Agenda item

The Committee received a report which set out the work being undertaken in schools in order to provide school children in Key Stage 1 (aged 5-7) with a free school meal.

 

A Member of the Committee asked that the report be deferred until the next meeting as one of the Scrutiny Leads mentioned on the front page of the report had not been consulted on it.  The Committee agreed that the report would be considered at this meeting and if there were any significant issues, this could come back to the next meeting.  A Member stated that it was important to ensure that as a standard practice, Scrutiny Leads were consulted and briefed on all reports concerning their area before being presented to the Committee.

 

The Corporate Director of Children and Families introduced the report and explained that the Government had allocated approximately £150 million nationally of capital funding in the 2014/15 financial year to support the roll out of Universal Infant Free School Meals (UIFSM).  The Corporate Director also made the following points:

 

·                     this universal offer raised a significant issue in that parents and carers of children in Reception, Year 1 and Year 2 may no longer choose to confirm their eligibility for a free school meal.  This was significant as eligibility for free school meals provided schools with Pupil Premium funding and deprivation formula funding;

 

·                     the Council had aligned the capital work on the provision of UIFSM with the school expansion programme to achieve maximum value for money and deliver better UIFSM.  The £500k allocated to Harrow would not be enough to deliver this successfully in all of Harrow’s schools;

 

·                     some schools still had to buy in hot meals as they did not have the facilities to be able to produce these on-site;

 

·                     surveys were being conducted with schools to provide further intelligence.  The information in these surveys included information about school meals and their kitchens;

 

·                     there was likely to be an impact on the funding provided to schools due to the reduction in deprivation linkage and the way funding was arranged nationally;

 

·                     there had been a significant drop in the last year in the number of pupils eligible for free school meals in Harrow.

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Young People commented that the Council was working closely with the schools on this issue and to try to encourage as many parents as possible to declare their eligibility.

 

The following questions were made by Members and responded to accordingly:

 

·                     What was the School Food Standards and what did this mean?  Was this the same across all schools?

 

The Corporate Director would need to confirm this and respond.  The assumption was that this did not apply to Independent Schools;

 

·                     Was the figure of 90.4% of young children in Harrow taking up the UIFSM offer correct?  This contradicted the figures provided further in the report which indicated the percentage of pupils eligible for free school meals.

 

These figures related to two different matters.  The figure of 90.4% related to the percentage take up of those pupils who were eligible for free school meals.

 

·                     The reduction to the percentage to Reception, Year 1 and Year 2 pupils eligible for Free School Meals had reduced from 16.5% to 10.1% between January 2010 and January 2015.  What was the explanation for the decrease?

 

The reason for the decrease particularly in the last year was assumed to be because of the changes requiring parents to declare their eligibility.  More and more parents were becoming aware of this fact and due to the stigma of having to make this declaration, it was natural that more parents would prefer not to make this declaration.

 

·                     Was the decrease to do with more parents being aware that they did not need to make this declaration as there was a decline between January 2013 and January 2014 which had nothing to do with the new scheme.

 

This would have to be revisited and the date on which the new arrangements were announced.  The difference between the table on page 29 of the report would also be clarified.  This information would then be provided to the Committee.

 

·                     Who was responsible for obtaining the declarations from parents confirming their child’s eligibility for a free school meal?

 

Ultimately the responsibility rested with the school itself.  The Council was trying to support schools into ensuring that they could obtain the relevant information from parents.

 

·                     Have schools tried to outline the issues to parents relating to eligibility for free school meals?

 

Schools had been making efforts to ensure that this message was being communicated to parents effectively.  This was not information that they currently held.  The Council was unable to pass on the data they held directly to the schools due to Data Protection laws.

 

·                     Did the Council currently advise parents when applying under the Council Tax Scheme, that their details may be passed on to the schools for identifying that their child would be eligible for free school meals?

 

This was a helpful suggestion and would be considered.

 

·                     Would schools be willing to pay the Council if it offered to chase up the parents on their behalf?

 

In the current financial environment it was difficult to get schools to agree on a collective way forward.  However this was a helpful suggestion and would be discussed with Headteachers.

 

·                     Could a document be circulated to the Committee identifying works associated with the UIFSM project particularly in relation to kitchens?

 

This document would be circulated to Members of the Committee.  It was also important to note that the Council had been looking at what other Local Authorities were doing and how they had been supporting their schools in obtaining the relevant declarations from parents.

 

·                     Was there a way to provide incentive for parents to make a declaration that their child was eligible for free school meals and was there an opportunity to use any funds received in a bespoke way for that specific child?

 

One of the authorities that the Council were currently researching and liaising with, adopted this practice.  This would be considered further.

 

·                     Would the Council be issuing guidelines for Headteachers and schools into the provision of special dietary requirements?

 

Special dietary requirements were always a sensitive issue and the responsibility for this now lies with the Headteachers.  Schools tended to make their decisions based on their cohort.

 

·                     How many primary schools in Harrow were Academies?

 

There were currently five primary school Academies.

 

·                     Could parents just fill in a questionnaire which contained categories which they selected rather than making a formal declaration about their child’s eligibility to have a free school meal?

 

This would not be permitted as the process was subject to audit.

 

·                     Where there any plans to ascertain the general benefits of universal school meals and its impact on pupils?

 

It was expected that the Government would conduct some type of evaluation given that they were investing money into this scheme.  The Corporate Director would speak to the Director of Public Health and see if they would also be doing any work around this area.

 

A Member commented that the concerns expressed by the Corporate Director in relation to the new scheme had not been made apparent in the report and this would have added value to it.

 

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.