Agenda and minutes

The Chair (Cllr Bramble) welcomed members to the Children and Young People Board meeting.

            No apologies were received and no declarations of interest were made.

Members of the Children and Young People Board agreed the notes of the last Board meeting, held 15 March 2022.

The Chair introduced the report which set out a number of proposals that sought to improve outcomes for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) via reforms to the SEND system.

The Chair invited Edmund Boggis, Department for Education to present to the board. Edmund explained that the consultation had been extended to the 22 July 2022. As of 27 May they had completed 71 events with 65 left to go, to supplement the main e-consultation. There was also on-going work in preparation of the consultation and a delivery plan they had committed to publishing. The School’s Bill was currently working its way to the House of Lords. Whilst they did not lead on this, they would be getting involved due to changes in the wider education system particularly around academy standards and intervention. Additionally, they were involved with the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care due to the impact on wider delivery and systems. In response to the publication, the government had set out actions taken in an oral statement and the Department for Education (DfE) were committed to publishing a detailed implementation strategy later this year.

Following the discussion, the following comments were made:

·       Members highlighted that there needed to be a significant cultural change where parents, carers and family members of children with additional needs felt their needs were being met, without having to go through the Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) route. Ed responded that the cultural change and greater confidence needed to give to parents and providers that they can support children with additional needs without the recourse of EHCP was their ambition. 

·       Members raised that there were huge issues around funding and the funding formulae. The current system was not viable in schools with high levels of SEND and in particular, small schools in rural areas. As well as Ofsted/CQC SEND area

inspections which were proposed to come into effect from 2023 with no further funding. Ed replied that they understood the issues around funding and would take note of this issue back to DfE.

·       Members commented that as a series of measures were coming forward, would these incentivise schools to be more inclusive and hold partners to account with their duty to cooperate. Ed answered that from a DfE perspective they were looking at inclusivity a lot more across the department, which was a shift in thinking and that they would look into incentives.

·       Members highlighted that identifying children with educational needs cost schools £6,000 which pushed incentivising schools in the wrong direction for early identification.

·       The Schools Bill worked against the SEND green paper objectives as it pushed for full academisation and continuing competitiveness, which was conflicting. The Chair added that SEND green paper, The Schools Bill and Care Review were not speaking to the holistic view of children and young people. Each were being treated as sperate pieces when in fact they were linked.

Direction:

Members of the Board noted the update.

Actions:

·       Officers to take  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

a) Mental health and wellbeing plan consultation

The Chair invited Flora Wilkie, Adviser who introduced the report, which covered the government’s commitment to developing a new cross-government, 10-year plan for mental health and wellbeing for England.

Flora went on to mention that there were six key questions presented as part of the consultation document in which they sought the Boards views to form part of the consultation response. Kevin Halden, Adviser had presented the report to the Community and Wellbeing Board a few weeks ago and would include their responses into the consultation.

Following the discussion, the following comments were made:

·       Members asked for a clarification of the definition of child versus a young person. Would this include all children up to the age of 18? This needed to be made very clear as it would have an impact on provision. Furthermore, report heavily focused on schools with no mention of colleges.

·       Members expressed that they would like to see social prescribing as an option within provision. Having local authorities, partners and stakeholders work together to understand what that social prescribing might look like.

·       Members commented that the section around the impact of poverty needed to be more robust with a clear explanation as to why on poverty had such a negative impact had on children’s mental health. Additionally, the impact of domestic violence and domestic upset on family home and the impact of mental wellbeing needed to be included. As well as the need for local government to have a robust role in preventative measures on anti-bullying strategies as a preventative measure in schools.

·       Members raised concerns over school access to drug and alcohol workers, which not all children wanted to access through schools but there was no mention of how this would be accessed outside of a school setting.

·       The Chair added that she thought there should be more support around what organisations could do in the interim while children and young people waited to receive support. As the length of time in some cases escalated the issues they had due to the delay. Also, how money was being spent was not clear and needed transparency to help the system move forward.

·       Members asked if  girls were at risk of mental health issues, in particular eating disorders. How would different types of needs be reflected within the document as eating disorders was a growing problem. Alongside that, providing help and support for refugee and asylum seeker children.

Decision:

Member of the Board noted the report.

Actions:

Officer to:

·       Work closely with the Community Wellbeing Board to develop a consultation response.

·       Continue to engage with the department to ensure the view of the local government sector is taken into consideration.

·       Circulate the LGA’s response with lead members for sign off.

The Chair introduced the report which discussed the UK Youth Parliaments work and

the outcomes of the Make Your Mark survey of young people across the UK.

Louise Smith, Senior Adviser, introduced Callum Parr, member of the Steering Group representing the East Midlands who informed the board that the UK Youth Parliament provided opportunities for 11-18 year olds to use their elected voice to bring about social change through meaningful representation and campaigning. Members of Youth Parliament (MYPs) are elected every two years by other young people in their area. MYPs are currently elected in 110 council areas in England and Wales. Some of the various debates included; mental health, animal welfare, sex and relationships education, knife crime, safety for LGBTQIA+ for young people, financial education, period poverty, transport, climate change, schools funding, tackling abuse and support for young people with caring responsibilities.

Callum continued that the Make Your Mark survey gave all young people aged 11-18 in the UK a chance to have a say on the biggest issues facing young people. Almost half a million young people took part this year. The biggest issue identified by young people this year was health and wellbeing, followed by jobs, money, homes and opportunities.

Callum introduced Julija Solovjova, former MYP for North Lincolnshire who spoke about her experience as an MYP.

Following the discussion, the following comments were made:

·       Members asked what work MYPs did to encourage other young people and children who are from marginalised communities and have struggled to get into institutions like parliament. Julija responded that setting up focus groups and inviting young people and children who were keen and open to getting involved provided a gateway to getting those from a marginalised community to join. 

·       Members asked how young people would like to access mental health support and what did volunteering opportunities look like for young people. Callum answered that MYPs will conduct focus groups within their local areas to identify mental health support available and any access issues. This will be collated into a report and fed back to the annual conference.

·       Members commented what engagement and input could the board make to help support the UK Youth Parliament. Julija responded that national level issues raised usually had no outcome and instead focused on local issues that they knew would be achievable. Marjaan Aman, MYP for Hounslow, added that she felt it would be useful to have annual meetings with councils to address issues and concerns and ensure their voices were being heard. Callum suggested that it would be great to have the opportunity to have access to key policy leads to make a real change to key issues.

The Chair thanked members of the UK Youth Parliament for joining the meeting and sharing their insightful ideas and opinions.  

Decision:

Member of the Board noted the report.

The Chair introduced Louise Smith who introduced the report which set out recommendations and an initial LGA view on the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care report.

Louise highlighted the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care was published on 23 May 2022 and included the following key points:

·       Family help – ensuring children and families receive support as soon as they need it, driven by an investment of £2 billion.

·       Child protection – introducing an Expert Child Protection Practitioner role, an

experienced social worker to co-work child protection cases with family help social

workers.

·       Data – a taskforce dedicated to achieving ‘frictionless sharing of information’ between council and partner systems and improving case management systems.

·       Family networks – improving support for kinship carers and introducing a legal right for all families to access family group decision making.

·       Children in care – improving placements through the introduction of up to 20

Regional Care Cooperatives, owned and run by councils, which would commissionand manage all placements.

·       Care leavers – extending corporate parenting to other public sector bodies; making care experience a protected characteristic; and improving outcomes in relation to relationships, education, housing, employment and health.

·       Multi-agency safeguarding - clarifying the role and improving the transparency of multi-agency safeguarding arrangements.

·       Improvement – Ofsted inspections to increase transparency in how judgements are made and consider more how families as a whole are supported.

Following the discussion, the following comments were made:

·       Members raised that there was a conflict in the recommendations for the Josh MacAlister review and Annie Hudson review. Louise responded that the LGA wasn’t for or against either and were still gathering views.

·       Members highlighted that the Secretary of State for Education had announced up to 40% cuts to civil service and DfE jobs, would this not compromise the ability to implement the Josh MacAlister review. As well as if there were any plans for the government to reinstate targets on child poverty. Louise replied that would be a team set up with DfE to look at the implementation of this report, along with the CMA report and National Panel report. The LGA would like to see a white paper published to demonstrate commitment from government. Child poverty was high on the agenda as the cost of living was rising and would continue to drive this forward.

·       Members highlighted that were no significant mentions around health and funding.

·       Members mentioned that long-term, sustainable sharing of foster carers was needed. With regard to Regional Care Cooperatives, views were varied as to the circumstances in which these would work best but it was recognised more regional working would be helpful.

·       Members mentioned that they were unclear about proposals to remove the Independent Reviewing Officer role and would like more information for the board to discuss and have a better view on. 

Decision:

Member of the Board noted the report.

The Chair introduced Ian Keating, Principal Policy Adviser who introduced the report which set out the Children and Young People end of year report, including initial proposals for the 2022/23 work plan.

Following the brief discussion, the following comments were made:

·       The Chair commented that she would like to see more discussions held around schools, how they are run and local authority responsibilities. As well as managing relationships with academies.

·       The Chair and members thanked officers for their work and commitment to pushing members views.

Decision:

Member of the Board noted the report.

Action:

·       Officers to prepare a paper setting out the proposed work plan for 2022/23 in line with the Board’s feedback.