Agenda and minutes

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

Reserve Members may attend meetings:-

(i)                 to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)               where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)             the meeting notes at the start of the meeting at the item ‘Reserves’ that the Reserve Member is or will be attending as a reserve;

(iv)              if a Reserve Member whose intention to attend has been noted arrives after the commencement of the meeting, then that Reserve Member can only act as a Member from the start of the next item of business on the agenda after his/her arrival.

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Member:-

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from:

(a)               all Members of the Committee, Sub Committee, Panel or Forum;

(b)               all other Members present in any part of the room or chamber.

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no declarations of interests made by Members in relation to the business transacted at this meeting.

To consider whether any of the items listed on the agenda should be considered with the press and public excluded on the grounds that it is thought likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that there would be disclosure of confidential information in breach of an obligation of confidence or of exempt information as defined in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.

RESOLVED:  That all items be considered with the press and public present.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 19 October 2005, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 19 October 2005, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record subject to the following amendment:

Minute 237, Paragraph 9 be amended to read, “The Sub-Committee expressed regret that the Director of Learning and Community Development was unable to attend the meeting, however it was recognised that this was due to religious observance”.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents/organisations under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 8.

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were put at the meeting under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 8.

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 9.

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were put at the meeting under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 9.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 10.

RESOLVED:  To note that no deputations were received at the meeting under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 10.

To receive any references from Council and/or other Committees.

(i)                   Children and Young People’s Plan:

RESOLVED:  That consideration of the reference be deferred to the next Lifelong Learning Scrutiny Sub-Committee which would be receiving a report on the Children and Young People’s Plan.

(ii)                 Review of School Organisation Plan 2003-2008:

RESOLVED:  That consideration of the reference be deferred to the Lifelong Learning Scrutiny Sub?Committee in the Municipal Year 2006/2007.  At this time the ‘Higher Standards, Better Schools for All’ would be a Bill rather than a White Paper.

Report of the Director of Organisational Performance.

The Sub-Committee received a report from the Director of Organisational Performance, which set out the progress made on the review.

Members thanked the co-optees and officers who had contributed to the review.  They commented as follows:

·                     that it was unfortunate that the fees for non-accredited Adult and Community Learning (ACL) provision would be increased;

·                     that the re-branding of the ACL service was overdue and that the existing brand of REACH (Reaching Every Adult and Community in Harrow) did not clearly communicate the nature of their service;

·                     that it was important to reach out and support learners with a disability and other ‘hard to reach’ groups;

·                     that the issue of supporting learners with a disability ought to be raised by the Council’s Chief Executive through the West London Alliance, which would enable solutions to be developed for the region;

An officer explained why the fees for ACL provision had to increase and why this would lead to a more equitable system and suggested that the report be referred to the Cabinet meeting as outlined in the officer report.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the report of the scrutiny review group be approved;

(2)  the report be referred to Cabinet meeting on 16 February 2006, so that the issues of fees could be considered in conjunction with the report on the revenues budget which would set out the proposed increase in fees and charges;

(3)  the publications and dissemination of the report be agreed;

(4)  the Sub-Committee receive a progress report of the review at a future meeting.

The Chair welcomed the Portfolio Holder for Education and Lifelong Learning to the meeting.  The Chair invited Members to put their questions to the Portfolio Holder and stated that they could also ask supplemental questions.

Question 1:  Please would you explain the current structure of the Schools Forum? What changes will the Council consider to ensure its future role is fit for purpose?

The Portfolio Holder responded that the government had required all local authorities to set up Schools Forums by 2003.  He added that details of the Forum were published on the Council’s website and that meetings were open to the public.  Harrow’s Schools Forum had 15 members, with primary and secondary schools represented.

The Portfolio Holder added that all Schools Forums had to be reconstituted in accordance with amended regulations by 31 August 2006.  Under the new regulations, a Forum must comprise of at least 15 members, the majority consisting of ‘school’ members. 

Question 2:  What training and when will be available to the new members of the schools forum when they are elected?

The Portfolio Holder responded that new members would receive appropriate induction materials and there would be an induction event for them.  Some training would be provided by Harrow Council but members wishing to attend national or regional events would have to use the Schools Forum’s budget.  In response to a Member’s question about whether it was compulsory for Members to attend training, the Portfolio Holder replied that it was not.

Question 3:  What will the position of non-executive Councillors be in relation to the Schools Forum?

The Portfolio Holder responded that under the new regulations, executive elected members and officers with direct responsibility for strategic resource management could not be members of the Schools Forum.  Non-executive members could serve on the Schools Forum either in their capacity as a governor or as a non-schools member.

Question 4:  How will communication of the activities of the Schools Forum be improved when its role is enhanced?

Question 5:  How will the Schools Forum consult prior to the making of decisions?

[Note:            Questions 4 and 5 were taken together].

The Portfolio Holder responded that there would be little change in communication.  The Schools Forum would still consult schools before taking action and the meetings would still be open to the public.  Schools Forum minutes would be published on the website.

In response to a comment from the questioner that the Forum operated in a closed environment and that the communication lines ought to be reviewed, the Portfolio Holder responded that the business of the Forum was technical, and that, as a result, a choice would have to be made on what aspects of the Forum’s business should be communicated as it would not be possible to communicate everything.

 Question 6:  How does the Portfolio Holder see the scrutiny function working with the Schools Forum?

The Portfolio Holder responded that the Schools Forum could be scrutinised. The Lifelong Learning Scrutiny Sub-Committee would be consulted on the Schools  ...  view the full minutes text for item 256.

Report of the Directors of Business Development and People First.

The Sub-Committee received a joint report from the Executive Director of Business Development and the Executive Director of People First.  The report set out the People First Education Budget. Members were being consulted on the Budget before the matter was considered by the Cabinet and the Council.

An officer explained that this was the first year the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) had been included in the Budget.  She added that the provisional settlement for 2006/2007 had been announced in December 2005 and that Harrow Council had received an increase in Formula Grant of 2% which, when inflation and other costs were taken into account, could leave a deficit.

It was reported that schools had faired better than the Local Authority in the new settlement and that Harrow’s DSG allocations would be at 6.6% per pupil increase in 2006/07.

In response to a Member’s question about whether allocations were made according to Special Educational Needs (SEN) or school numbers, an officer explained that allocations were made on school numbers.

A Member sought clarification on Concessionary Fares.  An officer explained that this included Freedom Passes and Taxi Cards and was not connected to the Education budget.

A Member raised concern that there was a problem with extrapolating the schools’ budget from within the People First Education Budget, suggesting that this issue ought to be addressed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the report be noted;

(2)  that Members’ comments be noted.

Verbal Report of the Group Manager (Achievement and Inclusion).

The Sub-Committee received a verbal report on the Strategic Performance Reporting.  The ‘Attendance Data Summary 2003?2005’ and the Harrow LA Key Stage 1, 2 and 3 and GCSE Results for 2003, 2004 and 2005 were tabled at the meeting.  The data was based on the “traffic light” approach and showed where targets were being met.

An officer explained that the 2005 Key Stage 2 test results in English and Maths were poor.  However, this was being measured against an aspirational rate of 85%, a figure that was significantly higher when compared with that of the neighbouring boroughs.  However, Harrow schools were still performing well and were in the top quartile.  It was reported that additional support was being provided to schools which were underperforming.

An officer reported that high performance had been maintained at Key Stage 3 (2005) except for ICT TA.  She explained why the ICT TA call at Key Stage 3 (2005) was shaded red and was therefore a cause for concern.  However, she was confident that the situation would improve in 2006.  In addition, she expected the aspirational targets set for GCSE results in 2006 to be met.

The Attendance Data Summary 2003-2005 was also tabled at the meeting.  It was reported that Harrow Council had not met the total absence target in primary schools in 2004/2005, but had been making progress each year.  Harrow was within the five authorities nationally that had the lowest percentage of unauthorised absences.  It was suggested that some authorised absences were due to parents taking children out of school for holidays and visits to their countries of origin.

In response to questions from Members, an officer stated that:

·                     the data had been tabled at the meeting as the DFES had only recently published the information;

·                     significant progress had been made in Harrow to improve attendance at schools;

·                     the Education Welfare Service and the schools worked hard on ensuring punctuality and attendance with incentives offered to pupils;

·                     that OFSTED required all schools to show that they were addressing both punctuality and attendance.

A Member mentioned that some schools were recording late pupils as being absent from school.

Members were advised that work was being undertaken to map details of the stages during the year when relevant performance information becomes available, with a view to this work informing the development of future work programmes for the Sub-Committee.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the verbal report be noted; and

(2) the report be referred as an information item to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Verbal report of the Group Manager (Achievement and Inclusion).

The Sub-Committee received a verbal report on the Restructuring of School Development Services.  The officer explained that there had been a proposal to move Achievement and Inclusion service area from the Lifelong Learning Directorate into a new directorate.  The Sub?Committee was informed that until consultation had been completed and the new structure was in place, no restructuring within the School Development Services could take place.  Members were informed that funding had been secured until 2008.

RESOLVED:  That the verbal report be noted.

Verbal update of the Group Manager (Achievement and Inclusion).

The Sub-Committee received a verbal report on the progress of the Children and Young People Plan.  The officer reported that consultation with young people had been indirect and indicated that there was a need to ensure that the voice of the young people was heard.  However, the Plan included many points that young people had wanted to raise.  It was reported that the second draft of the Plan was on the website and was open for consultation.  Notices had been sent to schools and parents, inviting them to comment.  The second draft of the plan was tabled at the meeting.

The officer explained that the Plan was for three years and that it would be reviewed annually.  Following consultation, there would be an option of redirecting or refocusing the Plan.  It was explained that the final version of the Plan would go to Cabinet in February 2006 and thereafter to Council as it had to be published in May 2006.

Members expressed concern that they had not received the Plan prior to the meeting.  This had not given them sufficient time to read and then make comments.  The officer explained that this was due to the second draft having only just been completed.

The officer informed the Sub-Committee that, for the future, a timeline would be produced indicating when certain documents would need to be approved so as to coincide with the meetings of the Council.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the verbal report be noted;

(2)  the Children and Young People Plan be submitted to the Joint Meeting of Lifelong Learning and Health and Social Care Sub-Committees on 18 January 2006 in order to allow Members to make comments on the second draft;

(3)  the final document be submitted to the Sub-Committee at its meeting on 4 April 2006 to enable Members to comment on it before the plan is submitted to Council for final approval.

Presentation of the Group Manager (Achievement and Inclusion).

The Sub-Committee received a presentation on the inspections carried out by OFSTED under the new arrangements.  Members were informed that five schools in Harrow had been inspected under the new arrangements.  Under these arrangements there was an emphasis on the schools undertaking regular self-evaluation under the School Evaluation Framework (SEF), with governors, parents and pupils being involved.

The Headteacher from St Teresa’s School informed the Sub-Committee of her experience.  She explained that governors and Headteachers needed to be proactive and that inspectors would look for evidence to support the self?evaluation of the school and check that the self?evaluation process was itself robust.  The Headteacher informed the Sub?Committee that the inspection took two days, with the inspectors providing a verbal report at the end of the second day.  She reported that each part of the inspection was graded and an average was produced.  It was important that SEF was evidence based rather than prescriptive.  The school had felt that the inspection had been constructive and positive.  It identified areas for improvements.  Members made the following comments:

·                     that teamwork was essential;

·                     that it was important to ensure that the schools and the agencies which delivered the services were proactive;

·                     that good practice ought to be adopted by all schools.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Presentation of the Group Manager (Achievement and Inclusion).

The Sub-Committee received a presentation on Harrow’s ‘Countries of Origin’ Project.  Members were informed of the visit to the Indian cities of Delhi and Bangalore in February 2005.  The visit had been carried out by officers of the Council and teachers from schools in Harrow.  It was reported that India had been chosen for the visit because 20% of the community of Harrow could trace their origins back to India.  An officer who had been on the visit reported that one aim of this project was to offer a professional development opportunity to staff developing their understanding, sensitivity and response to the needs of the Indian community in Harrow. Other aims were to establish links for Harrow schools and to identify appropriate partners and initiatives in order to establish relations for future link projects.

The Headteacher of Roxeth Middle School related his experience.  In India, whilst tradition and culture was being maintained, English language was recognised as the language of opportunity.  The ‘’Each One Teach One’’ project involved pupils educating the local community, particularly women.  It showed a sense of what the schools owed to the local community.

An officer explained that there would be a further visit to India in February 2006.  The visit would be to the city of Ahmedabad in Gujarat state.  The visit would focus on sustainable development and ICT links.

The booklet that had been produced following the February 2005 visit was tabled at the meeting.  It was pointed out that the booklet contained a list of post?visit actions.

A Member asked how the visits were being funded and an officer explained that funding was provided by the Achievement and Inclusion Division and schools.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the report be noted;

(2)  following the visit to Gujarat in February 2006, a report be submitted to the Sub?Committee setting out details of the costs of the visits and how these had been funded, including proposals to visit other countries.

Which the Chair has decided is urgent and cannot otherwise be dealt with.

Adult and Community Learning

RESOLVED: That there would be a brief update on the Adult and Community Learning review at the Sub-Committee’s meeting on 4 April 2006.

In accordance with the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 6.7 (ii) (b), it was

RESOLVED:  At 10.00 pm to continue until 10.30 pm.