Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Jackson and Lammas.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 7 March 2024.

The record of the meeting held on 7 March 2024 was agreed and signed by the Chairperson 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)

There were none.

Other interests

Sharon Docherty declared that she works at St Mary’s School.

Councillor Gurung declared that she works as a member of the Social Work Team in the Independent Fostering Agency.

Councillor Hamilton declared that she was on the Board of Trustees for The Rochester Grammar School and Sir Joseph Williamson Mathematical Grammar School.

Councillor Mandaracas declared that she was an Exam Invigilator at Greenacre School.

On 26 January 2024 Medway Youth Council (MYC) delivered its annual conference that addressed issues related to identity, with specific attention to young people’s experiences of homophobia and racism and how they are tackled. The report made key recommendations from young people about how this should be dealt with within and outside schools.

Discussion

The Vice-Chair of Medway Youth Council (MYC) presented the report on the annual conference which highlighted issues related to identity with a specific focus on experiences and responses to tackling racism and homophobia. The objectives of the conference were to raise awareness and educate on the impact of these issues to young people.

Members raised several comments and questions which included:

• The work of the MYC was commended as it continued to be inspirational.
• It was vital that we work together collectively to break down barriers.
• The profile of the work done by MYC to be raised by all elected members at every opportunity and to encourage more schools to take part in future conferences.
• It was encouraging that the MYC continued as it always had done to tackle difficult topics.
• The MYC to be cautious about the resources they signpost young people to due to the controversy surrounding some companies they referred to in the report in recent years.
• It would be valuable to share the report with headteachers of primary schools to raise awareness and tackle issues earlier in the school phase.

Support provided in schools – in response to a question on what support was provided in schools, the Vice- Chair of MYC said that young people of a broad age range experienced the problems highlighted at the conference. Whilst some young people expressed that their behaviour was not always intentional, the impact however, was resounding as it affected all aspects of mental and physical health. There had been some positive feedback from schools on how the information gained from the conference could be utilised in school to tackle issues.

The Assistant Director of Education and SEND added that the Council provided support to schools on Personal Social Health and Economic (PHSE) curriculum and also work with school councils to help address issues. Details of some of the work on tackling racism in schools was presented to the Committee last year.

Officers said that schools were aware of the racial incidence reporting tool where they could clearly record incidences. The support schools received was in line with their curriculum approach and PHSE programmes which was provided through every school phase.

Managing Inconsistencies- concern was raised regarding the amount of young people that stressed the inconsistency in management of the concerns raised and it was asked what could be done to improve training and monitoring. Officers said that schools were responsible for ensuring their staff received the appropriate training to enable them to effectively manage all types of issues. There was national guidance on responsibilities set in school legislation. There was some disparity in what was reported as an official incident and there was work ongoing on identifying where there were consistency issues and challenging schools where appropriate.

If was further asked what the process was once an incident was raised and what could be done to encourage schools to use the reporting tool. The officer said whilst reporting of these incidences could not be mandated,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

This report sets out why Medway Council should consider adopting care experienced as a protected characteristic.

Discussion:

The Head of Corporate Parenting and the Service Manager Leaving Care introduced the report and gave a presentation which gave some background and context as to the reasoning behind the proposals for Medway to join the over 90 Locals Authorities that had agreed to add care experience as a protected characteristic.

A consultation has taken place with Medway’s Care Experienced Young People to capture their voice on this matter and an overwhelming proportion agreed with the recommendation for care experience to be protected in local policies for Medway.

As a result, recommendations for change were made and would be presented to the Council meeting of 18 July 2024 to join the National campaign with other Local Authorities (LA) to agree to make being care experience a protected characteristic in policy.

Members raised several comments and questions which included:

• The proposals were welcomed and highlighted the collective and high aspirations for Children In Care (CIC). The continuous work to improve life chances for the young people of Medway was commended as well as the current good practice of the Leaving Care Team.
• It was acknowledged that Councils may not necessarily know what this would look like long term but all Councils that had come together to have care experience as a protected characteristic were commended.
• it was important that this be used as a tool for young people to direct what they want and for additional or further stigma not to arise as a result of this. It was encouraging that Medway officers as well as other LAs were mindful of any unintended consequences.

Practicality of care experience- in response to a question on what care experience as a protected characteristic meant practically for young people, officers said that outside on the national collective campaign on this matter, and locally, for Medway having been asked by CIC what it would mean for them, it was about recognition, listening to young people and working to eradicate stigma and discrimination of being care experienced. Initially it would mean Medway reviewing its Council policies and for care experience to be recognised as equally as other factors such as age, gender or race.   Having care experience as a protected characteristic would be used as a tool to enable conversations to take place and raise awareness which would result in reduction of stigma with the longer-term aim of it being normalised.

Budget implications – it was asked what budget implication would be associated with changes to Medway’s policies on this matter, officers said that they may be minimal and would be different for every department. At this stage if Medway decided to agree the recommendations the only impact envisaged would be in updating of policies at this stage and would incur  minimal financial implications

Medway CIC in other Local Authorities – it was asked what this would mean for Medway children placed outside of Medway, officers said that each LA has priorities and financial pressures. Medway service provision would be for Medway young people  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

This report sets out a response to the Member’s item, raised by Councillor Howcroft-Scott, concerning the Early Years/ Preschool Funding Rates 2024-25.

Discussion:

The Lead Education Professional: Quality & Inclusion, introduced the report which provided a service response to the questions raised regarding the Early Years/Pre School-Funding Rates April 2024-25

Members raised several comments and questions which included:

Rates of funding – concerns were raised regarding the funding allocation and the pressures this caused on financial resources of nurseries, their ability to pay staff, maintain overheads and the viability of continuing their businesses. There was a distinct disparity between the funding rates for Medway in comparison to London and other parts of the country’s pre-school provision.

The Finance Business Partner said that funding was received from Central Government who allocated funding based on detailed formulae. Medway distributed 95% of the funding received to providers as part of the 2024/25 early years formula.

Responses to consultation - in answer to a comment that responses to consultations were poor, officers acknowledged that the figures were low but were informed that there had been some changes as a result of feedback received, in particular the top slicing on the two year old funding to allow for a SEND inclusion fund similar to the fund on the three year olds.

The Lead Education Professional: Quality & Inclusion added that part of their role was to support providers, recognise that they were independent business and the challenges faced in relation to the ratio of funding received. There was an Early Years Forum which has been in place for a number of years which brought together providers to air concerns, explore solutions and respond to consultations. A recent survey about sufficiency strategies for staffing had received approximately 110 responses to date which was positive. The Forum would continue to be used to reach out to providers and encourage them to share responses to national issues.

Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) - it was asked why just 1% of the funding was retained for SEND given the rise in number of SEND children, including in early years, many of whom had experienced a distinct rise in SEND children in their settings. The Officer said that they attempted to strike a balance between what providers were given for SEND and what was required for base rate funding. The higher the percentage set aside for SEND, the lower the base rate funding becomes. The formula must also allocate as a minimum, the unit cost that any provider received in the previous year. Whilst all attempts were being made to increase the SEND allocation, it had to be done in a fair, transparent, and gradual way.

The Lead Education Professional: Quality & Inclusion added that there was a team of early years SEND advisors in place to help identify training needs that providers engaged well with and to assist them to differentiate between a developmental delay and a SEND to ensure that they were able to respond to needs appropriately and effectively.

Decision:

The Committee noted the Director’s comments in response to the Member’s Item.

This report provides an overview of the Medway SEND Local Area Partnership (LAP) Improvement Plan 2024-25. The plan was developed in response to findings following the recent Joint Area inspection in February 2024 by Ofsted and CQC. The plan will be led by the SEND Partnership Board co-chaired by the Lead Member and the Chief Nurse of the NHS Integrated Care Board.

Discussion:

The Assistant Director Education and SEND introduced the report on the improvement plan, following the SEND inspection in February 2024. The inspection resulted in a Good grading and highlighted the strengths of the service as well as the areas for improvement. As a result of the inspections the Local Area Partnership (LAP) Improvement Plan was developed and had been approved by Ofsted.

Members raised several comments and questions which included:

Support for families- it was asked what was in place to assist families in understanding and navigating through the system. The officer said that availability of message was highlighted as an improvement and as a result, through revision of the local offer, they had launched inclusion teams (May 2024) at local hubs where families and carers could attend drop-in sessions to obtain support to navigate the system. Families and carers were also able to access support through their schools and health care providers. There was however more to be done on how information was sent directly to parents and carers.

Support for schools - members were informed that there was programme of training for schools, including the trauma informed training and they were able to access various online training tools around pedagogy and need. There was outreach support available for schools who wanted specific advice and guidance on particular issues. Top-up payments were made to school notional budgets when they were identified as having a higher proportion of pupils with Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP) needs who were on waiting list for assessments.

It was further asked in relation to nurseries what was being done to educate early years settings to enable EHCP conversations to take place at an earlier stage. The officer explained that there was a range of training in place for providers on identifying need. The challenge was when there was not an obvious need or diagnosis, then a graduated approach needed to be implemented for those children. The officer confirmed that they do work rapidly to provide support for children with clear needs but in instances of complex needs, support was deliberately staggered to ensure they correct course of action was taken to address needs.

Communication – in response to a comment on how communication with families could be improved and ensuring that information received was inclusive, the officer said that accessibility was a fundamental part of the work being undertaken, not just for children with SEND but for all children and ensuring there was a wraparound service.

Benchmarking – in response to a question on benchmarking against outstanding Local Authorities, the officer said that they took on learning from other Local Authorities, by exploring what was being implemented and utilising examples of good practice.

SEND Reports – it was commented that parents were waiting for a long time for reports which impacted the wait time for support. The officer said that a number of strategies had been put in place including the imminent publication on use of Independent Representatives for reports. In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

Medway’s Council Plan 2023/24 sets out the Council’s three priorities and the measures used to monitor performance. This report and appendices summarise how we performed in Q4 2023/24 on the delivery of these priorities and the actions we are taking to improve performance.

This report also presents the Q4 2023/24 review of strategic risks which fall under the remit of this committee (Appendix 2).

Discussion:

Members raised several comments and questions which included:

·       The Midwifery Team at Medway Hospital past and present, Dr Soe and the team at the Oliver Fisher Special Care baby Unit were commended for all the work they do.

·       It was suggested that the KPI’s for breastfeeding should be focussed on breastfeeding on a long term basis rather than a target that reflected the situation immediately following birth.

·       Officers acknowledged that the ILACS 7 target of 80% was an aspirational target and what the actions and data shared was the developments in areas that were marked as requires improvement and enabled deep dives to take place in areas marked as inadequate.  To achieve this target, the priority for the service was embedding of good practice, recruitment and retention of staff to ensure consistency of good practice and improved performance figures.

·       Further information was requested on what was being done to increase the uptake of breastfeeding and the outcome of discussions of the infant feeding strategy group meeting that took place in May. Additionally costs of the Councils advertising policy on healthy eating. The Democratic Services officer undertook to obtain a response from the Public Health Team.

ILACS 5 – in response to a question on how long before the attainment of the 65% target, which was in relation to the percentage indicators for children in long term fostering and where children had agreed placement. Officers said that a lot of work had been undertaken on permanency plans that link to permanency and stability, some of the work that needed to continue was on accuracy of recording and ensuring the use of the correct codes. There was now a permanency dashboard in place which provided the ability for weekly tracking. There had also been an appointment of permanency workers who would bring more focused targeted work on at risk placement moves and would ensure that reports were provided to fostering panels in a timely matter.

Child protection plans- clarification was sought on the increase in the number of children child protection plans, with a rise from quarter 3. The officer said that the report showed that there was a peak in February, however this had now decreased. There was a slight increase overall, and this may continue due to the extensive work being undertaken to ensure that children were on the right plans.

School performance and attainment 8 score -the red indicators were highlighted as a concern and the officer said that the challenges with key performance indicators was that they were updated in line with exam and national data. The Medway Education Partnership, schools and headteachers groups had this as a priority and the remit of the regional groups and teaching schools on improvement within academy schools.

School performance – it was asked what involvement there was with the two inadequate secondary schools in Medway. The officer said the two schools were academies, they had been supported with development of their improvement plans, but their progress was the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

Discussion:

The Democratic Services Officer introduced the report and drew the Committee’s attention to the two recommendations mentioned in the report.

Members expressed the importance of the Local Plan being discussed at a Committee meeting to ensure that the plans were child friendly and incorporated factors such as access to education and open spaces.

Suggestions were made to add child mental health, a report on M-PACT Moving Parents and Children Together and also a report on DoLS to the work programme.

Decision:

1. The Committee agreed that a report on the Local Plan be presented to the Committee meeting of 1 August 2024.
2. The Committee agreed the suggestions made for topics to be added to the work programme.