Agenda item

The Interim Virtual Head Teacher introduced the Annual Virtual School Head teacher Report 2017. The report outlined:

-        the purpose and role of the Virtual School;

-        places the school in its national and regional context;

-        the current school age population;

-        the key achievements of the last school year;

-        progress since the last inspection;

-        the main challenges for the future;

-        the Attachment Friendly Schools’ Project; and

-        the use of Pupil Premium Plus.

It was stated that in September 2017 there were 337 looked after children, attending 194 different schools in 32 different local authority areas. A member of the Virtual School team would attend the each of the termly Personal Education Planning meetings which gave good oversight of the issues and progress of each child or young person. 

It was explained that there is a major educational gap in the educational outcomes of children and young people in care and their peers who are not looked after. Intelligent interpretations of the outcomes of children and young people in care needed to take into account the numerous risk and protective factors which impact on educational attainment and progress.

These risks included:

-        The high level of turnover of the virtual school population as a result of admissions and discharges;

-        The disproportionate number of children & young people with special educational needs;

-        The significant number of young people attending non-mainstream educational settings;

-        The type and number of care placements;

-        Recency of care; and

-        Emotional wellbeing.

The analysis of GCSE outcomes for Rotherham LAC in 2017 showed that the biggest risk factor, in terms of progress, was type of care placement and recency to care. Of those who made less than expected progress between Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 4, 5 out of 10 had been in care for less than 3 years and only 4 out of 10 were in foster care placements.

The greatest single challenge for the Virtual School, the schools that LAC attend, their carers, their social workers and other professionals is how to re-engage approximately 25 young people (at any one time), predominantly in Years 10 and 11 who are not in receipt of 25 hours education, and those who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) post-16.  Related and interconnected challenges were reducing fixed term exclusions and reducing persistent absence.

Work to address these challenges included:

-        Developing a Creative Mentoring scheme;

-        Exploring a wider range of alternative and complementary provision;

-        The Attachment Friendly Schools’ Project;

-        The promotion of Emotion Coaching;

-        Developing the use of the Solution Focused Staff meetings in schools.

Another significant issue faced by the Virtual School and its partners was the increased numbers of children and young people in care. Between March 2016 and March 2017 the number of LAC increased from 430 to 484 and the rate/10,000 of the under 18 population had increased from 68/10,000 to 76/10,000. This was higher than the regional trend and presented significant challenges in terms of the resources and their deployment in the Virtual School Team.

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues raised/clarified:-

Further details were asked to establish if schools were using ‘informal’ exclusions to manage behaviour? – The Virtual School Team was undertaking work to ensure that fixed term exclusions adhered to the legal process.

Further clarification was sought about the use of Pupil Premium Plus and how this is accounted for. - The Virtual Head could determine how resources were used to achieve the best educational outcomes in accordance with the child’s PEP. Examples were provided about input from educational psychologist and the engagement of creative mentors to work with young people. In addition, the Virtual School Governing Body maintained oversight of spend in schools to ensure that resources are used effectively to maximise outcomes for children and young people.

In respect of ensuring that a looked-after child attended a good or outstanding school, what consideration was given if a child had strong attachment to a school which was judged poor or requiring improvement? - It was explained that in such circumstances it would be established if the placement was in the best interest of the child. If the placement was to continue in a school not rated good or outstanding, attention would be given to how any educational disadvantage could be ‘compensated’, for example by the use of extra-curricular support or activities.

(Cllr Cusworth assumed the Chair temporarily)

It was noted that there was a higher proportion of looked after children with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCP) compared to the wider non-looked after population and many of those were in a non-mainstream educational setting. Are mainstream placements sought for looked after children with EHCPs? - It had been established through research that educational outcomes were better for looked after children who attended mainstream schools. Every effort was made to maintain mainstream placements wherever possible, which included the introduction of specialist training to schools to understand trauma and attachment so they could better support looked after children. Each child’s PEP was reviewed termly and the most appropriate educational placement would be determined on this basis.

Clarification was sought on what changes had been made since the last Ofsted judgement in 2014? Assurance was given that the standard of work was much higher and the systems and processes underpinning the Virtual School team were robust.

Details were asked to establish the level of take-up of the attachment training in schools across maintained and multi-academy trust schools. –

Take-up had been high and has been successfully implemented, with the support of headteachers and senior leaders. A more detailed analysis of take-up would be provided.

What work was undertaken with the designated governors for looked after children? – There was not a designated governors’ network (although there were networks for designated teachers). There is a training session for school governors in February 2018 were this issue could be raised. It was suggested that the issued is referred to the Virtual School Governing Body for consideration.

Given the rise in number of looked after children, how confident was the Virtual Head in the capacity to support looked after children? – The rise in number had placed a pressure on resources, although this was mitigated to an extent through the use of the Pupil Premium Plus. However, recent changes to legislation brought post-adoption children and children who have special guardianship or residence orders under the remit of the Virtual School. It was suggested that a further update be provided to the Committee on the implications of the Children and Social Work Act 2017 once statutory guidance is issued. Further work was underway to examine how additional numbers could be managed on a risk-based approach.

Resolved:- 

1)    That the Committee accepts the report and endorses the key actions outlined in Section 3.

2)    That the role of the Designated Looked After School Governor is raised with Virtual School Governing Body and its response is reported to this Committee

3)    That a further update is provided to this Committee on the implications of the Children and Social Work Act 2017 once statutory guidance is issued.

4)    That information is provided on the take-up of training by maintained schools and schools in multi-academy trusts.

(Councillor Clark resumed the Chair)