Agenda, decisions and minutes

1)    That the minutes of the Children and Young People Select Committee meeting held on 18 November 2015 be agreed as accurate record of proceedings subject to the following amendment:

Monsignor Nick Rothon be included on the attendance list as present.

2)    That following the item on the Future the Youth Service at the Committee meeting on 18 November 2016; the Committee recommends that the Youth Service continue to consult and work with voluntary organisations that deliver youth activities in the borough. In particular, in areas where there is currently no direct Council youth provision, such as the seven wards in Lewisham East, to ensure that the current provision is not reduced or ended when the Mutual comes into operation.

RESOLVED: That

1)    The minutes of the Select Committee meeting held on 18 November 2015 be agreed as accurate record of proceedings subject to the following amendment:

Monsignor Nick Rothon be included on the attendance list as present.

2)    That following the item on the Future the Youth Service at the Committee meeting on 18 November 2016; the Committee recommends that the Youth Service continue to consult and work with voluntary organisations that deliver youth activities in the borough. In particular, in areas where there is currently no direct Council youth provision, such as the seven wards in Lewisham East, to ensure that the current provision is not reduced or ended when the Mutual comes into operation.

Councillor John Paschoud declared a personal interest in item 3 as he was a STEM Ambassador through STEMNET and in item 7 as he as a member of Voluntary Action Lewisham and on their Children and Young People Steering Group.

Councillor Jacq Paschoud declared a personal interest in item 3 as her husband was a STEM Ambassador and in item 7 as her husband was a member of Voluntary Action Lewisham and on their Children and Young People Steering Group.

Councillor Jonathan Slater declared a personal interest in item 4 as he was the London Borough of Lewisham Mental Health Champion.

Councillor John Paschoud declared a personal interest in item 3 as he was a STEM Ambassador (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) through STEMNET and in item 7 as he as a member of Voluntary Action Lewisham and on their Children and Young People Steering Group.

Councillor Jacq Paschoud declared a personal interest in item 3 as her husband was a STEM Ambassador through STEMNET and in item 7 as her husband was a member of Voluntary Action Lewisham and on their Children and Young People Steering Group.

Councillor Jonathan Slater declared a personal interest in item 4 as he was the London Borough of Lewisham Mental Health Champion.

RESOLVED: That

The report and presentations be noted and that the speakers be thanked for attending.

3.1       Yolande Burgess, Strategy Director at London Councils, gave a presentation to the Committee highlighting the following key points:

·         London Council’s, the Mayor of London’s Office and the London Enterprise Panel had worked with London Boroughs and Doctor Deirdre Hughes OBE to produce the report “London Ambitions – Shaping successful careers offer for all young Londoners”.

·         The report made seven key recommendations

1) That every young Londoner should have impartial independent and personalised careers advice including face to face guidance;

2)  That every young Londoner should have 100 hours experience of the world of work;

3)  That every Secondary School and College should have in place an explicit publicised careers policy and curriculum;

4)  That Schools and Colleges have a Governor with oversight for ensuring the organisation supports all students to relate their learning to careers and the world of work from an early age.

5)  All Schools and Colleges have up to date labour market intelligence and information available for students and parents.

6)  “Careers Clusters” should be developed to share resources and intelligence.

7)  The development of the London Ambitions portal for schools and colleges to easily find high-quality careers provision.

·         It was essential that employers were involved in careers guidance and in intelligence gathering on labour market trends.

·         There was £13 million of European Social Fund money available through the London Enterprise Panel which local authorities could bid for to work with young people in particular those who were NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training) or at risk of NEET to form cluster groups.

·         There were examples of good practice across London but the aim was that every young person in London got a good careers offer irrespective of location or any other factor.

·         The Information, Advice and Guidance network in Lewisham was strong and robust.

3.2       In response to questions from the Committee, the following key points were raised:

·         The 100 hours of experience of the world of work could include a range of experiences and was not limited to work experience placements. These experiences could start from the age of seven years old.

·         There was evidence that some young people were closing off options to themselves from a very young age and in particular many girls were closing off STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) from as young as 5 years old due to perceptions of what was gender appropriateness.

·         In terms of involvement of employers in careers offers to young people it was important to consider all types of employers including sole traders and micro businesses as well as larger employers. It was important to uncomplicate the requests to Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) to reduce barriers to their involvement.

·         London Councils was consistently lobbying for schools to have funding for careers guidance. Once processes were imbedded the resources needed to maintain them would reduce but at first it could be more resource intensive to embed a successful careers offer in the first instance.

·         The London Ambitions Portal was due to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

RESOLVED: That

The report be noted.

4.1       Caroline Hirst, Commissioner and Wendy Gerraghty, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM) introduced the update on the response to the Committee’s recommendations from their review on Young People’s Mental Health. In response to questions from the Committee, the following key points were raised:

·         In recommendation 7 of the review, the Children and Young People Select Committee had recommended that it should carry out further work looking at incidences of self-harm amongst young people and why this had increased. This could be considered when looking at the 2016/17 work programme.

·         Presentations of self-harm at Lewisham Hospital Accident and Emergency were monitored and were increasing. This mirrored National and London trends. There was still not full understanding of the reasons for these increases, but it was felt that young people were under increasing levels of pressure.

·         To respond to the increased incidences of self-harm, Lewisham Council had secured resources through NHS England to work in partnership with University Hospital London, the Police and SLaM to create a crisis care service for Children and Young People. Work is being undertaken through the Headstart Lewisham programme to raise awareness on mental health.

·         Young Advisors present, reported that they felt a lot of pressure came from schools themselves and it felt like many schools were not always geared up to recognise signs of mental illness, stress and anxiety.

·         Transition between young people with mental health issues to adult social care could be challenging due to the different threshold requirements to meet eligibility criteria for support. Some services such as those that supported young people with psychosis had smoother transition paths than young people who had more sporadic needs.

·         The London Borough of Lewisham had been allocated £609k per year funding over the next five years through the “Future in Mind” programme. This funding would be for targeting specific issues surrounding access, workforce development, and support for vulnerable children.

·         Analysis of demographics and data collection was important when planning services and LB Lewisham and the Lewisham Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) were in the process of recruiting for a specific data management post in the Child and Adult Mental Health Service to support this.

·         The HeadStart Lewisham programme had a focus on support for parents and carers in addition to children and young people aged 10-16. This included an online resource called “Work it out Lewisham”. This could be linked to careers advice services.

·         Standing orders were suspended at 9.55pm.

4.2       RESOLVED: That

The report be noted.

Presentation only

RESOLVED: That

The presentation be noted.

5.1       Chris Threlfall, Head of School Infrastructure and Margaret Brightman, Pupil Places Manager gave a presentation to the Committee, a copy of which is included in the agenda. Following questions from Members of the Committee, the following key points were highlighted:

·         23% of Children with Special Educational Needs or Disability were placed outside the borough or in independent schools. This was often through a lack of provision within the borough to cater for specific needs.

·         There was potential for a temporary new provision on the vacated Brent Knoll site which would increase SEND provision in Lewisham.

·         Schools would be facing increasing budgetary pressures with the continuing Government cuts to funding.

·         Raising standards in secondary provision across Lewisham would mean less movement of children out of borough at the end of year 6 which would help ensure places in years 7 and above were filled.

5.2       RESOLVED: That

The presentation be noted.

RESOLVED: That

The report be noted.

6.1       RESOLVED: That

The report be noted.

RESOLVED: That

The report be noted.

7.1       Nathan Pritchard, Interim Service Manager, Early Intervention Services gave a presentation to the Committee. During the presentation and in responses to questions from the Committee, the following key points were highlighted: 

·         A total of £1.9 million savings were being made between 2015/16 and 2016/17 from the Early Intervention Services Budget. This was divided evenly over the two years. 

·         All Children’s Centres had remained open except for Heathside and Lethbridge which had been planned for closure previously as the building was being demolished.

·         There were regular performance meetings with providers and they were meeting performance targets.

·         School based centres had retained the same opening hours as previously but there was some reduction at sites covered by area providers. The reductions were largely down to now only being open when activities were taking place rather than having an administrator present and the centres being “open” even when there were no activities.

·         The amendments to the number of targeted families providers were expected to work with in the children’s centres was down to new more robust methodology in assessing the profile of the areas.

·         There had been a problem at Clyde (Area 1) with the “Tribal Management System” which was now being resolved. 

7.2       RESOLVED: That

The report be noted.

RESOLVED: That

The report be noted.

8.1       Katie Wood Scrutiny Manager introduced the report to the Committee.

8.2       RESOLVED: That

The report be noted.

There were no referrals to Mayor and Cabinet.

There were no referrals to Mayor and Cabinet.