure on dental surgeries to prioritise looked after children. So we are putting different mechanisms in place. They are being seen. We are just not pressing the right button. Tamsin? Thank you. I was just looking at the chat data at 1.30 when you are talking about referrals into MASH and the decrease in the referrals in the six month period which you explained is to be expected because of summer holidays. And I was just wondering given all the emphasis and the importance on early health and prevention what we do do and what can we do to try and sort of that period in the summer holidays when children might not be being seen by staff members by school. And I am thinking not children that are already on a child protection plan but maybe children in need or children unknown to the service. What can we do and what do we do to sort of get them in front of people during that summer holiday really when we know that the referrals go down. So what we do have is a very comprehensive summer programme and that is set out through our early health hubs. And some of the staff in our early health hubs are social workers and also very highly trained practitioners who go out and are part of the summer programme and to make sure that we have eyes on children. And the numbers and I know that we report here on the numbers of our early health schemes and our summer schemes are very high. So especially for the primary school children we have thousands of children taking part in a whole variety of programmes. And all the organisers have got safeguarding training so if there is an issue if children disclose anything during those activities that will come into the MASH. So we try and do it through that. You know I think that we also have done a lot of meetings and a lot of sessions with schools in terms of really thinking about that period of time leading up to the summer holiday. And we always see an increase in referrals in those weeks leading up to the summer holiday where schools might be a bit worried about what's going to happen with a child because there might be signs of, you know, lower signs of neglect. But they will then do a referral in and then we will check on those children. And a lot of those children may go to early health, you know, rather than into statutory services. So they will be stepped into early health to make sure that they are visited and they are seen. But this is also part of, in the report we also give you a lot of information about the social care reforms. And really what we are wanting to do with the social care reforms is bring that early health and that assessment work closer together. To make sure that actually if a child is being seen by practitioners in early health and a crisis is occurring they can step into an assessment easier. So we are just in the beginning of developing our model in Barnett about what that might look like. It is an exploratory phase at the moment where we are going out to see how other local authorities have done the Family First Pathways programs and they have piloted various models. So that will also provide some assurance that over these periods and it is also over the December, over the Christmas where schools are closed and over those six weeks we will have a system where we can get the right support to the families first time. Talk a bit about leading on to the social care reforms. You are talking about family group decision making, is that part of the same? Okay, thank you. It is. So we have always had our family group conference service but what we have done is we have used them a lot for when children might become subject to care proceedings and we look at alternative carers. Now the difference in the approach through social care reforms is to make sure that we bring families in as involved as possible right in the beginning of the journey into social care and to make sure that we have them alongside not necessarily as alternative carers but as support to the family so that we can help them face a family crisis together as other families do. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Before we move on, Councillor Lemmon. Yeah, thanks for that, Chair. On the Ofsted plan, on the return home interviews, it talks there about bringing together a dashboard for KPIs. I am just wondering when that is due to be finished. I do not have a deadline for that. I know that we have recently spoken about it at our senior leadership team and they have been – the problem with having one of the things that we have done, is that they have got to prioritise. So when safeguarding are asking them for the dashboard, I am asking them for a placement dashboard as well. So I do not know whether – I do not think we have a firm date but what we can do is just say that we will bring something here next time to show you that dashboard. Okay. And linked to that, a bit further down on the bullets, RHCs, 81% offered, 40% completed and it is kind of linked to KPIs. What do you expect to be a realistic target for those two items? So I would want every child – so I think 80% is a reasonable target because of the way that we have to report missing. A lot of our children who miss curfew and come back an hour later are still having to be reported missing. So some of the circumstances and some of the context don't necessarily require a check-in. It is for the young people that go missing overnight or for long periods of time or consistently break curfew and then they should be offered an opportunity to speak to them. I think that the take-up is low. I would like to see the take-up of the return home check-ins to be more towards 55-60%. Because, you know, our children talk to so many professionals that they don't always want to talk about and especially they don't want to talk about why they are going missing. But I think over time, if we use the people who they trust for those check-ins, then we will have better results. So I think we are trying different approaches to the check-ins so that we can actually improve those responses. Thank you. So can I ask if members agree to the recommendations as laid out? Yes? Okay, we will move on to our next agenda item and this is the Chief Officer Report. So we have Sharon Palmer who has joined us online, very kindly, to give an overview of the Quarter 3 Financial Position with a focus on the Children and Families Department. So welcome, Sharon. Thank you very much, Sharon. That was a really great overview. Do we have any questions for Sharon? Councillor Longstaff? Thank you, Chair. I just wondered, because you mentioned ceasing using external providers for contact, but only use the family services. And I just wondered, looking forward, has that been achieved yet that we have ceased to use? When is it likely to be achieved? Thank you, Sharon. Yes, so the demand, the number of children needing contact has gone up significantly. So the aim to actually bring it all in-house into the contact centre has not been achieved. And that's really about the volume of children. And also, because of the placement sufficiency, we have some young children who have been placed further afield. We've always had the premise that we don't move the child, we move the parent. So that means that we are going out. But what we have done is, although we aren't using the contact centre, we're using contact centre staff. So we now almost have two teams. We have a team at the contact centre, and then we have what we call our community team. And that is working more efficiently, because they're going out to where the child is. They're using family centres and not expensive venues, so that we can actually bring down the costs of the contact. Thank you. Thank you. Given time constraints, I'm going to move us along. But I'm... Thank you. Yep. Rizal? Just a question about this high-needs overspend. Are there usually government grants that come in to cover this area that are no longer covering what the spend is? Or is this something that Barnet usually has to find budget to cover, and that's just growing? Thank you. I'm going to move us along. But many thanks, Sharon, for waiting so patiently until your agenda item. I appreciate it. It came very late on into the meeting. So thank you for being here. And thank you for having me. Absolute pleasure. So we'll move on to agenda item 11, which is the task and finish group updates. So you would have seen that in the agenda pack, pages 189 to 202. So very quickly just to ask the committee if they have any comments. No? Okay. I've also had it noted here that the committee's asked to commission the fostering task and finish group. You would have seen that email come through just a couple of days ago. And we did discuss this at the call over. But can I just ask if the member is happy to commission that group? Yep. Okay. So we'll move on to agenda item 12. And that's the cabinet forward plan, the key decision schedule. That would have been across pages 203 to 222. So the subcommittee requested to consider any items that they may wish to request for pre-decision scrutiny during 2025 to 2026. Yes, Tamsin, please go ahead. The only one I had a query about was the kinship care policy, whether that comes to this committee first. So, Chair, we just need advice from officers about whether this fits within the remit of this committee, whether it be possible and suitable for pre-decision scrutiny before it goes to Cabinet. I don't see one, Chair. I'm happy with that. I'm happy with that. Yep. Okay. I'm happy with that. Yep. Okay. Sorry. I just asked the officers if this particular item was suitable for pre-decision scrutiny before it goes to Cabinet. Councillor Longstaff? Councillor Longstaff? It was just something on Barnet Homes, and there was one that Councillor Ross-Houston has got, and it's about approval of the Barnet Homes delivery plan. And whilst I've not seen it, it is quite an important thing for Barnet care, children in care, and moving on and getting accommodation. And obviously one will look at that to make sure that that's not been changed, otherwise it does affect our ability to house our looked-after children as they leave care. Absolutely. Stella will make a note on that. Any other comments? Okay. Okay. So we'll move over to the Scrutiny Work Programme. So this report sets out the Draft Work Programme for the Children and Education over the Scrutiny Subcommittee 2025. Are there any comments? No? Okay. So the committee has just asked to note the Work Programme. Are you all happy with that? And that takes us to the end of the meeting, so thank you so much for our patience. We've finished a couple of minutes early, so thank you all.