Agenda and minutes
PDF 174 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Andrew Spragg, Room 122, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: Apologies were received from Robert Evans and Linda Kemeny. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest. · Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register. · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest.
Minutes: There were no pecuniary declarations of interest, however, Colin Kemp asked that it be noted that he is Chairman of a governing body at a school that could be impacted by changes to deprivation funding, in relation to Item 5 on the agenda.
|
|
|
QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
To receive any questions or petitions.
Notes: 1. The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (10September 2015) 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (9 September 2015) 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
RESPONSES FROM THE CABINET TO ISSUES REFERRED BY THE SCRUTINY BOARD
There are no responses to report. Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
FUNDING SCHOOLS FOR DEPRIVATION
Purpose of the report: Policy Development and Review
This report provides background information on the funding of deprivation within the Surrey schools funding formula. This is currently a contentious issue among headteachers and the subject of a consultation with all schools.
The outcome of the consultation will be discussed at Schools Forum on 1 October and a decision will be made by the Cabinet in October. As a non-executive scrutiny board, the Education and Skills Board is able to make a recommendation to Cabinet or officers to accompany the report on 27 October 2015. Minutes: Declarations of interest:
There were no pecuniary declarations of interest, however, Colin Kemp asked that it be noted that he is Chairman of a governing body at a school that could be impacted by changes to deprivation funding, in relation to Item 5 on the agenda.
Witnesses P-J Wilkinson, Assistant Director for Schools and Learning Lynn McGrady, Finance Manager (Schools)
School Forum Representatives: Ben Bartlett, Hinchley Wood Secondary School Chris Lee, Broadwater Secondary School Kate Keane, Ewell Grove Primary School (Primary Phase Representative)
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Finance Manager introduced the item and talked Members through a number of slides, which are included at Annex A to these minutes.
2. It was noted that the deprivation funding factor in Surrey was 10.8%, against a national average of 8.1%. This higher figure for Surrey was reflective of the fact that the county had a large number of schools and certain pockets of deprivation. The Board was asked to note funding formula changes introduced in 2013 had removed a “tiered deprivation” funding factor.
3. A working group of headteachers had recently recommended to the Department for Education that the tiered deprivation factor be reinstated. However, following rejection of this proposal, the working group has recommended that all schools in Surrey are consulted during September on three options for funding targeted to deprivation. Members were advised that even within the working group membership, views were polarised, resulting in the following 3 options being set out in the consultation:
a. Maintained at approximately 10.8% of total schools’ formula funding b. Reduced to approximately 7.79% of total schools’ formula funding (the national median) c. Reduced to approximately 4.89% of total schools’ formula funding (the median for south east counties).
4. Upon debating the 3 options, Members commented that the report the Board had received did not have sufficient information about the difference each of those options would make in light of the minimum funding guarantee.
5. The Assistant Director for Schools & Learning emphasised the importance of achieving a reasonable compromise and the right settlement. A key priority was for schools to reach a joint conclusion on funding targeted to deprivation. It was clarified that both academies and non-academy schools were impacted by the funding formula for schools deprivation.
6. The School Forum representatives provided some context and insight into the relationship between deprivation and attainment. It was noted that in areas of high deprivation, students were more likely to have learning disabilities, social care and child protection issues. The Board acknowledged that there was a clear link between high deprivation and lower attainment, but emphasised the importance of monitoring progress of pupils throughout their school career and challenging the real impact that funding was having on attainment. The Scrutiny Board was very concerned about the attainment gap and suggested that opportunities should be explored to encourage schools to work in innovative ways, sharing resources to enable enrichment for pupils and minimise the impact of the funding gap. On the same ... view the full minutes text for item 5. |
|
|
SCHOOLS AND LEARNING PRIORITIES 2015/16
The Service will give a brief outline of its priorities for 2015/16. Minutes: Declarations of interest:
None.
Witnesses PJ Wilkinson, Assistant Director for Schools & Learning
Key points raised during the discussion: 1. The Assistant Director for Schools & Learning introduced the item and referred to the one-page service plan set out in the agenda papers.
2. With regard to the key action to work with property and planning to deliver school places, Members acknowledged the importance of joined-up and collaborative working between these key services.
3. It was agreed that safeguarding should be explicitly mentioned in the service plan.
4. Members praised the simple layout of the service plan, but requested that the challenges and opportunities section was developed in the future to include aspirations.
5. It was noted that there was a minor error in the budget paragraph and the Assistant Director for Schools & Learning agreed to correct this.
Actions/Further information to be provided:
None.
Recommendations:
None.
|
|
|
SERVICES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE PRIORITIES 2015/16
The Service will give a brief outline of its priorities for 2015/16. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: Frank Offer, Head of Commissioning for Young People
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Head of Commissioning for Young People introduced the item and drew attention to the on sided service plan included with the agenda papers. It was noted that the plan for Services for Young People focussed on a young person’s employability. It was noted that all known Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET) young people were being worked with on an individual basis. The Head of Commissioning for Young People went on to talk Members through the other key actions for the service over the coming year.
2. Members felt that safeguarding responsibilities should be outlined in the service plan and officers agreed to include this for future plans.
3. There was a query about outsourcing of services. It was reported that rather than outsourcing, a variety of new models of delivery were being considered. A paper would be brought to Cabinet in February 2016.
4. Members were pleased to note the reduction in NEET numbers, but expressed concern about the apparent continuous change within the service. The Head of Commissioning for Young People advised that the Council was the second highest performing authority in the country in terms of NEET figures. The last review of arrangements had taken place in 2011/12 and it was planned that after 3 years a review would take place. It was noted that due to a loss of income and budget alterations, there had been no option to continue with no change in service. Changes had included a focus on community youth work, development of a Resource Allocation System and prioritising community youth work on a need related basis. Plans for the future included looking at different models of delivering services, such as a staff mutual.
5. Members queried whether Services for Young People had the resource and services for such ambitious change. The Head of Commissioning for Young People explained that the Council’s New Models of Delivery Team were aiding the service to explore a range of options.
Chris Norman left
the meeting at 12.20pm. Actions/Further information to be provided:
None.
Recommendations:
None. |
|
|
APPROACH FOR 2015-16
The Board is asked to agree its approach for 2015-16 Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Witnesses: Andy Spragg, Scrutiny Officer
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Chairman introduced the item and explained that he had worked with officers in Democratic Services to identify 5 strands of work for the Scrutiny Board to undertake throughout the year. 3 Members had been allocated to each topic and they were able to decide amongst themselves if they wanted to elect a Chairman of each of these sub groups.
2. The calendar of work and Member sub groups are detailed at Annex A to these minutes.
3. Following the debate at the Scrutiny Board meeting, Members emphasised the importance of continuing discussions around progress, rather than just attainment, for those sitting on the ‘attainment and outcomes’ sub group.
Actions/Further information to be provided:
None.
Resolved:
· That the Board adopt the proposed approach for 2015-16.
· That the terms of reference for the Board’s Performance and Finance sub-group be agreed.
· That the Performance and Finance sub-group’s membership was agreed as: Mark Brett-Warburton, Denis Fuller and Colin Kemp.
· That the terms of reference for the first activity of its Work and Prosperity Team be agreed.
· That the Work and Prosperity team membership was agreed as: Mark Brett-Warburton, Chris Townsend and Derek Holbird.
|
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held on 22 October 2015 at 10am.
Minutes: The Board noted that the next meeting would be 22 October 2015 at 10am. |