Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Lammas, Lenny Willams (Church of England Diocese Representative), Lisa Scarrot (Medway Parent and Carer Forum) and Councillor Spring.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 8 January 2026. 

The record of the meeting held on 8 January 2026 was agreed signed as correct.

The Chairperson will announce any late items which do not appear on the main agenda but which he/she has agreed should be considered by reason of special circumstances to be specified in the report. 

There were none.

Members are invited to disclose any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct. Guidance on this is set out in agenda item 4.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

Councillor Joy declared that he was on the Finance Board of Wayfield Primary school.

Other interests

There were none.

This annual report provides an account of the role of the Lead Member for Children’s Services as identified in the Department for Education statutory guidance on the roles and responsibilities of the Director of Children’s Services (DCS) and the Lead Member for Children’s Services (LMCS) (DfE 2012). This report details their ambitions for their areas of responsibility, how they have and will undertake political challenge and leadership and what their priorities and ambitions are for the year ahead. It covers the period from April 2024 until February 2025.

Discussion:

Councillor Adam Price, Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services was in attendance and took questions from the Committee.

Members raised several questions and comments which included:

• The extra funding and support put in place for the Kinship programme was welcomed.
• Maintaining the budget in a demand led service must remain an area of focus.
• The Mocking Bird programme was commended.
• The use of language was instrumental in connecting and building relationships with young people.

Children’s voice – it was asked how it was ensured that children’s voices were heard and were included in shaping services for their future. The Committee was informed that inspectors at the last ILACS visit commented that it was evident that children matter in Medway. Children’s voices were central throughout the service, which took all possible opportunities to engage with and consult young people in planning of services. Joint working took place with young people through the Corporate Parenting Board, and we continued to grow our own, which was evident through the appointment of the Assistant Director of Children Social Care who started her journey at Medway, many years ago as a young person and had worked her way up through to leadership position.

Lived experience –  in response to a question on how it was being ensured that children’s lived experiences, hopes and aspirations were being used to shape services, the Portfolio Holder said that the children’s choice report taken at the start of each Corporate Parenting Board meeting was central to all discussions. The Corporate Parenting Strategy had been reviewed, with changes made to strengthen the Strategy and further align with aspirations of young people.

Areas for improvement - in response to a question on what the response was to Ofsted’s comments regarding instability in senior leadership and issues with recruitment and retention of staff, the Portfolio Holder said that the comments made were in relation to inconsistencies in case recording due to high caseloads. The  service had responded to the areas highlighted for improvement by working with social workers to ensure consistency in recording, evidencing of tasks and activities and supporting them with personal development. There were ongoing issues experienced nationally with recruitment and retention and through various initiatives, the service had been able to recruit more permanent staff to the service. Lessons continued to be learnt on areas of improvement and responded to accordingly. There was a focus on a strong induction programme, and exit interviews conducted had been instrumental in gaining meaningful insight on the reasons staff left Medway. Cultural changes continued to occur across the service, with feedback received that the senior leadership team were a particular strength of Medway Council.

It was further asked how the service would ensure consistency of practice across all teams and ensure the sustainability of progress made in improvement. The Committee was informed that there were seven practice development leads in place across the service and a Principal Social Worker who maintained quality assurance of practice. Monthly audits took place to identify strengths  ...  view the full minutes text for item 758.

This annual report provides an account of the role of the Portfolio Holder for Education. It details their ambitions for their areas of responsibility, how they have and will undertake political challenge and leadership and what their priorities and ambitions are for the year ahead.

Discussion:

Councillor Tracy Coombs, Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services was in attendance and took questions from the Committee.

Members raised several questions and comments which included:

The summary produced by the Medway Parents and Carers forum on the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) reforms was recommended to all to access as it outlined the changes clearly and concisely.

Access to SEND provision - it was asked how parents were being educated on how they could access SEND support in order to alleviate the anxieties around capability of mainstreams schools being able to support their children. The Portfolio Holder said that there were changes being planned for SEND support in order to improve and streamline the system and access to services. The SEND reforms white paper aspirations were for families to receive early support without the need for Education Health Care Plan (EHCP) and formal diagnosis, improve training of staff in schools through national SEND training and ensure that school environments were more inclusive. Work on the reforms was already underway, with the department and partners identifying areas for improvement. Schools continued to work together to meet the needs of children, with 21 schools involved in the Partnership in Neurodiversity(PINs) programme and a further 14 schools due to come on board.

Inclusion rates - it was commented that whilst the drive for inclusion was welcomed, it was important to be mindful that mainstream education was not appropriate for some children with complex needs and that parent and carers views must continue to be sought on appropriateness. The Committee was informed that children’s needs were assessed on an individual basis, with parental wishes being accommodated where appropriate. Children with very complex needs would continue to attend specialist provisions. Medway continued to work extensively to increase local capacity of provision and the two new schools would provide that local provision. Mainstream schools would receive strong support on how to provide and care for children with SEND.

Elective Home Education (EHE) - it was asked how parental confidence was being strengthened to prevent further increases in EHE numbers. The Portfolio Holder said that it was vital to continue to address the drivers behind parental decision to EHE. A pilot study was conducted which revealed that the main reason for EHE was dissatisfaction with schools and lack of confidence in their abilities to meet children’s needs. There was work to be undertaken on reassuring parents and carers, working with schools to assist with mediation and improve their communication and engagement with parents. The education department was being grown to enable increased support for families and check that the education being received by young people was appropriate. At present, the local authority had very few levers due to parental choice and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill would provide the local authority with more statutory responsibilities. This meant that there would be instances where parents would have to ask permission to EHE, in cases where children have an EHCP in order to ensure that those  ...  view the full minutes text for item 759.

This report provides the members of the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee with an update on the Medway Therapeutic Alliance procurement and contract mobilisation.

Discussion:

Officers from North Kent Mind gave a presentation on the Medway Therapeutic Alliance, what is encompassed, the offer for young people and priority groups within that cohort, as well and continuous improvement and governance of the Alliance.

Members then raised several questions and comments:

It was commented that this service would be a safety net for young people to ensure that they did not fall through the gap. However, there was a concern that whilst this service was in place for children up to their 19^th birthday or age 25 for care leavers or children with SEND, that people would not be suddenly dropped upon turning 19 or 26. The Officer agreed that it was vital to ensure continuity of service for young people and whist there were age boundaries within services, they were conscious of ensuring discussions took place at early stage of intervention regarding long term needs,  goals and where appropriate, transition. The priority was on changing the narrative to ensure that young people did not wait till they reached crisis point before reaching out for support.

Promotion and access to support - it was asked how the work of the Alliance was being promoted and what would happen if they were unable to support a young person. The Committee was informed that roadshows continued to take place across Medway and in schools, there were online webinars available and North Kent Mind would work with the Medway Youth Council to promote the service. There were other services that young people could access if the Therapeutic Alliance was not the right service, and there were many online resources that young people could be signposted to. The Therapeutic Alliance would promote a “no wrong door” approach and if their service wasn’t right they would support the young person to access the right support.

Continuity and accountability - it was asked what assurance could be given on leadership amidst concerns that expectations may not be delivered. Officers said that the Alliance was developed to enable access to services before the need for specialist intervention, which would reduce pressure on specialist services. Over the years, different services had been commissioned across many areas, and this had begun to create confusion for parents, carers and families. The Therapeutic Alliance operated on a commissioned lead provider model, in this case North Kent Mind (NKM) as the lead and they subcontracted out to other providers to deliver the services required. NKM would be responsible for holding their subcontractors to account and maintaining service level agreements.

It was further commented that it was crucial to develop cohesion by ensuring that data across all services under the Alliance were uniform in order to be able to hold providers to account. The officer agreed that this was crucial and that there would be several mechanisms of accountability put in place, including measures of engagement and outcomes.

Decision:

a)     The Committee noted that North Kent Mind (NKM) had been successfully awarded the contract for the Medway Therapeutic  ...  view the full minutes text for item 760.

The One Medway Council Plan (OMCP) 2024/28 sets out the Council’s priorities and the performance indicators used to monitor performance. This report and appendices summarise how we performed in Quarter 3 2025/26 on the delivery of these priorities. This report also presents the Quarter 3 2025/26 review of strategic risks.

Discussion:

The Committee received the report and were informed that there were some measured that remained below target, with improvements noted in areas with long term targets. It was anticipated that the children’s social care reforms would positively influence performance.

Measures on a downward trend – in response to a question on what was being done to address the downward long term trend of some measures, the Committee was informed that children’s social care had ambitious targets set which they were working towards achieving. The service worked with partnership leads on understanding trends, and reporting in areas such as Early Help, which was a difficult target to report on, as different systems had been used to try to capture the data required. There was work being undertaken as part of the sufficiency strategy, which was  currently being reviewed, and there was ongoing recruitment of more foster carers which would enable children to be placed locally.

Reduction in Statutory Interventions – it was asked what monitoring of reduction of statutory interventions took place due to a shift in demand in Early Help. The Committee was informed that there had been a shift in terms of families moving over to family solutions but there was more to be done to increase the numbers further. There was additional work being undertaken with partners on Family First and the children’s social care reforms would assist with the work being undertaken in Early Help. Extensive work continued to be undertaken to support moving families down from Child Protection where appropriate. Additional resource had been put into the service to ensure that there was enough capacity in place to support work on direction of travel and achievement of targets.

Decision:

The Committee noted the Quarter 3 2025/26 progress of the performance indicators used to monitor progress of the Council’s priorities,  and the Strategic Risk Summary, as set out in the report.

This report presents the results of the third round of the Council’s capital budget monitoring process for 2025/26. The Council’s summary position is presented in section 4, with section 5 providing the detail for the service areas within the remit of this Committee.

Discussion:

The Committee received the Capital Budget Monitoring Round 3 2025/26 report which was presented to Cabinet on 10 February 2026. The Capital schemes within the remit of this Committee were projected to overspend by £177,000 (£57,000 underspend as at Round 2) against the approved budget of £73.622million.

It was asked what the implications of the transfer of earmarked reserves to the general fund, and what the reason was for round 3 variance for interest and financing. The Committee was informed that an extensive review of earmarked reserves had taken place as it had been realised over time and events had changed since the reserves had initially been set up, some were no longer needed, and it was more beneficial to be used now. There were however other earmarked reserves still in place. In relation to interest on financing, the budget was built based upon predictions by treasury advisers on the likely interest rates that would be incurred for borrowing requirements, who indicated that interest rates would fall quicker than had happened during the financial year.

Decision:

The Committee noted the results of the third round of capital budget monitoring for 2025/26.

This report presents the results of the third round of the Council’s revenue budget monitoring process for 2025/26. The Council’s summary position is presented in section 4 of the report, with sections 5 and 6 providing the detail for each service area.

Discussion:

The Committee received the Capital Budget Monitoring Round 3 2025/26 report which was presented to Cabinet on 10 February 2026. Education was forecasting an overspend of £434,000 which was an improvement of £525,000 from round 2. Children’s Services was forecasting an overspend of £2.750million, which was an increase of £343,000 from the round 2 forecast.

Overspend in children’s services – it was asked how confident officers were that children’s services would reduce the overspend, in particular in client support packages of £2.4millon and that the reduction in the overall budget of £4.6million next year would be achieved. The Committee was informed that the placement support package alleviated foster care placement costs and the increased spend in that area had brought down the overall spend in placements, The service continued to work diligently with finance to bring down overspend and worked to reduce overall packages where appropriate. There was confidence in provision of the right support for children in receipt of support packages, whether at home with carers or in kinship arrangements by providing additional support  to prevent children coming into care where possible.

The Finance Business Partner added that there was confidence at this time due to mapping of current situation and expectations in subsequent years, that the  assumptions made on reduction of the budget for the upcoming year was as accurate as possible based on current data, however small variations could occur at any time and could lead to higher spend.

Overspend in Education and SEND -  there was concern regarding the £1.5million overspend in inclusion which would bring spend to £5.3million and due to the increase in demand for EHCP, there was concern raised regarding the allocation of £4.6million overall budget for the service in 2026/27. The Committee was informed that the £1.5million overspend was a result of agency staff brought in to address backlog and issues with EHCP assessments. This had been included in next year’s budget, with a view to recruit more permanent staff, notwithstanding any changes that needed to be made as a result of reforms. There had also been significant savings realised in the transport budget.

SEND service - in response to a question on how confident the service was in meeting budget requirements for SEND children despite the impact on services, the Committee was informed that officers were as confident as possible in terms of delivery and current support in place, notwithstanding changes that would come with the new reforms and how the service would be redeveloped. There had been announcements of grants to fund the reforms, which the Council would have to bid for and what this could mean for Medway would have to be factored in as more information came though.

Sustainability – in response to a question on fluctuations in long term planning and mitigating reliance on capital receipts, the Committee was informed that the finance team worked alongside services to update forecasts on a regular basis. Forecasts were made with 99% live tracking data and all peaks and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 763.

Discussion:

The work programme was presented for information.

A Member referenced the latest Ofsted inspection of Wayfield Primary school.

Councillor Joy declared that he was on the finance board for the school and removed himself from the meeting during this discussion. It was agreed that the Chairperson would discuss concerns regarding the performance of the school with the Assistant Director of Education outside of this meeting.

Councillor Joy returned to the meeting after discussions relating to Wayfield Primary School.

In response to a suggestion that the Integrated Care Board (ICB) attend a future meeting to be held to account on their performance in relation to various services for children and young people, the Public Health Principal and Strategic Head of Public Health Programmes confirmed that discussions had been taking place with officers from the ICB on attendance at a future meeting and that they could be invited to  discuss performance of initial health assessments once their restructure and reorganisation had been finalised.

Decision:

a)     The Committee noted the report, agreed the work programme as set out at Appendix 1 to the report, and accepted the proposed changes, outlined in italic text on Appendix 1.

b)     The Committee agreed that an item be added to the work programme for a report from the Integrated Care Board on progress on Initial Health Assessments.