Agenda and minutes

The Committee’s membership is set out below:

Cllr Baldwin

Cllr Burgess

Cllr Cherry

Cllr Dabell

Cllr Cornell

Cllr Evans

Cllr Hall

Cllr Linehan

Cllr McGregor

Cllr Mercer

Cllr Smith

Cllr Wickremaratchi

The Committee is asked to elect a Chairman for 2024-25.  If the election is contested, a secret ballot will be held in accordance with Standing Order 2.17.

1.1        Cllr Linehan was proposed for the position of Chairman for one year by Cllr Wickremaratchi and seconded by Cllr Hall.

1.2        Cllr Cornell was proposed for the position of Chairman for one year by Cllr Smith and seconded by Cllr Mercer.

1.3        A secret ballot was held which was won by Cllr Linehan by seven votes to four.

1.4        Resolved – That Cllr Linehan is duly elected as Chairman of the Children and Young People’s Services Scrutiny Committee for a period of one year.

The Committee is asked to elect a vice-Chairman for 2024-25.  If the election is contested, a secret ballot will be held in accordance with Standing Order 2.17.

2.1        Cllr Mercer was proposed for the position of Vice-Chairman for one year by Cllr Cherry and seconded by Cllr Smith.

2.2        Cllr Dabell was proposed for the position of Vice-Chairman for one year by Cllr Linehan and seconded by Cllr Hall.

2.3        A secret ballot was held which was won by Cllr Dabell by seven votes to four.

2.4        Resolved – That Cllr Dabell is duly elected as Vice-Chairman of the Children and Young People’s Services Scrutiny Committee for a period of one year.

Report by Diretor of Law and Assurance.

The Committee is asked to review the membership of the Business Planning Group in view of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman appointments.  For the last year membership has been Cllr Linehan (Chairman), Cllr Baldwin (Vice-Chairman), Cllrs Cornell, McGregor and Mercer.

3.1        Resolved – That the Committee appoints the following members to its Business Planning Group: Cllr Linehan, Cllr Dabell, Cllr Burgess, Cllr Cherry and Cllr Cornell.

Members and officers must declare any pecuniary or personalinterest in any business on the agenda. They should also make declarations at any stage such an interest becomes apparent during the meeting. Consideration should be given to leaving the meeting if the nature of the interest warrants it.  If in doubt please contact Democratic Services before the meeting.

4.1        In accordance with the County Council’s code of conduct the following declarations were made:

4.2        Cllr Linehan declared a personal interest as the parent of a child who has an EHCP, under agenda item 8.

4.3        Cllr Smith declared a personal interest as the parent of a child who has an EHCP, under agenda item 8.

4.4        Cllr Cornell declared a personal interest as a governor at Manor Green College in Crawley under agenda item 8.

4.5        Cllr Mercer declared a personal interest as a member of Horsham District Council, a Governor at St Andrews School, Nuthurst, and the chair of the Orchard Hill College Academy Trust which has Brantridge School in West Sussex under agenda items 8, 9 and 10.

4.6        Cllr Burgess declared a personal interest as a member of Crawley Borough Council, under agenda item 10.

4.7        Cllr Dabell declared a personal interest as his daughter is the headteacher of a Primary School in East Grinstead under agenda item 10.

Items not on the agenda which the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency by reason of special circumstances, including cases where the Committee needs to be informed of budgetary or performance issues affecting matters within its terms of reference, which have emerged since the publication of the agenda.

5.1     No urgent matters were raised.

The Committee is asked to agree the minutes of the meeting held on 28 February 2024 (cream paper).

6.1        The Chairman asked that a sentence be added to paragraph 46.14 to recognise the pressures on capital budget if the proposals did not go ahead and in paragraph 46.16 change to start “A Member asked,”.

6.2        That the minutes of the meeting held on 28 February 2024 be approved as a correct record and that they be signed by the Chairman.

The Committee is asked to note the responses to recommendations made at recent meetings.

7.1        Resolved – That the Committee notes the responses to the recommendations provided from recent meetings.

7.2        The Cabinet Member for Children and Young People’s Services reported that the decision report on the Chichester School proposals was in draft format and was hoped to be ready for review later in the month.

7.3        A member expressed concern that they felt the Early Years and Childcare Strategy 2024-27 had not been a full strategy as it had not included Key Performance Indicators or a direction of travel.  It was confirmed that when the delivery plan was ready it would be shared with Committee Members.  The Cabinet Member for Children and Young People’s Services reassured the member that their comments would be taken forward to further discussions on the matter.

Report by Director of Children, Young People and Learning.

The Committee is asked to assess the updated SEND Improvement Plan in response to the areas of improvement identified in the Area SEND Inspection report.

8.1        The Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, Learning and Skills, Cllr Russell, introduced the report highlighting that the West Sussex Local Area Partnership inspection outcomes reflected the self-evaluation carried out prior to the inspection, identifying five areas of improvement to be considered by the partnership.  Following the inspection, the partnership had to produce a strategic improvement plan setting out how these areas of improvement would be addressed.  This had been produced, approved by the Department for Education (DfE) and published by the authority.

8.2        Mr Brian Pope, the independent Chairman of the SEND and Alternative Provision Partnership Board, reported that prior to the inspection the Board’s Terms of Reference had been refreshed and a multi-agency board put in place. There had been good attendance with representation from the parent carer network, colleagues from health, education providers from every phase from early years right through to the college sector, key County Council providers such as social care for both adults and children, public health, virtual school, and the early years standards and effectiveness team.  The Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, Learning and Skills, had been committed and attended regularly and there had been outstanding support from the Director of Children Young People and Learning.  Work had initially focussed on refreshing the self-evaluation following the changed framework that Ofsted had implemented, and then the development of a comprehensive improvement plan.  This work had stood them in good stead for the inspection.  The EHCP Recovery Plan is reviewed at every Board meeting.

8.3        Members of the Committee asked questions and a summary of those questions and answers follows.

8.4        The Area SEND Partnership inspection outcome had been a strong middle rating.  It was noted that local authorities with the lower levels of school funding tended to end up with the worst area partnership inspection outcomes.  Many large local authorities, like West Sussex, tended to have inconsistencies in outcomes.

8.5        It was not felt that lack of scrutiny had impacted the outcome of the inspection.  The issues identified were national issues as a result of a change of Government policy which had led to local authorities doing the best they could to mend the system for young people. 

8.6        The SEND and Alternative Provision Partnership Board had taken the opportunity to look at the health led action plans for the Waiting Well offer, which felt coherent and comprehensive.  It was however critical to drive down waiting lists in health so young people would not need a Waiting Well strategy.  It was highlighted that the NHS were not always meeting the prescribed deadline for providing advice to young people and officers were seeking data on the timeliness of compliance for inclusion in their dashboard.

8.7        It was acknowledged that the pace and effectiveness of change following the 2018 inspection had not met expectation.  Progress prior to the 2023 inspection had been a priority in the department with extra resources being put in place to push forward the agenda.  Scrutiny is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8a

Report by Director of Children, Young People and Learning.

The Committee is asked to scrutinise the progress being made on EHCP recovery plan as part of the SEND Improvement Plan.

8.13     The Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, Learning and Skills, Cllr Russell, introduced the report which highlighted how the service were addressing the backlog in EHCP assessments and how since August 2023 the backlog had stabilised.

8.14     Members of the Committee asked questions and a summary of those questions and answers follows.

8.15     A root and branch review of how the service worked had been undertaken to understand how the team worked and in September 2024 the team would be reconfigured into smaller, more focussed, teams, e.g. post-16 transfers, annual reviews, new assessments.  It was believed this would reduce caseloads and free up time to spend on improving communications with families.

8.16     The SENAT team are committed to improving relationships with families.  The SENAT principal service lead meets regularly with the Parent Carer Forum lead to enable a two-way dialogue.  Staff training focuses on effective communication with parents and carers throughout the whole process.  Work was underway to improve the flow of information for families.  Training is also underway with the West Sussex Parent Carer Forum to help the team understand the lived experience, what forms of communications work successfully and what does not.  All staff will attend this training in the autumn term.

8.17     The service have much more accurate and forensic data on the backlog of assessments and are taking a more performance management approach to looking at the backlog.  New assessments are prioritised based on each child’s individual needs, safeguarding concerns, etc.  The most vulnerable are prioritised to be seen by week 12 of the assessment term.  SENAT are working hard to finalise assessments within the 20-week timescale.  There has been a significant reduction in delays for children with the most complex needs.  The backlog is reviewed as the needs of children change, with prioritisation being a dynamic process which picks up changes in the circumstance.  The overall length of time a child is waiting is reducing. 

8.18     In response to a question on when the backlog would be cleared and 100% of assessments completed within 20 weeks, it was confirmed that currently the national average is 49% of assessments completed on time and only small unitary authorities managing to achieve 100% of assessments in 20 weeks.  The first milestone is to reach the national average by July 2025, however beyond this date further targets would be put in place with the ambition to reach the 100% of assessments being delivered within the 20 week timescale.  It was noted that there are pressures on partners to deliver on their responsibilities, for example in health due to the availability of professionals, a shortage of educational psychologists and the growth in requests for assessments.  However, there have been dramatic increases in responses from social care up from 30% to 80-90% in 6 weeks which was encouraging.  The service was carrying out work to understand why the increase in demand for assessments in West Sussex is higher than the national average.  Cases have also become more complex, e.g.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8b

Report by Director for Children, Young People and Learning.

The Committee is asked to assess the impact and performance of the Family Safeguarding Model since its implementation in February 2022.

9.1        The Cabinet Member for Children and Young people, Learning and Skills, Cllr Russell introduced the report which included the independent review of the Family Safeguarding Model (FSM) undertaken by the University of Bedfordshire. Cllr Russell reported that review was showing that the model was beginning to work and the recommendations in the review were being used to embed and sustain the model and would be incorporated into the continuous improvement plan.

9.2        Dr Bostock, co-author of the review, explained the background to the report and its findings which included a clear strategic leadership approach, good buy-in by staff right down to frontline practitioners, the value of the co-located multi-disciplinary approach, feedback on the family experience, and preparation for resource allocation for future policy direction. 

9.3        Members of the committee asked questions and a summary of those questions and answers follows.

9.4        Members asked what the impact had been of receiving lower grant funding than anticipated from the Department for Education (DfE). Officers confirmed that this had led to the original plans being revised, e.g. reducing multi-disciplinary practitioners down from 13 to 9, and the County Council had provided some funding.  Savings were not yet being realised but there was confidence that they would come in time. Contract renegotiations were under way and would follow the normal financial planning cycle.

9.5        A member highlighted that there needed to be balance between positive quotes and asked how many complaints had been received by the service?  Officers reported that they welcomed comments whether good or bad. They reported that complaints tended to rise in times of inconsistency, often caused by the turnover of staff and social workers.  Action: Officers offered to provide data on complaints to the members. 

9.6        Dr Bostick confirmed that feedback from families in the review was consistent with the wider research message about what families wanted from social care and was representative of local conversations with families. 

9.7        The new model, along with a motivational interviewing approach had helped reduce the number of families who refused help from the service.  There had been a large reduction in the number of care proceedings being issued for children, which allowed more time for staff to support other families.

9.8        Officers always strived for improvement and consistency was the biggest issue they were dealing with.  This was impacted by staffing and recruitment issues, which were being felt nationally, however the FSM work force was now much more stable.  Communication was another area being worked on to improve performance.

9.9        Future risks to the FSM could be the ending of grant funding, difficulties with recruitment and retention of staff, the ambitiousness of incorporating 26 teams and that cost assumptions were often based on the pre-pandemic position.

9.10     The Committee asked how the recommendations from the review would be taken forward.  Some of the recommendations were already being addressed, e.g a service development lead for motivational interviewing had been appointed to embed the practice approach. The recommendations would be shared with all staff  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report by Director of Finance and Support Services, setting out the finance and performance position as at the end of March 2024.

The Committee is asked to examine the County Council’s corporate performance, finance, savings, delivery and business performance for the services within the remit of this Committee for the period January-March 2024.

10.1     The Cabinet Member for Children and Young people, Learning and Skills, Cllr Russell, introduced the report which highlighted progress and the continued challenges.

10.2     Members of the Committee asked questions and a summary of those questions and answers follows.

10.3     Pupils transported by parental mileage – A member expressed disappointment that there had been no significant increase in the number of parents receiving grant funding to transport their children to school.  Officers updated the Committee that a budget had been set and work was underway to try to improve this figure, as part of a wider range of work, including a task force in place looking at spending on home to school transport in general, optimising routes and work with Adult Services.  The Committee agreed to monitor progress going forward. 

10.4     KPI 29 – Attainment gap of disadvantaged pupils compared with non-disadvantaged peers at end of Key Stage 2 – A member asked what work was being undertaken to move this KPI to an amber rating.  Officers reported that the attainment gap was roughly in line with the national average and that several initiatives were underway within schools to target this, looking at performance in schools and increasing the number of support visits from one to three a year.  The Committee would like further information on what is being done to improve this KPI.

Capital Programme

10.5     10 – Bedelands Academy – Cllr Russell, confirmed the project was on track in terms of nominating a contractor, with bids being reviewed toward the end of July and an appointment in August 2024.

10.6     39 – Holy Trinity School – Cllr Russell confirmed agreement had been reached with the Department for Education for funding and work can now proceed.

10.7     Resolved – That the Committee:

1.   Would like to see an increase in ratio on parental milage for home to school transport and will monitor the progress of this.

2.   Raised the current performance on the attainment gap of disadvantaged pupils (KPI 29) and would like further detail on what is being done to improve this. 

The Committee is asked to agree its draft work programme (Appendix A) in accordance with the scrutiny checklist attached (Appendix B) and highlight any further possible items for future scrutiny.

The Committee is also asked to review the Forward Plan entries relevant to its remit (Appendix C) and consider whether it wishes to enquire about any of the forthcoming decisions within its portfolio.

11.1     The Committee agreed the revised Work Programme.

11.2     Members discussed what the Committee could do in relation to the scrutiny of child mental health.  This item had been mentioned at most meetings during this electoral term and still not been scrutinised.  The Chairman reminded members that issues on health and the NHS were within the remit of the Health and Adults Social Care Scrutiny Committee (HASC) and that if there were particular areas of focus for scrutiny that these could be raised with HASC for consideration for future scrutiny. 

11.3     The Committee agreed to the establishment of a Scrutiny Task and Finish Group with HASC to look at the response of the NHS partners to the Area SEND Inspection report.  Cllrs Baldwin, Cornell, Mercer and Smith volunteered for the TFG and Democratic Services were asked to write round members for any other nominations.

There have been no requests for call-in to the Scrutiny Committee within its constitutional remit since the date of the last meeting.  The Director of Law and Assurance will report any requests since the publication of the agenda papers.

12.1     There have been no requests for call-in to the Scrutiny Committee within its constitutional remit since the date of the last meeting. 

The next meeting of the Committee will be held on 11 September 2024 at 10.30 am at County Hall, Chichester.  Probable agenda items include:

·       Performance and Resources Report – Quarter 1 2024-25

·       SEND Improvement Plan – Review of Educational Psychology Service

·       Millais Secondary School Proposals

Any member wishing to place an item on the agenda for the meeting must notify the Director of Law and Assurance by Friday 30 August 2024.

13.1     The next meeting of the Committee will be held on 11 September 2024 at 10.30am.