Agenda item

Consideration was given to a report presented by the Education Welfare Service Manger concerning “Children Missing Education” (CME), a term which refered to all children of compulsory school age who were not on a school roll, and who were not receiving a suitable education otherwise than being at school, for example, at home (Elective Home Education (EHE), privately, or in alternative provision.

The report stated that Section 436A of the Education Act 1996 required all local authorities to make arrangements to enable them to establish (so far as it is possible to do so) the identities of children residing in their area who were not receiving a suitable education.  The duty did not apply in relation to children who were registered at a school, but who were not attending regularly. Children not receiving a suitable education were at increased risk of a range of negative outcomes which could have long term damaging consequences for their life chances. For example, they were at risk of not attaining the skills and qualifications they needed to succeed in life, and were at significant risk of becoming NEET (not in education, employment or training) once they have reached the compulsory school leaving age. Such children may be from disadvantaged families (experiencing multiple risks such as poverty, substance misuse, mental ill-health and poor housing), travelling communities, immigrant families, become unaccompanied asylum seeking or trafficked children, or be at risk of neglect or abuse or disengaged from education. Local authorities must have robust measures in place both to identify quickly when a child is not receiving a suitable education, and to follow through with effective tracking and enquiry systems. 

Data collection at Rotherham was in line with national good practice, and there were links regionally in terms of data collection capabilities.  The system recorded details of CME ‘missing out’, CME ‘missing in’ and pupils ‘not on a school roll’. 

Members noted that local authorities were also required to put in place arrangements for joint working and appropriate information sharing with other local authorities and relevant partner agencies which come into contact with children and families.

Appended to the submitted report were:-

·         Details of the role and function of this Council’s Children Missing Education Officer;

·         Details of Opened Children Missing Education referrals, during the year 1st April, 2012 to 31st March, 2013;

·         Details of Closed Children Missing Education referrals, during the year 1st April, 2012 to 31st March, 2013;

·         A list of children most at risk of becoming Children Missing Education.

Reference was made to: -

·         The Local Authority’s In-year Fair Access Protocol;

·         Recruitment of employees to work with the EU Migrant community.

The Select Commission also considered the contents of this Council’s robust response to the Department for Education consultation (which had ended in February, 2013) about a proposed revision to the statutory guidance in relation to Children Missing Education (reducing the guidance from 44 pages to three pages). This Council’s response outlined some of the identified deficiencies in the revised guidance, some of which do not support strong and effective partnership working, nor do they provide clarity of roles and responsibilities.

Discussion ensued and the following issues were raised by the Select Commission: -

·         Further explanation and discussion was undertaken on appendices B and C that related to CME referrals opened and closed between 1^st April, 2012 and 31^st March, 2013;

o   The actions of the children’s workforce to follow-up all cases of CME;

o   From the list of children most at risk of becoming CME, did a system of priority exist when deciding which cases to follow-up first?  - No, all referrals were treated with equal priority;

o   Children of statutory school age who were not attending school in order to access employment would be followed-up as children on a school roll but who were not attending;

o   Percentage of cases that were never closed;

o   Breakdown of CME into ethnic groups;

o   Rotherham’s comparison against regional neighbours;

o   Data trends since 2005;

o   Confusion about the process for registration onto the school roll, and whether this was a factor in CME.

Resolved:- (1) That the report be received and its contents noted.

(2) That further reports be submitted to a meeting of the Improving Lives Select Commission, in twelve months’ time, to enable this Select Commission to review:-

a) The impact and progress of the Children Missing Education Officer’s     work by the EU Migrant Community Education Engagement Officer and           the two modern apprentices (noting that appointments to these posts          will be made by the end of June 2013); and

(b) progress in respect of the IT developments in twelve months’ time.