Agenda and minutes

Mr Ridings proposed, and Mr Northey seconded, that Mrs Cole be elected Vice Chairman of this Cabinet Committee.

Carried  

1.          Mr Scobie made a declaration regarding Items B1g and E1 advising that he was a governor at Bromstone Primary School and he had family members that worked at Laleham Gap (Special) School respectively.

2.          Mr Balfour made a declaration regarding Item B2b advising that he was the Chairman of Governors for Grange Park School.

3.          Mr Crowther referred to Item C2a advising that he was a Swale Borough Councillor.

4.          Mr Gough referred to Item B2a and advised that he was a parent with children at school.

1.          In response to a question, the Chairman advised that he would speak to the Director of Governance and Law on the issue of public speaking at Cabinet Committee meetings.

2.          RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 19 March 2013 be signed as an accurate record by the Chairman subject to grammatical changes being made.

1.          The Cabinet Member, Mr Gough, and the Corporate Director, Mr Leeson, gave their verbal updates.

2.          Mr Gough began by given Members his early observations in his new role as Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and this agenda. 

3.          Mr Gough highlighted 3 areas in which Local Authorities had a vital role to play as a model for Kent to follow:

·    Securing places by ensuring that there was adequate provision

·    Support for vulnerable learners

• Support for Families and Standards by acting as a champion for  parents and providing better standards

4.           Mr Gough then mirrored items on the agenda to those 3 areas where improvements were being made to services including the work being carried out through the Standards and Improvement Team working in partnership with schools to produce improvements.

5.          Mr Gough then gave an update on the Sevenoaks Grammar School Satellite proposal advising that he had chaired a public consultation meeting on 20 June, held at Invicta Grammar School, Maidstone, to discuss its proposals and vision for the Sevenoaks Grammar School Satellite. Parents from Sevenoaks were present.   The consultation was due to close on 19 July and it was anticipated that an application would be presented to the Secretary of State shortly after.  

6.          He advised Members of a recent additional proposal received from The Weald of Kent Grammar School, Tonbridge, for the Sevenoaks Grammar School Satellite which would be considered seriously. 

7.          Mr Gough stressed that his ambitions were not only for the most academic pupils but for the entire population of young people in Kent which would be met through; improving standards and closing the attainment gap for disadvantaged groups which included the raising of the participation age to ensure that young people Not in Education Employment or Training (NEET) and those not getting that extra element of learning built into their experience post 16.

8.          Mr Gough was keen to pursue the joining up of services both internally and externally, particularly with health. This would be carried out through building on the progress that had already been made; he gave the example of the Integrated Adolescent Support Service, which was a major theme of the Children’s Bill. 

9.          Following on, Mr Leeson advised that the local authority continued to sustain and develop a sense of community and family among all schools in Kent.  This was carried out through the various ambitions set out in Kent’s strategic documents.  There were over a hundred schools which were academies in Kent and 500 schools that continued to be maintained directly by KCC.  He stressed the importance of Kent being very ambitious as the largest County in the Country for Kent’s children and for Kent to be the best place to be educated.  There had been significant success but there was still a long way to go.

10.      One of the roles of the local authority was to change, modernise and develop its own approaches and services which were currently being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 110.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access and Mrs M White, Area Education Officer- East Kent, were present for this item)

1.          The Cabinet Committee considered a report on the results of a public consultation on the proposal to expand Lansdowne Primary School (Community), Sittingbourne.

2.          Mr Shovelton and Mrs White noted comments and responded to questions by Members which included the following:

a)         Mr Shovelton advised that all Kent schools had a School Travel Plan to ensure the safety of children arriving at, and leaving, their school and this would be revised in liaison with Highways and taking in consideration the views of the local residents.  The public would also have the opportunity to raise concerns regarding highways issues and the impact on their community through the consultation for planning consent of new school buildings. 

3.          RESOLVED that:-

a)         the responses to comments and questions by Members be noted; and

b)         the Education Cabinet Committee endorses the decision to be taken by the Cabinet ember for Education, Learning and Skills to expand Lansdowne Primary School, Faversham by issuing a public notice to expand the school.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access and Mrs M White, Area Education Officer- East Kent, were present for this item)

1.          The Cabinet Committee considered a report on the outcome of the public consultation on the expansion of Lower Halstow School (Community Primary), Lower Halstow, Sittingbourne.

2.          Mr Shovelton and Mrs White noted the comments and responded to questions which included the following:

a)    Mr Shovelton confirmed that the Lower Halstow School Ofsted inspection report required improvement, the required improvements were being made and there was confidence in the school leadership that the school would cope with the expansion.

b)    Mr Shovelton advised that all Kent schools had a School Travel Plan to ensure the safety of children arriving at, and leaving, their school and this would be revised in liaison with Highways and taking in consideration the views of the local residents.  The public would also have the opportunity to raise concerns regarding highways issues and the impact on their community through the consultation for planning consent of new school buildings.

3.          The Chairman then put the recommendations to the vote which was carried.  Mr Scobie requested that his abstention be recorded.

4.          RESOLVED that:-

a)    the responses to comments and Members be noted; and

b)    the Education Cabinet Committee endorses the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education, Learning and Skills to expand Lower Halstow Primary School, Sittingbourne by issuing a public notice to expand the school.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access and Mrs M White, Area Education Officer- East Kent, were present for this item)

1.          The Cabinet Committee considered a report on the outcomes of the public consultation on the expansion of Newington Community Primary School, Ramsgate.

2.          Mr Shovelton and Mrs White noted the comments and responded to questions which included the following:

a)    Mr Shovelton advised that all Kent schools had a School Travel Plan to ensure the safety of children arriving at, and leaving, their school and this would be revised in liaison with Highways and taking into account local views.  The public would also have the opportunity to raise concerns regarding highways issues and the impact on their community through the consultation for planning consent of new school buildings.

3.          RESOLVED that:-

a)    the responses to comments and questions by Member be noted; and

b)    the Education Cabinet Committee endorses the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education, Learning and Skills to expand Newington Primary School, Newington by issuing a public notice to expand the school.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access and Mrs M White, Area Education Officer- East Kent, were present for this item)

1.          The Cabinet Committee considered a report on the responses to the public notice period recently closed for the proposal published by the Governing Body of St Philip Howard Catholic Primary School to discontinue the school with effect from 31 August 2013.

2.          Mr Shovelton advised that officers had been working closely with the School parents and the Arch Diocese and all children had been offered a place in a local school and a number of children were already attending their new school.  One parent with an offer of a school had not made up their mind to take the place.  Celebration events were also being arranged to give children parents and teachers the opportunity to say their goodbyes.

3.          Mr Shovelton and Mrs White noted the comments and responded to questions by Members which included the following:

a)    Mr Leeson advised that St Philip Howard had not been viable financially for some time and there had been a lack of attention to the requirements of the children.  The Ofsted inspection judgement did not help matters and lead to parents opting not to send their children to the school especially as there was another successful Catholic School in the area close by. 

b)    Mr Shovelton advised that there was still a surplus of school places in the Herne Bay. 

4.          RESOLVED that:-

a)    the responses to comments and questions by Members be noted;

b)    the outcome of the Statutory Public Notice be noted; and

c)     the Education Cabinet Committee endorses the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to agree that the Governing Body of St Philip Howard Catholic Primary School should implement the closure of the school.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access and Mrs M White, Area Education Officer- East Kent, were present for this item)

1.          The Cabinet Committee considered a report on the results of the public notice for the proposal published by the Governing Body of The Charles Dickens School to expand the school by adding a sixth form for 200 students, increasing the school’s upper age limit from 16 to 19 years.

2.          Mrs White advised that The Charles Dickens School had put forward a proposal for a sixth form following considerable representation from its students and local parents.  Mrs White advised that there were few schools in the area with sixth forms.  The school intended to work closely with St Georges Church of England High School, which was located almost opposite The Charles Dickens School.  The original proposal was to have an academic “A” level based curriculum but during the consultation the school had worked closely with the Skills and Employability Team to look at the gaps analysis to develop a curriculum with a vocational base which the analysis showed was required.  The Charles Dickens School continued to work closely with the Local Authority, local schools and East Kent College to develop the most appropriate curriculum.

3.          Mr Shovelton and Mrs White noted comments and responded to questions by Members which included the following:

a)    Mrs White advised that subject to the curriculum being settled, there was general agreement from the other local schools to the expansion.

b)    Mrs White advised that students in the proposed sixth form may be able to access certain subjects at St Georges CE High School and discussions were still ongoing with East Kent College.

4.          RESOLVED that:

a)    the responses to comments and questions by Members be noted;

b)    the outcome of the Statutory Public Notice be noted; and

c)     the Cabinet Committee endorses the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to agree that The Charles Dickens Church of England School should implement the expansion by adding a sixth form.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access, was present for this item)

1.          The Cabinet Members considered a report on the results of the consultation on the proposed term dates for the school years 2014-15 2015-16 and 2016-17.

2.          RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorses the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to determine the school term dates for2014-15 and in light of amendments made following the consultation the school term dates for 2015-16, and 2016-17.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.          Mr Gough introduced the report that detailed the summary of responses received on the consultation on the proposed draft Strategy for Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) in Kent.  He highlighted that there would be particular focus on meeting the needs of; the increasing number of children assessed with autism and emotional behavioural conditions, reducing the out of County placements and closing the gap of SEND attainment.

2.          Mr Leeson highlighted the work undertaken to improve integrated working and joint commissioning arrangements between education, health and social care.

3.          Mr Gough and Mr Leeson noted comments and questions by Members which including the following:

a)    A Member stressed the need for timely assessments and diagnosis for children with autism, and highlighted the disruption that a child faced if incorrectly diagnosed.

b)    An opinion was expressed that children with SEND, where possible, should be placed in a local mainstream school.

c)     A comment was made that the transition arrangements of children with SEND to Further Education placements needed to be improved.

4.          RESOLVED that:-

a)    the responses to comments and questions by Members be noted;

b)    the responses received during the  stakeholder consultation be noted; and

c)     the amended Strategy for Special Education Needs and Disabilities (SEND) attached to the report and consultation responses and comments by this Cabinet Committee be presented to Cabinet in July 2013 for final approval be noted be noted.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.          The Cabinet Committee considered a report on a proposal to commission additional school places at two schools in the Gravesham District.

2.          RESOLVED that the Education Cabinet Committee endorses the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to carry out public consultations on the proposals to enlarge Chantry Primary School and Lawn Primary School, Gravesend.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mrs M White, Area Education Officer, East Kent and Mr K Shovelton,

Director of Education Planning and Access were present for this item)

1.          The Cabinet Committee considered a report on the proposal to commission additional school places in one school in the Swale District.

2.          RESOLVED that the Education Cabinet Committee endorses the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to carry out a public consultation to permanently expand Rodersham Primary School, Sittingbourne, adding five places in Year R from September 2014.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform, and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr P Cater, Leader of Kent County Council, was present for this item)

1.          Mr Gough introduced the report that set out the priorities for the Education Learning and Skills Directorate for 2013 to16 and highlighted that there would be significant focus on the following: 

·       Reducing the achievement gap figures for pupils from low income backgrounds, children in care and pupils with special educational needs and disabilities.

·       Employability skills, particularly for post 16 year olds especially in English and Mathematics.

·       The most vulnerable learners with learning difficulties and disabilities

·       Improving the data on those Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET).

2.          Mr Leeson advised that the improvements would be made through the delivery plans set out in the focused and targeted strategies such as the Schools Improvement Strategy, the SEND Strategy, the 14-24 Strategy, the Early Years and School Improvement Plans and the Education Commissioning Plan etc which were designed to have an impact on the quality of delivery to children and young people.  There also needed to be genuine partnerships with schools and post 16 education providers.  There was a lot of sharing to make this a reality on the ground.

3.          Mr Gough and Mr Leeson noted comments and responded to questions by Members, which included the following:

a)    Mr Leeson advised that there was little difference in Kent to a school being an academy or not in terms of how the local authority worked with them.  In terms of the raising of the participation age there were no legal sanctions of a young person who was not willing to participate.  There had been a rapid increase in the apprenticeship programme, which had been successful.  More employers wanted to employ an apprentice than there were apprentices coming forward for, there was a new training programme coming on line in September, the advice and guidance given on the options available by schools was improving, all of which needed to be expanded on to provide different quality pathways for young people which is what the 14-16 Strategy sets out. The participation rate was 89% of young people in training and learning post 16, the closing of this gap would continue.

b)    Mr Leeson stated that he considered that work had been undertaken to dispel at an administrative level and in practice in Kent that 5 good GCSEs including English and Maths were needed to start an apprenticeship, it was desirable and should not be a barrier.  Employers were looking for a good attitude and employability skills, which included the ability to organise themselves.  An element of the apprenticeship should include an element to improve the young person’s language and numeracy.  He advised that there were now more steps towards an apprenticeship which included the new training programme that came on line in September 2013.

c)     Mr Carter advised that young people not attaining the relevant qualifications  ...  view the full minutes text for item 122.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.          The Cabinet Committee considered a report on the mid year review that detailed the progress made in implementing the Kent Commissioning Plan for Education 2012-17 since its adoption by Cabinet in September 2012.

2.          Mr Leeson noted the comments and responded to questions which included the following:-

a)         Mr Leeson advised that there was a commitment for a 5%-7% surplus capacity in any planning area.  However, it was not expected that this could be achieved in every smaller locality within an area. This meant becoming better in using local intelligence and responding to parental preference in the planning process through the Commissioning Plan.  The Plan would be updated on an annual basis and a mid year review.  This highlighted where there were pressures and Thanet was experiencing real pressures and was one of the more challenging parts of Kent.  The inward and outward migration was something that the LA did not know enough about.  There were continued discussions with Headteachers who were the first to know of the parental pressures for additional places.

b)         Mr Leeson suggested the term “mobile classroom” be replaced with the term “modular build” to move away from the idea of poorly built structures. 

c)          Mr Leeson advised that the LA did not always require permanent expansions especially when there was a temporary bulge in a particular year.  Mr Shovelton highlighted 3 key areas from the review of the 5 year Commissioning Plan which were 1.That all of the additional school places that had been committed to had been created for September 2013;  2. The levels of accuracy in forecasting were good; and 3.  One of the positive impacts of having enough sufficient surplus places supported the needs of parental preference.  Mr Shovelton explained that the figures in the table referred to on Page 194 were current figures from March 2013.  The school expansions in Thanet would adjust those figures and the percentage would rise.  Additional school places would still need to be created in the Thanet area.  The impact of having a medium to long term plan would reduce the need to put in modular buildings.  Mr Leeson concluded that successful commissioning relied on ongoing discussions with districts councils and planners to make accurate forecasts.  The district councils welcomed the plan which informed their planning process in terms of educational need and the financial contributions expected to come from developers towards putting in additional educational capacity.

d)         The Chairman added that a report on the consultations on the relocation of some special schools would be submitted to the Education Cabinet Committee at its September meeting.

e)         Mr Leeson advised that there was significant movement in Dover in terms of educational quality with 80% of primary schools in Dover being good or outstanding.  However, this was not the case for the secondary school options for parents in the Dover district where significant improvement was required.  This would be carried out though the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 123.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform, and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.          Mr Gough introduced a report that monitored performance and the framework and sought the Cabinet Committee views on whether they were receiving the right information.  He gave examples of where there was general progress and clarity on where more progress was required.

2.          Mr Gough and Mr Leeson noted the comments and responded to questions which included the following:-

a)         Mr Leeson explained why there was so much variance in attainment in primary schools in various Kent districts eg Maidstone and Dover, in comparison with statistical neighbours by saying that within the education system in England there was too much difference in the quality of practice in schools which he considered needed to be addressed.  There was also very significant variation between schools in terms of quality of provision and outcomes.  He considered that through national policy and local approach it was the local authorities’ duty to reduce that variation as children had one chance to have a good education and it should not be a lottery.  The starting points were different too in parts of Kent.  The current Improvement Strategy was trying to build on significant years of underperformance and under expectation in different parts of Kent.  As we improvement we want to see the variation reduce and in some areas there may be more variance as some schools improve at a faster rate.  The success of the Improvement Strategy was how well we target our effort.  The local authority would focus its effort where the need was greatest improvement was needed.  Mr Leeson advised that half of the primary schools in Maidstone were not judged to be good which clearly reduced the options for parents and reduced the opportunity for the children in those schools.  Mr Leeson assured Members that where that variation was great, additional targeting was being made to address it.

b)         Mr Gough advised that Mr Bird put forward a question at the 23 May 2013 Council meeting, regarding the performance of the primary schools in Maidstone, which he gave a full answer to.

c)          In reply to a question, Mr Leeson confirmed that the figures included academies.  We work closely with the academies.

3.          RESOLVED that the responses to comments and questions by Members and the current performance against the set targets detailed in the Education, Learning and Skills Performance scorecard be noted.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform, and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.          Mr Leeson introduced the report that summarised the performance of Kent Schools in Ofsted inspections during the period September 2013-May 2013.  He highlighted the significant increase in Kent schools that were good or outstanding.  In 2010-11 56% of primary schools were good or outstanding which was a disappointing figure. Through the School Improvement Strategy there was a strong focus to improve this position.  Over the past 18 months those schools judged to be good or outstanding had increased to 68% which need to be continued.  He gave an example that in Dover 83% of schools were good or outstanding.  There had been a significant reduction in the number of school that were judged to be satisfactory.  The 74 schools that were inspected since September 2012, 66 of them were judged as good, some of those 66 schools had been judged to be satisfactory on several previous inspections.  Nearly 90% of those schools that were inspected since September 2012 had a good outcome.  This was very encouraging and reflected on the significant work that had been undertaken by schools and the quality of leadership.  Mr Leeson stressed how critical the quality of leadership was for improving schools and improving the outcomes for the pupils.

2.          There were now SEND schools and secondary schools that compared favourably with the national picture.  Kent Primary schools figures were still behind the national figures but improvement would continue as it had over the past 18 months.  There were now 135 schools in Kent that still required improvement [Not rated by Ofsted as good or outstanding].  Mr Leeson stated that efforts needed to be focused on those schools’ improvement.  Those schools under government policy and Ofsted requirements had to improve in 2 years.  That was the latest expectation from the Chief Ofsted inspector.  This had already been written in the Bold Steps for Education that a satisfactory judgment was not good enough as it did not produce the rate of progress and deliver the rates of pupil progress.  There was confidence that the quality of leadership in schools would improve.  There was also a need to support those existing good schools to ensure continued improvement.  Schools judged as good should be working to be judged outstanding.

3.          Mr Leeson noted comments and responded to questions by Members which included the following:

a)         An opinion was expressed that a failing school should not become an academy.  The focus should be on those schools having the right leadership to improve the delivery of education for those pupils.  It was important that the improved results of primary school pupils continued onto secondary school and into employment.  Mr Gough advised that this was a default national policy that when a school went into category that it moved to academy status which the local authority had to work with.  He advised that Kent had the confidence of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 125.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform, and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr J Reilly, Principal Policy Officer, was present for this item)

1.          Mr Gough and Mr Reilly introduced a report that set out the progress in 2012-13 against the priorities and target for each ELS Service Business Plan.

2.          Mr Gough highlighted priorities 4 - Long Term Spatial Planning and 5 - Securing Developer Contributions for Essential Infrastructure on page 260, where the progress was on an amber RAG rating.  This was an area that presented ongoing challenges.  KCC officers and the former Cabinet Member had worked with district councils on their housing plans which he would continue to do.      

3.          RESOLVED that the progress made against the key priorities contained within the seven Education, Learning and Skills Service Business Plans Outturn Monitoring sheets 2012-13, appended to the report be noted.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform, and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills) 

(Ms S Dunn, Head of Skills and Employability Services, was present for this item)

1.          Mr Gough introduced the report on the summary of the consultation with the wider group of stakeholders on the establishment of 8 new delivery hubs across the County for PRU and Alternative Provision, which meant a shift in Policy, the budget and delivery.  He highlighted section 5 of the report on the profiles and outcomes of the 454 pupils attending PRU and AC provision, of which 163 pupils were in Key stage 3 and 292 pupils in Key stage 4.

2.          Ms Dunn advised that there was now 100% engagement with Headteachers on this debate.  The 8 new delivery hubs were established to ensure that there was a locality maintained contact with the pupils on their progress into education and employment.  There had been no objections to the proposals.

3.          Mr Leeson explained that the review was designed to improve the chances of those pupils in particular in improving their attainment in English and Mathematics.

4.          Mr Gough, Mr Leeson and Ms Dunn noted comments and responded to questions which included the following:

a)         Members congratulated officers on the work carried out to date.

b)         An opinion was expressed that with the raising of the participation age of those continuing their education at school there would be more challenges for this provision.

c)          In response to the question on the budget available for therapeutic intervention, Mrs Dunn advised that this would be resourced through the funding that was held centrally by KCC for alternative curriculum and working with Headteachers to think about their resources on how they support young people in their schools with challenging behaviour or at risk of becoming disengaged. 

d)         Ms Dunn explained that the new delivery model through the review combined some of the provisions for Key Stage 3 and 4 which lead to a reduction in overheads including a reduction of Heads of Centres and a reduction in the property portfolio.  The intention was that some of the realignment of provision would enable to districts to develop their own intervention and prevention services alongside KIAS which was critical in the provision of PRUs.

e)         In reply to a question, Ms Dunn advised that many of those young people did not want to attend a traditional school or college setting but would prefer to go directly into employment and KCC role was to assist that.  There were a significant number of PRU learners that had gone into apprenticeships at level 2 and 3.  The pathway into employment and assistance with training was the next stage of this review.

5.          Mr Gough stated that the continued ownership of the outcomes of those young people would remain with the school up to the age of 19 years.  The local authority retained the responsibility of ensuring that the outcomes were good.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 127.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform, and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.          The Cabinet Committee received a report for information in accordance with the process set out in Appendix 4 Part 7 paragraph 7.18 (5) of the Constitution on decisions that were taken outside the meeting cycle.

2.          RESOLVED that decisions:-

were taken in accordance with the process set out in Appendix 4 Part 7 paragraph 7.18 (b) of the Constitution be noted.