Agenda, decisions and minutes

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 20 October be agreed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

1.1       RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 20 October be agreed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

Councillor Hilary Moore declared a personal interest in item 4 as she was an employee of Barking and Dagenham College and on the Corporation Board of Lewisham and Southwark College.

Councillor Jacq Paschoud declared a personal interest in item 7 as she was Chair of the Lewisham Parent and Carers Forum and a Trust Governor of Watergate School.

Councillor John Paschoud declared a personal interest in item 6 as he was on the steering group for Voluntary Action Lewisham, Children and Young People Forum. He also declared a personal interest in item 7 as his wife was the Chair of Lewisham Parent and Carers Forum and a Trust Governor of Watergate School.

2.1       Councillor Hilary Moore declared a personal interest in item 4 as she was an employee of Barking and Dagenham College and on the Corporation Board of Lewisham and Southwark College.

2.2       Councillor Jacq Paschoud declared a personal interest in item 7 as she was Chair of the Lewisham Parent and Carers Forum and a Trust Governor of Watergate School.

2.3       Councillor John Paschoud declared a personal interest in item 6 as he was on the steering group for Voluntary Action Lewisham Children and Young People Forum. He also declared a personal interest in item 7 as his wife was the Chair of Lewisham Parent and Carers Forum and a Trust Governor of Watergate School.

That the update from the Chair of the Children and Young People Select Committee be noted.

3.1       The Chair of the Children and Young People Select Committee, Councillor Hilary Moore, introduced her summary on the Family Lives Showcase which she attended on the 22^nd October 2015.

3.2       RESOLVED:

That the update from the Chair of the Children and Young People Select Committee be noted.

That the report and presentation be noted.

4.1       Ruth Griffiths, 14-19 Strategic Lead, introduced the report to the Committee and highlighted the following key points:

·         The statutory duties around careers advice and guidance in schools were set out in the Education Act 2011, and require governing bodies to ensure that students are provided with independent careers advice from years 8 to 13.

·         There was lots of information and resources available to schools and they were able to work in partnership with external providers and employers.

·         Careers guidance needed toinclude information on the range of education or training options, including apprenticeships and other vocational pathways.

·         Schools would be held to account for the destinations of their leavers through monitoring the details through the annual publication of destination measures.

·         Ofsted had been giving careers guidance a higher priority in school inspections since September 2013.

·         Local Authorities had specific statutory duties around providing support to vulnerable groups such as Children Looked After and those Not in Education, Training or Employment (NEET).

·         Following the presentation at the last meeting of the Children and Young People Select Committee by Steve Besley, the 14-19 Team would provide information on the National Careers and Enterprise Company mentioned in his presentation. This was still in early stages of development but would be promoted to Lewisham Schools. 

·         The Peer Review being conducted by the 14-19 Team and Careers Coordinators into careers guidance, was an important step in monitoring and improving provision in the borough. Committee Members would be welcome to attend review meetings.

·         The Lewisham Information, Advice and Guidance Forum was another useful support and networking opportunity to schools. Committee Members would be welcome to attend the next meeting.

4.2       In the discussion that followed, the following key points were made:

·         There were on-going discussions around Job Centre Plus staff working in schools to support careers guidance.

·         The Council was responsible for monitoring the Lewisham apprenticeship scheme but nationally apprenticeships were monitored by the National Apprenticeship Service

·         At Key Stage 5, Lewisham schools had a lower level than national and inner London averages of young people who progressed to Further Education. Work was being done with schools around being aspirational including progression to top third Universities, Russell Group and Oxbridge.

·         Careers advice should be targeted to ensure that it could adequately support those young people with Special Educational Needs or Disabilities.   

4.2       RESOLVED:

That the report and presentation be noted.

That the report be noted.

5.1       Sara Williams, Executive Director, Children and Young People and Kate Bond, Head of Standards and Achievements presented the report to the Committee and highlighted the following key points:

·         At Early Years Foundation level, Key Stage 1 (KS1) and Key Stage 2 (KS2) Lewisham results were above National and London average levels of achievement.

·         The provisional results at Key Stage 4 (KS4) were lower than London and National average and were similar to the 2014 results. The results at Key Stage 5 (KS5) in 2015 were also below London and National average and remained around the same level as 2014.

·         The Council had been consulting on priorities for a new 3-year Children and Young People’s Plan 2015-2018 entitled “Everybody’s Business” One of the focuses on the plan was the strand “Raising the attainment of all Lewisham children and young people” which included 7 target areas.

·         The School Improvement Team consulted with schools on a new School Improvement Framework in the Autumn term. This included 5 principles which have informed the School Improvement Framework and the wider School Improvement Strategy.

·         The 5 principles of the School Improvement Strategy are: Holistic Approach; targeted; inclusive; accountable; and collaborative.

·         A new School Improvement Framework had been created and distributed to schools which provided strategic vision from the Council.

·         Schools would be placed in one of four categories based on risk and resource required to improve. These were: green – high performing and self-improving; yellow – performing well and self-improving; amber – challenge and possible intervention required; red – serious concerns and rapid intervention required.

5.2       Ruth Holden, Principal, Bonus Pastor Catholic College, addressed the Committee on the School Improvements Strategy and Framework and highlighted the following key points:

·         There had been a full consultation with schools on the new strategy and it was helpful to have a strong, clear vision.

·         There were leadership and training opportunities available and networking events for middle leaders which was helpful.

5.3       Martin Powell-Davies, National Union of Teachers, Union Representative addressed the Committee and highlighted the following key points:

·         Aspiration alone was not enough and poverty was a real issue in poor performance.

·         Teachers had an increasingly challenging workload which was leading some to feel unmotivated nationally and there was not always enough support an encouragement within schools.

·         Recruitment and retention were becoming an increasing problem. A key performance indicator for schools performance should be the staff turn-over of teaching staff.

5.4       In the discussion that followed the following key points were raised:

·         Concerns were raised regarding outcomes for particular groups such as white, working-class boys having low percentages going on to post-16 education and white and mixed-race boys being over-represented in social care. Although it was highly complex analysing the demographics, these and similar issues were being looked at with an approach to early help and intervention.

·         It could be useful to include in the strategy, details of the Mayor’s commitment to a 10 percentage point increase in school results.

·         When setting the Children and Young People Select  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Please note Appendix 5 is Exempt

1)         That the following comments be referred to Mayor and Cabinet:

That

·         The Committee felt that the lines of accountability and governance structures outlined in the proposal were not sufficiently defined and a mechanism needed to be put in place to ensure that there would be sufficient future scrutiny of arrangements.

·         The Committee felt that additional information should be provided as to how the mutual would work in partnership with existing providers and voluntary sector organisations, prior to a decision by Mayor and Cabinet.

2)         That the following recommendation be referred to Mayor and Cabinet:

            That

·         The Mayor ensures he has sufficient information on the matters listed above before making his decision on the future of the youth service.

3)         That the report on the future of the Youth Service be considered at the next meeting of Business Panel for further discussion prior to the decision by Mayor and Cabinet.

6.1       Warwick Tomsett, Head of Targeted Services and Joint Commissioning, gave a presentation to the Committee. Mervyn Kaye, Head of Youth Services was also in attendance.  During the presentation the following key points were highlighted:

·         The Business Plan had been drawn up following the agreed budget reductions to the Youth Service agreed at Mayor and Cabinet on 11 February 2015.

·         There had been lots of involvement and engagement with staff in drawing up the proposals as well as with young people. A recent vote had taken place and 91% of staff were in favour on the proposals.

·         The key benefits included attracting additional external funding streams and maintaining a service whilst reducing overheads to the Council. Also the positive benefit of engagement and involvement with young people and staff on shaping the service provision and ownership.

·         Risks included the buildings and assets and there was proposed to be no asset transfer. The market rental value of assets was nearly £300,000 and it was uncertain as to whether the final proposal would include the Council being paid the full market rate for this.

6.2       Councillor Moore announced that under section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the  press and public be excluded from the meeting for the remaining discussion of this item because it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of part 1 of section 12A of the Act. Namely: Information relating to the financial and business affairs of any particular person (including the Authority holding that information).

6.3       In the discussion that followed the following key points were raised:

·         In terms of Income Generation, there were uncertainties about the exact amount that was possible but new revenue streams would be open to a Youth Services Employee Led Mutual (YELM) that would not be available to the Council. The Business Plan had also been independently tested by an external organisation.

·         With respect to ensuring partnership working and good relationships with other community providers, the contract would specifically list this as a criteria to ensure positive relationships were maintained and enhanced.

·         If the YELM was successful it could be a model that could be emulated by other services such as the Music Hub.

·         Standing orders were suspended at 9.45pm.

·         Concerns were raised over the ability of the YELM to deliver the proposed savings and that the Council would still maintain a large amount of the risk. Concerns were also raised regarding new staff being on different contracts and the potential for this to cause problems in the workforce.

·         Concerns were raised around the governance structures of the YELM and ensuring accountability and scrutiny of the arrangements.

·         Councillor Luke Sorba stated his opposition to the YELM and requested that this be formally minuted.

6.4       RESOLVED:

1)            That the following comments be referred to Mayor and Cabinet:

That

·         The Committee felt that the lines of accountability and governance structures outlined in the proposal were not sufficiently defined and a mechanism needed to be put  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Report to follow

That the report be noted.

7.1       Sara Williams, listed the savings proposals to the committee summarising the additional information listed in the report. In the discussion that followed, the following key points were raised:

·         With respect to savings proposal Q3e, there were alternative events programmes in place and these could be sign-posted to individual service users.

·         With respect to savings proposal J2a, a formal staff consultation could not take place until after the savings proposal had been agreed by Mayor and Cabinet.

7.3       RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

That the report be noted.

8.1       The Chair requested that any further questions committee members had could be submitted to the Scrutiny Manager for follow up and response.

8.2       RESOLVED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That data be provided be broken down by type of school.

That the report be noted.

9.1       Katie Wood, Scrutiny Manager, presented the report to the Committee and requested any comments on the work programme and the items scheduled for the next meeting.

9.2       RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

1)         That the following comments be referred to Mayor and Cabinet in respect of discussion on Item 6, Future of the Youth Service:

·         That the Committee felt that the lines of accountability and governance structures outlined in the proposal were not sufficiently defined and a mechanism needed to be put in place to ensure that there would be sufficient future scrutiny of arrangements.

·         The Committee felt that additional information should be provided as to how the mutual would work in partnership with existing providers and voluntary sector organisations, prior to a decision by Mayor and Cabinet.

2)         That the following recommendation be referred to Mayor and Cabinet in respect of discussion on Item 6, Future of the Youth Service

·         That the Mayor ensures he has sufficient information on the matters listed above at 3.2 before making his decision on the future of the youth service.

10.1    RESOLVED:

1)         That the following comments be referred to Mayor and Cabinet in respect of discussion on Item 6, Future of the Youth Service:

·         That the Committee felt that the lines of accountability and governance structures outlined in the proposal were not sufficiently defined and a mechanism needed to be put in place to ensure that there would be sufficient future scrutiny of arrangements.

·         That the Committee felt that additional information should be provided as to how the mutual would work in partnership with existing providers and voluntary sector organisations, prior to a decision by Mayor and Cabinet.

2)         That the following recommendation be referred to Mayor and Cabinet in respect of discussion on Item 6, Future of the Youth Service:

·         That the Mayor ensures he has sufficient information on the matters listed above before making his decision on the future of the youth service.