Decision details

6.1       This is a six month monitoring report of the scrutiny review that reported to the Committee on 15 September 2014.   The Assistant Director for Education and Inclusion Special Educational Needs and Disability (ISEND) introduced the item by drawing the Committee’s attention to the many positive outcomes contained within the report and to ask the Committee to note this progress.   The report contains an action plan which is divided into seven sections.   The Committee were then provided with a summary of the some of the key outcomes within these seven recommendations, these points included:

·         Recommendation 1.   This recommendation relates to Home Learning and Children’s Centres.  The Committee were informed levels of co-ordination between different teams working within early years has improved and that the de-designation of children’s centres was incorporated into the department’s plan for the most vulnerable 2 year olds.  

·         Recommendation 3.   This target focused on improving communication with parents and making it easier for them to identify high quality pre-school provision.    The Department undertook a number of strategies to improve this area.  Although one aspect of this work is in abeyance because of a wider website update that is programmed to happen in the autumn.  A communication marketing campaign aimed at 2 year old entitlement was also undertaken.   Uptake in this area is now above the national average, and this has had the benefit of increasing 3 year old uptake. 

·         Recommendation 4.  This target focused on the quality of transitions, assessment and early years teaching practice.   The Village project which is now moving into its 4^th phase has been key to improving transitions and has had a very positive impact.   For example, the outcomes for children within the project have increased at a rate above the rest of the local authority.  The increased level of interest and engagement from schools and their commitment to early years is also viewed as very encouraging.   Increasing numbers of schools are coming forward to take over the early years provision which is on their site.  Similarly, a number of schools have also indicated they wish to lower the age range of their school to take in this early years group.   There is also increased interest from Head-teachers looking to work together in this area – as evidenced by the fact that there are now 10 early years hubs across East Sussex.   With regard to the quality of early years provision, there is very strong improvement as recorded in Ofsted outcomes.

·         Recommendation 7.   With regard to funding, the scrutiny review board recognised that it would not be possible to bring additional resources to this area.   However a question was raised by the review board as to whether resources could be reprioritised.  As a result of this, reports were taken to the Schools Forum which approved allowing some funding that sits within the ‘school’s block’ to be transferred across to the ‘early years block’.  This meant that the higher level of payment for a highly vulnerable two year old (designated as a child in local authority care) could be continued to be paid at an hourly rate which is significantly greater than the normal rate.   With regard to other areas of activity, particularly relating to training the Department have re-prioritised funding across the division’s budget.  For example, the department have granted 30 bursary supports for levels 3 and 5 training.  

6.2    The Committee welcomed the positive outcomes identified in the report and debated a number of issues which are summarized below.

6.3    In response to a query as to why there is an increase in the number of primary schools lowering their age range, the Department commented that it was confident this was the result of schools recognising the advantages of engaging with children at an earlier age, particularly with those children who are most vulnerable to poor outcomes.   It was also clarified to the Committee that whilst language checkers are not universally distributed without support, these are available to parents.  

Transfer of responsibility for Health Visitors to the Local Authority

6.4       With regard to the wording in the action plan relating to ‘very vulnerable pregnant women’, Councillor Forward asked whether this term could cover all women who are pregnant for the first time.  In response it was explained that colleagues in Children’s Centres and the 0-5 Commissioning Group were currently looking at the service specification for Health Visitors as it moves to Local Authority control.    As a result it was not possible to clarify in the meeting the current position, although an undertaking was given to look into this matter and respond in due course.

6.5       On a more general level the Committee were very interested to learn more about the transfer of responsibilities from the NHS to the Local Authority for the Health Visitor service.   The Committee also asked whether more data could be provided regarding the level of visits undertaken as part of the Hastings pilot project.  In response, the Director explained that increasing pressures on the Department’s budget would impact on its ability to provide such data in future - although this area would be looked into.   

6.6    In response to a request from the Committee, an undertaking was given to suggest to the Schools Forum that a letter is sent on its behalf to the DfE regarding the mechanism for calculating funding and to ask that if such a letter was sent, that it should cite the Scrutiny Committee’s interest in this matter (re the first bullet point in the ‘summary of progress’ section of Recommendation 7).   

6.7          Councillor Whetstone highlighted the importance of good quality teaching in Reception.  The Department agreed that this is an important area and commented that one of the benefits of the Village Project has been to raise the profile of this issue and that this has had a direct impact on the quality of teaching in Reception.

6.8   The Committee questioned whether the increase in the number of schools seeking to lower their age range was at the expense of high quality independent providers.   In response the Department explained that it carefully assessed the level of need in a given area before seeking to lower a school’s age range and only did so where there were high levels of demand.  

6.9          Councillor Forward asked for clarification regarding the Department’s comment in Recommendation 7 that it will need to be mindful of the impact of changes in assessment and the Early Years inspection framework and that it will need to work to ensure that the improvement in East Sussex EYFS outcomes is not adversely  affected.  In response the Committee were informed that the new common assessment framework for Ofsted inspection is due in September, although at the time of the meeting the DfE had not released details.  The Department is very aware this is a vital issue for both schools and pre-schools.   However, it is the Department’s belief that those who are doing well now will continue to be assessed as doing well under the new inspection framework.   

6.10 Cllr Shuttleworth highlighted the importance of language and communication particularly for families in deprived areas and asked for a progress report on this matter.  The Department accepted that this is a crucial issue and that the ability of pre-schools and schools to work together to support language was having a direct impact on entry to school.   The Department hope to see additional evidence of this improvement over the summer period.  

6.11   RESOLVED to:

1)    note the recommendations in the report;

2)    request an update report in 6 months.