Agenda and minutes

1. Mr Thomas proposed, and Mr Mallon seconded that Mr Burns be elected as Vice-Chair of the Children’s, Young People and Education Cabinet Committee.

2. As there were no further nominations, the Chairman declared Mr Burns as Vice-Chair of the Committee.

3. RESOLVED that Mr Burns be elected Vice-Chair of the Children’s, Young People and Education Cabinet Committee.

Apologies had been received from Dr Roper, Mr Bradshaw who was substituted by Mr Mallon, Mr Mayall who was substituted by Mrs Roots, Dr Sturley who was substituted by Mr Finch and Ms Nolan who was substituted by Mr Brady.

1. Mr Stepto declared an interest in item 9 of the agenda, that he was a Governor at Nexus School.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 15 July 2025 was a correct record.

1. Mrs Fordham, Cabinet Member for Education and Skills, gave a verbal update on the following:
   1. Mrs Fordham undertook numerous visits to both mainstream and special educational schools, as well as to services supporting young people experiencing homelessness and in need of assistance.
   2. On 14th August, Mrs Fordham visited Tunbridge Girls' Grammar School for A- Level results day, where she offered her congratulations to students on their achievements. She also highlighted the availability of resources for those requiring additional support.
   3. Mrs Fordham attended GCSE results day at St John’s Catholic Comprehensive School, expressing her congratulations for the students’ academic outcomes and their commendable behaviour and attendance records. She shared her enthusiasm about returning to the school in the future.
   4. Mrs Fordham visited the Home to School transport system operating in Aylesford, emphasising the importance of its efficiency and effectiveness. She commended staff for their efforts in preparing the Q Roots system for its phased introduction in September 2025 and expressed her intention to return to observe its progress and further implementation.
   5. In relation to the Holiday Activity and Food (HAF) Programmes, Mrs Fordham visited DDivine in Northfleet, where she praised the work being done and emphasised the significance of such services. Following the Government’s announcement of continued funding for three more years, she committed to visiting more providers to explore how KCC could help expand the programme to benefit more children.
   6. Mrs Fordham visited the Amber Foundation in Ashford, a charity supporting young adults transitioning out of homelessness. She engaged with the young people to hear their stories and gain insight into how the service had positively impacted their lives.
   7. Mrs Fordham visited CLS at Oakford House to review the provision and funding available for adult education. In light of reductions in Government funding, she noted the shift towards skill-based courses designed to prepare students for employment.
   8. Mrs Fordham visited Nexus School, the only provision in Tunbridge and Malling for children with highly complex needs. She stressed the importance of ensuring that the needs of children with disabilities were fully considered when planning educational provisions.

2. In response to comments and questions it was said:
   1. Due to the timing of the local elections, Mrs Fordham had limited opportunity to visit schools during term time. She prioritised visits to special educational needs schools in light of upcoming decisions. Over the following year, she planned to visit schools that had begun implementing inclusive practices, with the aim of observing best practice and gathering feedback.
   2. Mrs Fordham emphasised that the cost of home-to-school transport was not the primary concern, rather the individual needs of each child were the key factor in decision-making. Work was ongoing to identify the most efficient ways to meet those needs.
   3. Officers were asked to provide a Member with details regarding the number of providers offering activity fund and HAF programmes during the summer holiday period.
   4. Mrs Fordham explained that a home-to-school transport information session had been scheduled to give Members a comprehensive overview of the entire process.

3. Mrs Palmer, Cabinet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

1. Ms Atkinson, Assistant Director Management Information and Intelligence, introduced the report, providing the Committee with an overview of the performance data of the individual indicators.

2. In response to comments and questions it was said:
   1. Ms Atkinson clarified that some targets were based on the academic year, while others aligned with the financial year. She emphasised the importance of ensuring the service had access to the latest national and statistical neighbour benchmarks to set appropriate and meaningful targets.
   2. Ms Atkinson explained that recruitment varied across different areas of the county, noting that it was particularly challenging in districts located deeper within Kent.
   3. The Department for Education (DfE) published annual Education, Health and C    are Plan (EHCP) data each July, based on Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) returns from local authorities. This enabled comparisons across school types and geographical areas. The Kent Commissioning Plan (KCP) was reviewed annually and included a specific focus on SEND. While efforts were made to reduce out-of-county placements, some children had complex needs that could not be met within Kent, necessitating external placements. As part of a wider SEND improvement journey, a special school review was undertaken to assess the provision and distribution of special schools. Several internal initiatives were introduced to support individuals entering social work, resulting in the recruitment of over 50 newly qualified social workers during the year. However, it was acknowledged that burnout led many to leave the profession early, both nationally and locally, creating a need for ongoing recruitment. Challenges were also identified in university programmes and the student pipeline. In response, local programmes were developed and implemented to maintain a steady flow of professionals into children’s services.
   4. It was noted that upcoming reforms under the Children’s Wellbeing Bill were expected to shift responsibilities not only to qualified social workers but also to alternatively qualified staff. Consequently, key performance indicators (KPIs) would need to be reviewed and adjusted to reflect the broader workforce contribution.
   5. There was a focus on schools working collaboratively at a local level. Through a local agreement, a permanently excluded pupil could be placed in another school and supported to succeed as quickly as possible. Mrs Atkinson confirmed that there were no Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) for primary-aged children.
   6. A Member highlighted the potential impact of the merger between the Universities of Kent and Greenwich.
   7. The timeliness of the Performance Monitoring report was influenced more by submission deadlines for Cabinet Committee reports than by technology. Ms Atkinson explained that if later submission dates were permitted, the service could provide more current data. In response to concerns about the number of primary school exclusions, she suggested that the Head of Service could be asked to provide a more detailed report.
   8. Efforts were made to streamline and improve processes in educational psychology. Measures included reviewing previous reports from independent educational psychologists, shortening report lengths and periodically using local educational psychologists to increase capacity. As part of the 20-week EHCP process, work was undertaken to improve inter-service communication, with a pilot  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

1. Mrs Palmer introduced the report and gave an overview into the role of a Local Authority Designated Officer.

2. Ms Burden, LADO and Education Safeguarding Manager, presented a report to the Committee, outlining the significantly transitional year for the service.

3. In response to comments and questions it was said:
   1. Ms Burden was happy to offer safeguarding training to Members.
   2. It was noted that LESAS had not previously engaged with the Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education (SACRE). Ms Burden recorded this for the faith lead to follow up. Kirsty Owens had been identified as the lead officer for work with faith groups. The team had joined a national focus group to explore barriers to engagement and collaborated with the organisation Thirtyone:eight to reach smaller faith communities. While strong links existed with larger groups such as the Church of England and the Catholic Church, smaller groups particularly those led by independent pastors, remained more difficult to engage. Ongoing work with partners aimed to raise awareness of services, address challenges and offer support, sometimes in collaboration with police colleagues or other churches.
   3. The service could be asked by partners within the Local Authority to do particular reviews, also schools select to commission them to do them themselves.
   4. Ms Burden had written peer auditing reports with Lancashire County Council, as well as Oxfordshire County Council, these would be circulated to the Committee after the meeting.
   5. Ms Burden confirmed that parents who educate their children from home could access the service. Whether the child was educated at home or not was not monitored by the service, Ms Burden explained that this was something that could be monitored in the future.
   6. The 75% increase in referrals came from a single local authority, considered to be an outlier. The National LADO Network had explored reasons for the upward trend, identifying factors such as high profile cases including the Lucy Letby case, which had raised awareness of LADO’s among communities previously unfamiliar with it. It was also noted that with publicity demand would increase which was seen as a positive in many ways.
   7. In terms of the ‘inappropriate conduct’ category in the Allegation Types 2024/25 category, Ms Burden explained that it acted as a catch all for a wide range of concerns that could not be categorised elsewhere.
   8. Ms Burden explained that funding was being sought to subsidise courses for early year providers, though this had not yet been secured and no promises could be made. In the meantime, alternative cost effective ways of engaging with providers was being explored, including running network meetings and potentially twilight sessions to avoid impacting nursery ratios
   9. The project being conducted with the Isle of Wight had no relevance to the prison population, alternatively it was related to the service for UASC.
   10. LESAS did not have a blanket view on the use of mobile phones by children in schools. LESAS aimed to support schools to manage the procedures they have in place, Ms Burden noted the difficulty schools would face trying to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

1. Mrs Palmer introduced the report and gave an overview of the purpose of the Private Fostering Annual Report.

2. Ms Bodiam, Service Manager, provided the Committee with an overview of the report, highlighting its findings and how the service was working to improve.

3. In response to comments and questions it was said:
   1. There was support in place under the Child in Need Framework for ‘Child Five’ as referred to in the report.
   2. Ms Hammond explained that private fostering regulations were significantly tightened after the death of Victoria Climbié. It was important to remember that some parents did not want their family arrangements to be investigated by Local Authorities. The service was reliant on families being honest about their arrangements and colleagues in schools and health referring any changes in care to the Local Authority.
   3. Ms Bodiam assured Members that areas that required improvement went back to management and officers to investigate and rectify. There were no comparisons to other local authorities available, but it was something that the team would look into. Mr Kasaven added that the inspection of the service observed a good improvement from the previous inspection in 2017. Only twenty percent of authorities received outstanding rating, this showed that nationally there was a challenge around various aspects of practice.
   4. Ms Crisan explained that it was not a criminal offence to not declare a private fostering arrangement.
   5. Ms Bodiam explained that the domestic abuse incident related to ‘Child Five’ was not linked to a lack of DBS.
   6. Ms Bodiam explained that ‘Child Two’ was not in fostering arrangement, instead they had remained in family arrangement.

RESOLVED that the Committee noted the report and its recommendations for 2025-2026.

1. Mrs Fordham, Cabinet Member for Education and Skills, introduced the item and reasoning behind the decision.

2. Mr Abrahams, Area Education Officer, introduced the report and explained the level of needs at the school and explaining that this was linked to a previous Key Decision taken, the implementation of the decision would allow for extra teaching areas and other rooms to support students. Additionally, Mr Abrahams highlighted that the funding came from dedicated DfE grants.

1. In response to comments and questions it was said:
   1. When asked about the increase costs from those that were projected, Mr Abrahams explained that Officers were disappointed to see such a dramatic increase. In response to this, the service had integrated a second step into the process of contractor’s providing costs. Quantity surveyors were to go through contracts to ensure the costs estimated were appropriate.
   2. When asked about the cost of the original contactor, Mr Abrahams explained that the estimates were pre-construction estimates. Additionally, the contractors would have been paid by revenue funding as part of the design of the project and he would come back to the Committee with the exact figure.
   3. A Member thanked Mrs Fordham for her complimentary comments about Nexus School and encouraged Members to visit the school and see the work that was done.
   4. Mr Abrahams explained that this decision would avoid the need for future children to travel further. The majority of children that would be placed at Nexus School would have otherwise been put into the independent sector, which would have resulted in higher costs and further distances to travel.
   5. When asked if there was a delivery programme in place, Mr Abrahams explained that contractually KCC could not spend money until decision had been formally taken. There was a programme that would have pre-groundwork starting in November 2025, with construction starting at the beginning of 2026 and the target was the building would be completed for the September 2026 cohort.

RESOLVED that the Committee considered and endorsed the proposed decision.

1. Mrs Fordham, Cabinet Member for Education and Skills, introduced the item, explaining the reasoning behind the decision.

2. Mr Adams, Assistant Director Education (South Kent), introduced the report, highlighting the potential saving to the Council of circa £2.6 million. The purpose of the decision was to ensure that there was parity between the funding that went to the academy and maintained school sectors.

3. In response to comments and questions it was said:
   1. In terms of listening to feedback from schools and the potential risk of increased costs if issues arose, Mr Adams explained that top-slicing was not a decision that KCC could make as they needed the support of the Schools Funding Forum or the decision of the Secretary of State. The service thought the safest, lowest risk option was for KCC to continue to provide the service in the way that they had previously. Mr Adams acknowledged that if the questions within the survey had been altered slightly, there may have been more clarity with the responses.  The decision would be debated through Schools Funding Forum and Mr Adams was to relay the feedback made by the Committee to the Forum.
   2. Mr Adams explained that the Government had changed some grant funding that KCC had received, for example if a grant had ceased then equivalent funding would have gone into school budgets. Kent had been slow in telling schools to pay for services with their funding and consequently they had continued to fund services out of the general fund. Mr Adams highlighted that in some cases this would have been a conscious choice and historically, Kent’s maintained schools were amongst some of the lowest funded in the country. As the funding was now with schools, Members would have to make policy choices as to whether KCC continued to fund these services out of the general fund or whether schools should fund services out of their own budgets and what mechanisms would be used to do that. Mr Adams recognised the importance of the challenge to keep a balance between risk to the Council, the cost to schools and the autonomy for people to make their own decisions.
   3. The grant funding previously received by the Local Authority would have detailed its purpose of use. When the equivalent funding went into school's budgets, the expectation was that either schools purchase those themselves or buy them from the Local Authority.
   4. Mr Adams had spoken to colleagues in Infrastructure to investigate how to have conversations with the Forum about meetings of a school's group to have a look at matters such as the FM Contract. The service were aware they needed to be better at engaging with schools around what they were buying on their behalf and how to assure quality. There was a focus on how to work collectively for all schools.
   5. The survey response rate was lower than anticipated, which prompted efforts to encourage greater participation. Whilst proposals had already been shared and it was acknowledged that schools were under significant time  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

1. Mrs Palmer, Cabinet Member for Integrated Children’s Services, introduced the item, explained that these short breaks were a vital service for families who look after profoundly disabled children.

2. Ms Holden, Head of Children’s Commissioning, gave an overview of commissioning and introduced the report.

3. In response to comments and questions it was said:
   1. Mr Lusk, Senior Commissioner, explained that providers were required to record their information on Core Plus, the Council’s early help system. This gave the service an increased amount of visibility on the number of children, their needs type and the outcomes of each session. The service looked into annual reviews of the grant project, to ensure feedback was provided by parents and carers. The service had received positive feedback detailing how important the breaks were for parents and careers and how their children had developed and grown due to the activities. The service was achieving value for money in those grants, however it was highlighted that the budget had not changed in numerous years. The service was continuing to seek best value of money through the voluntary community sector. In terms of next steps there had only been one full year of data, but this had been encouraging. Ms Holden added that an outcomes framework had been developed with colleagues within SEN, which was led by children and the outcomes that they wanted to see.
   2. When asked if there was capacity within the voluntary sector to manage demand, Ms Holden assured the Committee of sufficient capacity and emphasised that this was a vital part of the commissioning landscape.
   3. Ms Holden explained that the use of the term ‘disabled children’ had only recently been changed from ‘children with disabilities’, but she was happy to pass back feedback to the service.

RESOLVED that the Committee considered and endorsed the proposed decision.

RESOLVED that the work programme was noted.