Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Day, Councillor Nawaz, Councillor Rush and Councillor Shearman.  Councillor Peach, Councillor Serluca and Councillor Thulbourn were in attendance as substitutes.

There were no declarations of interest or whipping declarations.

·         3 December 2013 - Extraordinary meeting to consider Call-in of Executive  Decision -  Early Years Services Including Children’s Centres

·         6 January 2013 -  Creating Opportunities and Tackling Inequalities Scrutiny Committee

·         17 February 2013 -  Extraordinary meeting to consider Call-in of  Executive Decision - The Future Direction of Children’s Centres Delivery

·         3 December 2013

·         6 January 2014

·         17 February 2014

The minutes of the meetings held on 3 December 2013, 6 January 2014 and 17 February 2014 were all approved as an accurate record.

The decision notice for each decision will bear the date on which it is published and will specify that the decision may then be implemented on the expiry of 3 working days after the publication of the decision (not including the date of publication), unless a request for call-in of the decision is received from any two members of a Scrutiny Committee or Scrutiny Commissions.  If a request for call-in of a decision is received, implementation of the decision remains suspended for consideration by the relevant Scrutiny Committee or Commission.

There were no requests for Call-in to consider.

The report was introduced by the Community Cohesion Manager and provided the Committee with the overview report detailing the outcomes from the Joint Scrutiny in a Day event held on 17^th January 2014.  The event looked at understanding and managing the impacts of welfare reform on communities in Peterborough. The approach had been an innovative one which cut across the remit of all the Scrutiny Committees in order to look at welfare reform comprehensively and gain a deeper understanding. The Committee were asked to agree the recommendations made by the committee on the day and advise on how they wish to take them forward.

Observations and questions were raised and discussed including:

·         Members referred to the recommendation ‘To identify barriers to work and explore how early years provision, support and related services can help parents into employment’ and asked what actions could be expected with regards to identifying barriers to work and getting parents back into work. The Community Cohesion Manager stated that this was a recommendation from Members on the day deferred to Members to respond.

·         One Member responded that one strand of feedback on the day was an introduction to support for single-parent families.  To look at ways that the systems could be used to support parents into employment whilst ensuing that children were still able to attend school and ensuring there were no barriers to parents accessing employment.

·         Members asked what an example would be of a barrier to get work. The Co-opted Member stated that working hours could be impractical with young children or it could be parents making sure that children were in attendance at school when they were working in shift work jobs.  There were different support mechanisms available to help with these types of barriers.

·         The Chair sought approval from Members for each of the recommendations.  All agreed.

·         Members wanted to know what practical actions would be taken to implement the recommendations in the report. The Senior Governance Officer responded that the report would go to each committee for approval.  The recommendations would then be developed into a piece of work for each committee and scrutinised and monitored by the relevant committee. There would also be a piece of work to look at the ‘return on investment’ for the recommendations which would come back to the Committee to show the impact of the event.

·         Members asked if there would be a practical implementable policy at the end of the piece of work.  The Community Cohesion Manager responded that each recommendation would be worked through following an endorsement from the Committee. Actions would then be put in place to work through those recommendations but it could possibly take up to a year to measure.  The outcome of the recommendations would be measured through the ‘return on investment model’. The Executive Director, Children’s Services responded that the work was urgent and in some cases had already commenced.  An example was that Connecting Families was already up and organised and the impact on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Assistant Director Education and Resources introduced the report which  provided the Committee with a summary of  the 2013 validated assessment and examination results for the Early Years Foundations Stage (EYFS – Reception Year – YR), Year 1 Phonics Check, Key Stage 1, Key Stage 2, Key Stage 4 and Key Stage 5. The figures were final and formed part of the assessment for the league tables. The report therefore represented a holistic view of examination results across Peterborough.   The Head of School Improvement went through the report highlighting the following:

• Early Years Foundation Stage – this was the first year of measure.  There had been a good level of development and consistent achievement across the curriculum.  6% above local comparators and 2% below the National Average.
• Year 1 Phonics – there had been a big improvement but the gap had not closed.  11% below the National Average and 8% below the Local Comparators.
• Key Stage 2 had seen some good improvement and now had the closest gap to the National Average.  The rate of expected progress particularly in maths and writing had been pleasing and the gap was closing.
• Key Stage 4 had seen a 7% improvement from 2012 and this was being sustained.  The gap to National Average was closing.
• Key Stage 5 – The gap to National Average was narrowing.
• Floor standards at KS4 remained the same. 
• Key actions to address underperformance.

Observations and questions were raised and discussed including:

·         Members commented that whilst the report had been good in some aspects there was still a lot of negative aspects when comparing to the national average and in particular the gap in relation to the average point score.  The Head of School Improvement responded that he was in discussions with teachers, Heads of Faculty, etc. to ensure they were  focusing on all students including those attaining low grades to ensure they made progress. The Assistant Director Education and Resources responded that there had in some schools been a focus on the high-performing pupils getting 5 GCSEs at the expense of those at the lower end.

·         Members asked if this therefore meant that there was going to be greater focus in future on pupils at the lower end of attainment. Members were advised that schools had taken the message on board and were considering the average point score with greater significance.  The average point score would become more significant because in the future the best eight subjects measure would ultimately replace the 5 A* - C including English and Maths.

·         The Head of School Improvement advised Members that Peterborough had done particularly well in 5 A*-C not including English and Maths and were above National Average.

·         Members noted that the report showed final figures and did not include young people who had not been in education for less than two years.  Members wanted to know if by not including new arrivals on the report it made the figures slightly better or worse. Members were informed that if a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The report was introduced by the Assistant Director Education and Resources and provided the Committee with an update on the reports previously presented to the Committee in April and November 2013 which outlined the vision for supporting education in Peterborough. Significant work had been undertaken to review functions and improve outcomes and the report aimed to finalise the proposals for the future delivery of the Education Service. The report also reflected on the recent Ofsted visit and proposed actions moving forward.

Members were informed of the recent Ofsted Inspection of Peterborough’s School Improvement Arrangements and advised that Ofsted had judged the service as effective.  A copy of the Ofsted report was tabled at the meeting (attached at Appendix 1).

Observations and questions were raised and discussed including:

·         Members congratulated the officers on the positive Ofsted report. Members wanted to know whether officers had felt that Ofsted had missed any areas during their inspection. Members were informed that they had not looked at Looked after Children education or Early Years in any depth. It had taken Ofsted a little while to understand the context of Peterborough but it had been a fair inspection.  The Executive Director, Children’s Services stated that the Ofsted report was a huge accolade and endorsement as to the amount of effort that the School Improvement Team had put into schools. The Ofsted team had gone in to schools and meet with Head Teachers to validate what officers were saying. The Cabinet Member also congratulated the officers and Improvement Team on the outcome of the Ofsted report and it was commendable that Peterborough had performed better than many other Local Authorities.

·         Members wanted to know when the Ofsted report had been received and why it had not been sent to Members before the meeting. The Assistant Director Education and Resources responded that it had been received during the middle of the previous week but had been embargoed until the day after the scrutiny meeting.

·         Members asked how the outcome was arrived at to keep an in house School Improvement Team.  A report had been presented to the Committee a year ago suggesting that this service may be outsourced.  The Executive Director, Children’s Services responded that that when she first took up the post there was confusion as to whether to retain in-house services or outsource. There had been a number of reviews under the previous Director but she felt that there was no evidence or justification or improvement to be gained by outsourcing the service.

·         Members followed-up asking that since the focus of the school improvement team had decreased was the conclusion the same. The Assistant Director Education responded that there were budgetary constraints but the change in focus did not put performance improvement at risk. Councillor Holdich responded that the Ofsted report had validated the decision.

·         Members noted that Serco had been commissioned to undertake a review and wanted to know if that had had some kind of financial implication. The Assistant Director Education responded that Serco  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Alistair Kingsley, Independent Co-opted Member of the Committee and a member of the Task and Finish Group introduced the report which provided the Committee with the findings of the Children’s Improvement Programme Scrutiny Task and Finish Group. The Committee were asked to endorse the findings of the Children’s Improvement Programme Scrutiny Task and Finish Group and accept the recommendations.  The Committee were informed that the Task and Finish Group had felt confident in the sustained progress that had been made.  Mr Kingsley thanked the Executive Director of Children’s Services for the amount of data that had been shared with the Group and the openness and willingness to accept challenge. 

Observations and questions were raised and discussed including:

·         Members referred to page 138, the Audit of Contact and Referral Thresholds and noted that two cases which resulted in No Further Action should have progressed to referral and asked what exactly had happened in those instances. The Executive Director, Children’s Services responded that there was a clear threshold document in place whereby staff apply the criteria for referral against that to see whether they should be accepted into social care. However when this was looked at it was felt that the criteria had not been properly applied.  The case therefore had not progressed to initial assessment when it should have done. 

·         Members of the Task and Finish Group advised the Committee that whilst the review was taking place they had gained a lot more information on the Children’s Services Department and the procedures and policies.  It had given them the opportunity to meet   staff and follow the procedures through rather than just hearing about them.  The continuation of the Members visits to the service areas had been very helpful and it was felt that the staff appreciated the visits from councillors.  The Executive Director, Children’s Services responded that when she first took the post of Executive Director one of the biggest complaints from councillors had been that the service was not transparent. She stated that there was now much greater transparency and openness but there was still a need to scrutinise and monitor the service at meetings.

The Chair thanked the Task and Finish Group for the thoroughness of the review and thanked the Executive Director, Children’s Services for her co-operation and openness during the review.  Members also thanked the Senior Governance Officer for her support of the Task and Finish Group.

ACTIONS AGREED

The Committee noted the report and accepted and endorsed the recommendations within the report.

The Chair introduced the report which proposed that the Committee consider retaining Alistair Kingsley as a Co-opted Member of the Committee with no voting rights for the municipal year 2014/2015.  

The Committee unanimously agreed to the proposal and agreed to review the appointment at the end of the municipal year.

ACTIONS AGREED

The Committee agreed:

To retain Alistair Kingsley as a Co-opted Member of the Committee with no voting rights and that this arrangement be reviewed on an annual basis.

The Committee received the latest version of the Council’s Forward Plan of Key Decisions, containing key decisions that the Leader of the Council anticipated the Cabinet or individual Cabinet Members would make during the course of the following four months.  Members were invited to comment on the Forward Plan and, where appropriate, identify any relevant areas for inclusion in the Committee’s work programme.

ACTION AGREED

The Committee noted the Forward Plan of Key Decisions.

The Senior Governance Officer introduced the report which provided the committee with a list of possible items to be included in the committees 2014-15 work programme.

Additional items for consideration included:

·         School to School Partnership

·         Reception Intake Assessment

·         Pupil Premium

ACTION AGREED

The committee noted the report and agreed to discuss in further detail at the next group representatives meeting.

The meeting began at 7.00pm and ended at 9.05pm