Meeting documents

Children's Services Scrutiny Committee
Tuesday, 13 December 2005

CH131205-03

Return to Agenda

ITEM CH3

CHILDREN’S SERVICES SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 3 NOVEMBER 2005

Minutes of the Meeting commencing at 10.00 am and finishing at 12.20 pm

Present:

Voting Members:

Councillor Mrs Anda Fitzgerald-O’Connor - in the chair

Councillor Norman Bolster
Councillor Alan Bryden (in place of Councillor Zoe Patrick)
Councillor Jean Fooks
Councillor Deborah Glass Woodin
Councillor Sue Haffenden
Councillor Steve Hayward
Councillor Hilary Hibbert-Biles
Councillor Bill Service
Councillor Val Smith
Councillor Keith Stone
Councillor Melinda Tilley
Councillor David Turner
Councillor Carol Viney
Mr Chris Bevan
Mr Ben Jackson
Mrs Sue Matthew
Ms Bernadine Spencer

By Invitation:

Mrs C. Thomson (Oxfordshire Governors’ Association)
Ms B. Williams (COTO).

Officers:

Whole of meeting: D. Mitchell (Chief Executive’s Office).

Part of meeting: M. Lloyd (Chief Executive’s Office).

The Scrutiny Committee considered the matters, reports and recommendations contained or referred to in the agenda for the meeting, together with a schedule of addenda tabled at the meeting and agreed as set out below. Copies of the agenda, reports and schedule are attached to the signed Minutes.

    54/05. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS

    Apologies for absence and temporary appointments were received as follows:

    Apology from

    Temporary Appointments

    Councillor Steve Hayward

    -

    Councillor Zoe Patrick

    Councillor Alan Bryden

    55/05. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

    Mr Ben Jackson declared a personal interest in relation to Agenda Item 5 on the grounds that he was a member of CHOICE.

    56/05. MINUTES

    The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 27 September 2005 were approved and signed, subject to the deletion of the text "(to relate to primary education)" in Minute 45/05.

    57/05. PREPARATION FOR ‘SELECT COMMITTEE STYLE’ INVESTIGATION FOR ACHIEVING EDUCATION FOR CHILDREN WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES

(Agenda Item 5)

On 21 September 2005, members of this Committee had agreed to carry out a ‘select Committee style’ investigation at the meeting into how children with learning disabilities were enabled to participate in education. This would include reported budget issues surrounding the Learning disabilities service education and training and proposals to delegate the Statementing budget to schools.

The Committee had before them background material with a view to developing lines of enquiry in relation to the topic. The questions/lines of enquiry would then be addressed to relevant witnesses (officer and Cabinet) at the December meeting.

The Committee also had before them:

  • Best Value Review of Children’s Services 2005

  • Children and Young People’s Plan (CYPP), October 2005

  • Realignment Of Directorates Report to Cabinet – 18 October 2005 by the Chief Executive on behalf of the County Council Management Team

  • Strategy for Special Educational Needs 2004-2007

The Committee AGREED to hold a ‘Select Committee Style’ investigation into the impact of delegating the Statementing Budget to schools at their meeting in December and identified their key lines of enquiry and witnesses (set out below), to be finalised in consultation with The Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Committee.

Key issue:

Impact of delegating the SEN statementing budget to schools. These proposals were currently out to consultation. Consultation ended 15 November 2005. Results would be presented to the Schools forum in December. Report to Cabinet in January.

Witnesses:

    • Councillor Waine

    • Simon Adams and other appropriate service officers.

    • Someone from LSC.

    • Representative from the SEN Delegation Working Group

    • Professor Matthew Griffiths

    • Primary School SENco

    • Secondary School SENco

    • Representative from CHOICE

    • A Headteacher

    • Representative from FE college

Key lines of enquiry:

    1. What are the implications for children with a learning disability of the proposals to delegate the SEN statementing budget to schools?

      2. What are the key budget pressures in this area?

      Concern about construction and use of SEN Index.

    2. How will smaller schools or schools with smaller statementing budgets be helped?

      3. Have any 'domino effects' of delegation been identified?

      How will the proposed 'contingency fund' work?

    3. What risks have you identified in this area?

      4. What are the successes or difficulties in this area?

      How will legal issues such as tribunals be handled?

    4. What comparisons have been made with authorities who have already delegated their statementing budget? what can be learnt from them?

      5. What do you think 'best practice' would look like?

      Method:

      4 Members had volunteered to 'lead' the questioning (using the groups of questions above?)

      They are:

      Jean Fooks (a)
      Sue Haffenden (b)
      Hilary Hibbert-Biles (c)
      Deborah Glass - Woodin (d)

      Officers undertook to circulate questions to members by Friday 18 November

      Still need to decided:

        1. order to see witnesses;

        2. which questions most appropriate to which witnesses;

        3. more specific questions for some of the external witnesses.

    58/05. EVALUATION OF USE OF SCHOOL PREMISES FOR COMMUNITY PURPOSES SCRUTINY REVIEW ("ROOM AT SCHOOL")

(Agenda Item 6)

The former Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee had undertaken a scrutiny review into ‘The Use of School Premises for Community Purposes’. The Review Group had been appointed to identify local community needs for access to school facilities, assess the degree of non-school usage and report back on key findings.

On 1 June 2004, the Executive had considered the review report and resolved to ask the Director for Learning & Culture to arrange for the report to be considered by the Extended Schools Strategy Group and to report back to the Executive at the earliest opportunity with a prioritised action plan.

On 7 September 2004, the Executive considered a report (EX13) which commented on each of the review's 18 recommendations in the light of consideration by the Extended Schools Strategy Group and set out an overall action plan in response. A second group of actions would be taken forward through the Capital Programme and Asset Management Plan Steering Group.

The Executive had resolved: to:

    • welcome the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review Report "Room at School" and thank the members of the Review Group and the officers supporting them for the work they have done on the Review;

    • endorse the action plan in response to the Review set out in the report and Annex 1 subject to the resources identified in paragraph 8 of the report being forthcoming.

It had now been over a year since the (then) Executive had agreed the recommendations of this Scrutiny Review.

The Committee had before them a report (CH6) which outlined the main objectives of the Review and suggested lines of enquiry together with the report by the Director for Learning & Culture (CH6) which included the action plan (Annex 1), County Facilities Management Response (Annex 2) and a diagram showing the extended schools model, to enable them to question the Cabinet Member for Children & Young people.

In the event officers had not been able to prepare a briefing for the Cabinet Member in time for the meeting.

The Committee therefore decided to prepare specific questions to be answered at their February meeting whilst expressing their concern that officers had not prepared a briefing in time for their meeting.

Following debate, the Committee AGREED to ask officers to produce a briefing note for the Cabinet Member for Schools Improvement for their meeting in February on the 29 Actions set out in the Action Plan, outlining against each action: the progress in implementing the action; what the action had achieved; and what had improved as a result of implementing the action.

The Committee further asked officers to comment on how the changes had impacted on the Adult Learning Service.

    59/05. SCRUTINY REVIEW: GIFTED CHILDREN

    (Agenda Item 7)

    On 27 September, this Committee had agreed as part of their work programme to undertake a scrutiny review of ‘gifted children’ and appointed Councillors Deborah Glass-Woodin, Hilary Hibbert-Biles, Val Smith and Melinda Tilley to the Lead Member Review Group.

    The final scoping document had been agreed by the Lead Member Review Group in consultation with a Scrutiny Review Officer. This was attached for information at CH7.

    Councillor Hillary Hibbert-Biles, Chairman of the Lead member Review Group reported on the current progress on this review, and invited members to ask questions on areas of interest and to approve the scoping document for submission to the next meeting of the Scrutiny Co-ordinating Group.

    The Committee AGREED to approve the scoping document, subject to the addition of the words ‘ensure schools’ after the word ‘to’ in the first line under Rationale.

    60/05. TRACKING SCRUTINY ITEMS

    (Agenda Item 8)

    Report back on advice by this Committee to the Cabinet or Council:

    The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to note the outcomes on their advice/recommendation on

    Children’s Centre Strategy; Children & Young People’s Plan; realignment of directorates; Best Value Review of Services for Children & Young People; County Facilities Management – Best Value Review and Stability of Placements for Children Looked After Scrutiny Review; and

        1. in relation to the Children’s Centre Strategy, to nominate Councillors David Turner, Keith Stone and Anda Fitzgerald-O’Connor to look at the outcome of consultation prior to its consideration by the Cabinet;

        2. in relation to the Realignment of Directorates, to review the situation in the Spring;

        3. in relation to the Best Value Review of Services for Children & Young People, to note in February that a report would come back to their February meeting.

        4. in relation to the Stability of Placements for Children looked after Scrutiny Review, to ask the Cabinet Member for Children & Young People to report back to their December meeting on the progress thus far in implementing the Review’s recommendations.

    61/05. FORWARD PLAN

(Agenda Item 9)

This item had been included in the Agenda to enable the Committee to suggest items from the current Forward Plan on which it might have wished to have the opportunity to offer to the Cabinet before any decision was taken.

No items were identified.

in the Chair

Date of signing 2005

Return to TOP