Agenda item

(Report by Mr M Whiting, Cabinet Member, Education, Learning and Skills and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director, Education, Learning and Skills)

1.               The Chairman invited the Corporate Director, Mr Leeson, to introduce the report.  Mr Leeson highlighted the following:

·       A review of the Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) and alternative provisions began in the Spring of 2012.

·       There were 18 PRUs and alternative curriculum provision for pupils at Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4 in Kent.  Just over half of that provision was good or outstanding.

·       There had been variable quality of alternative curriculum provision in different parts of Kent.

·       The outcomes for pupils in alternative curriculum provision and PRUs was not good.  Many of those young people had gone on to become not in education, employment or training (NEET) because they had not been following pathways that offered progression or achieve qualifications level that would give them good enough pathways post 16.

·       The provision was offering different quality and flexibility in different parts of the Kent.  In some parts of Kent there were good models of PRU provision, offering good reintegration into mainstream schools, good support for mainstream pupils behavioural needs and opportunities for young people to have managed moves between schools if relationships had broken down in one school and a fresh start in another school was the appropriate option.  However in other parts of Kent that protocol and way of working was not so in evidence.

·       All Districts had opted for a new model of working from the 4 options within the consultation document. Schools were taking more responsibility on managing pupils at risk of exclusion or who were excluded and were agreeing with the local authority that the number of exclusions needed to be significantly reduced.

·       Kent had a very high level of permanent exclusion at present and 75% of permanently excluded pupils in Kent had SEN which was the 8^th highest figure nationally and had to be improved.

·       A second phase of the consultation was due to begin and run through to the Spring 2013. 

·       Each District in Kent would work on the practical details of their models, in terms of staffing, governance arrangements, funding, methodology and new ways of working from April 2013 onwards.

·       The government had brought forward national policy which enabled all PRUs to become schools from April 2013 with governing bodies rather than management committees with fully delegated budgets so Kent would need to align what it was doing with this shift in national policy in how PRUs operate in the future.

·       The intention was to bring the new models of PRUs in place by September 2013.

2.               A final report would be submitted to the meeting in March 2013 and the decision on the changes to the funding arrangements etc would be submitted to Cabinet.

3.               RESOLVED that:-

a)         the Cabinet Committee notes the progress on the review of the PRUs and alternative curriculum provision to date and supports the undertaking to extend the consultation on the proposed options for change for PRU/AC provision in each District; and

b)         the final report on the PRUs and alternative provisions be presented to this Cabinet Committee before being submitted to the Cabinet for decision in March 2013.