To receive the Estyn Inspection of Powys County Council July 2019 together with the draft Post Inspection Action Plan.
To scrutinise the two documents for assurance that the Post Inspection Action Plan addresses the concerns raised within the Inspection Report.
Minutes:
The Chair introduced the meeting advising that Scrutiny Members would be focussing on each of the Inspection recommendations in pairs and that this focus would continue through the production and agreement of the Post Inspection Action Plan and on into the monitoring phase. It is intended to examine the document produced and undertake a gap analysis to be assured that all the recommendations made by Estyn are being acknowledged and addressed.
The Portfolio Holder for Education introduced the Estyn report outlining his view of the severity of the report and how alarming the concerns highlighted within the report were. He listed a series of issues and acknowledged the weak leadership both corporately and from Members. He noted the lack of transparency and loss of trust between the Cabinet and Scrutiny. He recognised that there were too many schools in Powys and too much was being spent on buildings and leadership which was ultimately had the potential to affect the viability of the Authority.
The Portfolio Holder went on to say that a Conference had been held with the Primary and Secondary Heads who had asked the service to make political decisions.
He confirmed that he fully accepted the recommendations from Estyn and that decisions had to be made in 2020 for implementation by 2021.
The Chair explained that there had been a misunderstanding over the last week regarding what documents were expected to be provided to this meeting. The production of the Post Inspection Action Plan (PIAP) was not as complete as had been expected but that it was understood that there was a desire to get the information correct. The acknowledgement that there are too many schools was refreshing along with the acknowledgement that if nothing is done the Authority will be bankrupt.
The Chief Executive assured the Committee and Estyn that the Authority fully accepted the findings of the report. The Authority moved quickly to appoint an Interim Leadership Team comprising of Ms Lovell (Interim Head of Schools) an internal appointment, G Rees (Service Improvement Officer), C Rees (Education Advisor) and D Lewis (Education Advisor). The team are working on the PIAP which is 90% complete but scrutiny comments are welcomed on the high-level actions and if any thing is not clear or appears to have been missed. A full version will be shared with Cabinet, Scrutiny and the Improvement and Assurance Board before the meeting with Estyn at the end of November. Work on this started in July and there are significant improvements needed which cannot be completed overnight. The PIAP will detail short term and longer-term actions. It can be expected that this journey will take two years as it will have to be done properly to leave a legacy for learners who are at the heart of considerations along with the wider community.
The Interim Head of Schools confirmed that the service fully accepted the recommendations the gravity of which are clear.
The Service Improvement Officer advised that he had been appointed with two colleagues to work directly on this. There is a passion to address this quickly and correctly. There is no reason why Powys cannot have a first-class education system.
Recommendation 1: Improve the standards in secondary schools, and especially the performance of more able learners
It is surprising the Portfolio Holder finds the Inspection report alarming. There is nothing new in this inspection that has not been found in previous inspections. It will be necessary to undertake a comprehensive marketing campaign as schools and communities have heard all this before. It is surprising the PIAP is 90% complete and yet it has not been made available for scrutiny to comment on before it is submitted to Estyn. With most of the Scrutiny Members sitting on Governing Bodies Members are familiar with Post Inspection Action Plans and had expected to undertake detailed scrutiny of the document prior to submission.
In relation to the Portfolio Holder report the following gaps are noted:
Outcomes – areas for improvement
· Almost half of secondary schools have been in the bottom 25% when compared to similar schools over the last two years with regard to attendance rates.
· The rate of permanent exclusions in secondary schools is high the total number of fixed term exclusions remains too high.
· There is no strategic approach for developing pupils mental and emotional health across the Authority.
Budgets have been cut which is resulting in cuts to the Learning Inclusion and Support Team (LIST). School staff are required to attend multi-agency meetings which are cancelled at short notice resulting in time lost for school staff.
The report states that pupils do not feel listened to and neither do parents which is why the marketing campaign needs to be good. There will be some people unhappy with the decisions that need to be made but it is the role of the Authority to make these difficult decisions.
There are good things happening in schools, but this is not across the board.
It will be necessary to look at the standards of teaching particularly in secondary schools. A robust programme of monitoring performance is needed, and the use of unsuitable cover needs to cease.
The Portfolio Holder accepted that the Authority had been here before but actually it was still here. Improvements for more able and talented pupils are identified as a priority along with improving attendance, particularly in secondary schools. Attendance rates raise the question of why pupils do not want to be in school. With experience of being a local Authority governor he recognised the importance of support services in tackling behaviour and reducing exclusions.
The cuts implemented last year did not help but he understood they were offered up by the Schools Service. The importance of talking to parents is accepted. The schools service has spoken with Headteachers and Chairs of Governors and now need to go out and visit the 13 catchments between now and Christmas.
The PIAP is 80 pages long and is at a different level from a school PIAP. The service needs to get this document to you for scrutiny.
There are difficulties in getting enough specialist teachers in all the schools in Powys because teachers are needed in too many schools teaching too few pupils. The appetite of Governing Bodies to address poor performance and the level of HR support needs to improve. There are people not pulling their weight along with many good members of staff and it would not be the intention that morale would be affected.
This is not a matter of insufficient money; it is about the education offer. There is 25% surplus capacity and too much money is spent running the estate.
The Interim Head of Education noted that the removal of the LIST is a key point. The local Authority needs to be assured that the right support is available going forward. Cuts that affect schools cannot be supported.
It is accepted that parents feel they are not being listened to.
There is some good work being undertaken in schools regarding pupil mental health. As Interim Head I now attend partnership meetings such as Startwell and it will be necessary to work effectively with the Powys Teaching Health Board and Children’s Service. This is acknowledged as an area for improvement.
There are some areas with robust monitoring of teaching and learning but there are some schools, particularly secondary schools where the provision is not suitable for learners. The calibre of teaching and learning is affected by the extent of the school estate. Over the last few years there have been problems in the secondary sector which is linked to the modernisation of the school estate.
There is a new curriculum in 2022 and one of the main areas identified within the PIAP is improving pedagogy at Key Stages 3 and 4.
It has been inferred that the recent cuts have gone too deep. It will be necessary to review the impact of the cuts over the last 2 years.
Scrutiny recently received a report on unverified results. A number of recommendations have come out of that session together with a series of recommendations from when scrutiny considered the Post-16 report. Scrutiny look forward to receiving a response to these recommendations.
School Governors need training to be able to undertake their role, but they are volunteers and it is becoming difficult to attract School Governors.
Children have gone through their whole education in Powys whilst there have been the problems identified in the report. There has been inconsistency across the Authority and within schools and whilst some children have not been affected, some have, and some have achieved despite rather than because of what has been available.
The Portfolio Holder agreed with comments regarding Governors and noted that there are too many schools and/or sites. A reduction in the number of schools/sites will mean fewer School Governors will be needed.
It was noted that pupils will vote with their feet and go where they feel the best offer is. If the best offer for students is over the border, then they should be supported. Powys pupils should be able to access the best offer available.
The Interim Head of Education noted that the local Authority needed to agree what pupils were entitled to from the Foundation Phase through to Post 16 provision.
Recommendation 2: Improve the evaluation, planning and co-ordination of provision for learners with special educational needs and other pupils who may require extra support.
This area is identified as an area for improvement, but the service vision is not articulated, and this vision needs to be shared with stakeholders. There are changes coming forward under the ALN Act which means all schools will have to be inclusive schools. Schools will need to be confident they have equitable access to support services.
In relation to the Portfolio Holder report the following gaps are noted:
LAQ4
· Access to specialist placements is overly complex
· Review of specialist resource centres – consultation with Headteachers is inconsistent leading to a lack of clarity around the reorganisation of the specialist resource centres
· Limited ongoing monitoring and evaluation of quality of outreach support
Teachers share the Authority's passion for ALN development, but the problem is funding and how for example if an invigilator is needed the ALN support will be called on.
It is surprising that ‘Ensure that schools and other stakeholders have a clear understanding of the services that are available to support pupils with SEN/ALN and other pupils who may require support and that process for accessing these services are clear and robust’ (Recommendation 2b) is needed. This should be happening already and access to these services should be equitable.
In relation to the Portfolio Holder report the following gaps are noted:
· Introduce local Authority monitoring of bullying incidents
· Simplify access to placements
The Portfolio Holder noted the comments regarding Recommendation 2b and confirmed that access should be equitable.
The funding of ALN is also impacted by the number of schools the budget is having to be spread across.
Detailed information on the disparity of the cost of educating pupils has only recently become available.
The Portfolio Holder for Finance advised that there would always be a variation in the cost per pupil.
The Education Advisor noted all the comments as helpful and that they were being addressed in the PIAP.
There is some confusion regarding the language used. Currently the terminology is SEN, but the new Code refers to ALN. Many bodies have started using the term ALN before the Code has been enacted. SEN/ALN refers to pupils with a disability or learning need, for example autism or dyslexia. There are also other groups of pupils who may require additional support (around 12 groups, including for example pregnant schoolgirls, young carers etc).
Do more able and talented pupils fall within this category?
The Education Advisor confirmed support for schools in relation to more able and talented pupils is received from the Challenge Advisor team.
The Authority has an ALN Transformation programme with eight workstreams which was set up to make the changes required by the new legislation. Implementation of the new legislation has been delayed by a year and therefore it is will be necessary to include work on this area in the PIAP to ensure the recommendations are addressed in a timely manner. It will be necessary to map what is on offer from the central team and outreach from the three specialist schools as the service do not currently know what is on offer and are not monitoring what is taking place. This mapping will enable gaps to be identified. The loss of the LIST means that it is not possible to provide some support. It may be that this support is replaced by guidance. It will be necessary to improve the availability and use of data to support the identification of gaps and what support is required. It will be necessary to address the recommendation in relation to bullying. Welsh Government guidance is awaited – this may provide a definition of bullying which will be used in reporting incidents of bullying.
It has been acknowledged that the service does not know what is being provided in terms of outreach and that there is some provision which will no longer be provided. How can the Authority be assured that the cuts that have been required from the central service are safe?
The Education Advisor confirmed that the service did not currently know what outreach services were being provided. Money is going into provide outreach, but it is not known how effective this service is.
The Chair advised that assurance regarding the impact of cuts to central services would be sought outside of this meeting.
The Education Advisor confirmed that the decisions made last year on cuts to central services were not fully understood and the Portfolio Holder has asked for this to be looked at again. It will be necessary for Members to be assured that the money that is being spent on this service is being used effectively. The Interim Head of Education has been asked the ensure that any financial decisions are made from a position of understanding.
The impact of cuts to central services has been of concern to scrutiny and it is reassuring that future financial decisions are made from a position of understanding.
It is of concern that more able and talented pupils come under a different umbrella to ALN pupils. More able and talented pupils who are bored can be as disruptive as pupils with ALN.
The needs of these pupils will be addressed but it is confirmed this falls under different arrangements to those pupils with ALN.
Recommendation 3: Improve the consistency and impact of senior leaders in improving the quality of education services and continue to strengthen the rigour, scrutiny and challenge about performance of the Authority’s services.
This is an all-encompassing recommendation which sets out what in scrutiny was known to be the position but was not accepted to be the case. Estyn are owed a debt of gratitude for codifying the position. The detail will be available in the PIAP but scrutiny are looking to the new Portfolio Holder and the Officers brought in to address the recommendations.
The Chief Executive advised that six weeks after starting with the Authority the notice of inspection had been received from Estyn. When researching the Authority whilst applying for the role the data was showing that pupils weren’t being stretched. She had challenged the self-evaluation which was rewritten before submission to Estyn and although she still did not think it was correct she did not have the knowledge to challenge it further and did not think the service had the information needed. The Inspection Report was a real shock but there is now an opportunity to make changes. During the inspection I met with the Chief Inspector each day and the constant issue that came through was that the inspectors needed more data and evaluation of the data. How did the Authority know what the impact of intervention was? As a new Chief Executive, I was shocked this information was not available in Education Services as it was in place for both Children’s and Adults Services. It seemed that the focus on social care had resulted in a loss of focus in education. It is accepted that scrutiny need more detail than that provided in the high-level update provided to committee.
The Service Improvement Officer advised that the Authority had invested in leadership training and had expressed corporate values however, the local education service appeared to have largely excluded itself from this training. A professional approach to performance management is required along with benchmarking with other Local Authorities.
The Portfolio Holder confirmed his approach is if something was not good enough this will be acknowledged and shared with scrutiny.
There has been scrutiny concern regarding the standard of reports presented on various occasions so the improved access to data is welcomed. The lack of leadership training in the education service is concerning. As is the suggestion the service will take 2 years to improve. This is the fifth adverse inspection report and during this period not all pupils have received the standard of education that the Authority aspires to. There are interim leadership arrangements in place but what assurances can be given that any permanent appointee will not wish to make changes to the plans currently being drawn up? There is a lack of detail regarding timeframes in the document provided.
The Chief Executive confirmed that the PIAP would include considerably more detail including dates and staff with responsibility for the actions. This would be shared with scrutiny in a briefing session followed by a public session before Christmas. It will be necessary to discuss the PIAP with Estyn before it is circulated publicly but it will be shared with scrutiny ahead of that.
The Authority is advertising for a Chief Education Officer and is looking for a person to join the Authority on the improvement journey and not start it again. The current Interim Head of Education had had six line managers in eighteen months. The Chief Executive confirmed her commitment to Powys and if the calibre of applicants is not good enough, she would recommend that alternative options are considered. The broad outline of two years to improve includes a variety of timescales with some items being completed more quickly and some longer term. This is a once in a generation opportunity to improve prospects for learners and it must be sustainable. Many Members have been here for a long time and tried to make changes but have failed. The Inspection report highlights that there are significant concerns, and this does impact on children however the report acknowledges ‘that pupils generally make sound progress over their time in statutory education’. There are some strengths, particularly in the primary sector and these need to be made sustainable. There is one additional item required in the PIAP which is to ensure that those primary schools that are removed from follow-up sustain their progress. I want to reassure Members that there are areas of strength and good practice although this is inconsistent. The Inspection findings are fully accepted.
It is disappointing that the sentence quoted has been used in isolation.
The Portfolio Holder noted that his introduction had focussed on the areas for improvement but it was important to acknowledge that the workforce do a good job and there are pupils that get good grades despite rather than because of what is provided.
The Chair had emailed the Leader a fortnight before seeking clarity on the Portfolio Holder responsibilities since the recent changes regarding Education and the Welsh Language. Could the Cabinet Members provide clarity in this respect?
The Portfolio Holder for Education confirmed that he had responsibility for the whole of the Education Portfolio except transport.
In relation to the Portfolio Holder report the following gaps are noted:
· …in our schools and develop the contribution of pupil’s views to the strategic direction of education issues of the local authority
· Develop appropriate levels of challenge to schools
· Develop robust self-evaluation processes
· Implement appropriate performance management arrangements
· Ensure appropriate arrangements for monitoring recruitment of volunteers
Recommendation 4: Ensure that the organisation of the provision for non-maintained, post 16, Welsh medium education and secondary education meets the needs of the children and young people of Powys
The document presented by the Portfolio Holder notes in the areas for improvement on Local Authority Question 6 ‘Officers do not have a clear enough understanding of whether there are sufficient early years places, within a reasonable distance of children’s homes and in the language of their choice’. If the local Authority intends to contribute to the Welsh Governments intent that there will be 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050 it will need to aim to provide bilingual education. The offer to parents of education through the language of choice can deprive the pupil of the ability to speak two languages.
The Service Improvement Officer confirmed that there is no reference to the language of choice in the PIAP and that the reference quoted has been taken from the Estyn report. It will be necessary to develop the Welsh in Education Strategic Plan (WESP) and ensure that this is implemented. New guidelines are being published in January 2020 for WESPs which will cover a 10 year period and the PIAP will be amended if necessary in light of the new guidelines and the definitions used within the guidelines will be used within the PIAP.
The assurances that it will be necessary to implement the new WESP are welcomed but the previous two WESPs did not come to fruition. The WESP should not be a standalone policy. It is essential that it is integrated into every education policy. At present there are 90 primary schools. It will be necessary for three to become Welsh Medium each year to hit the Welsh Government target. In recent years Welsh language in Powys has not just stood still but has actually declined.
The Portfolio Holder agreed that the WESP had to be integral to the whole improvement process.
The Service Improvement Officer noted that the second WESP had not been implemented and there was little point in looking to update that document, it was necessary to start from the current position in light of new legislation and set the direction for the next 10 years. It appears bilingual education will be central to the new curriculum and this will need pace to achieve.
This is welcomed but to what extent can the PIAP influence improvements in Welsh Language early years provision? When the transport policy was considered it had failed to prevent school transport being provided from bilingual school catchments to English medium catchments which does not help in meeting the Welsh Government targets. Could the funding formula be used to incentivise schools to move along the language spectrum?
The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Transport confirmed it will be necessary to look at the school transport policy within the next six months and that this will be made available for pre-Cabinet scrutiny.
School transport is integral to school organisation and it will be essential that these are considered in parallel.
The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Transport confirmed that the school transport policy would stick to principles and therefore would not have a detrimental impact on school organisation.
Will there be the opportunity for learners joining schools part way through their school career to access Welsh language immersion centres?
The Service Improvement Officer expected the new guidelines would contain information regarding immersion and that this will be considered when producing the new WESP.
In respect of Post-16 education it is not possible for Powys schools to compete with the offer in England. Students are prepared to travel therefore Powys schools need to find a unique selling point which should be Welsh Medium or bilingual Post 16 education.
The Service Improvement Officer noted that the Headteachers Conference recently had drawn attention to the lack of opportunities for progression at 14-19 was undoing some of the good work undertaken at primary level.
Recommended that:
· Welsh medium provision in the two catchments which do not have any Early Years Welsh medium provision is considered.
It has been accepted that the Authority has more schools than is sustainable. Do Central Services have the capacity to undertake this transformation? There are a number of school buildings in poor condition and a programme for improving these schools. Is consideration given to the impact of school modernisation on the school estate? As the Inspection Report includes recommendations for improvements for all age groups will transformation take place concurrently to ensure that necessary changes for one group or area are not prevented from taking place due to previous changes approved? What is the view on cross-border movements, are they encouraged, discouraged and will they be accounted for in the data available for school modernisation? Will purdah for Westminster elections have an impact on the work programme Schools service are following?
The Portfolio Holder for Education confirmed that the view on cross-border movements is that if pupils are educated out of county, they are still Powys residents. It will be necessary to define what learners are entitled to at the ages of 4, 7, 11, 14 and 16. There are schools where it will be very challenging to deliver the new curriculum, schools that do not have sufficient pupils to have sports teams or a choir. Consideration needs to be given to the appropriateness of being educated in a school that was attended by parent, grandparents and even great grandparents. The provision of adult learning in the community also needs to be considered.
The Service Improvement Officer advised that it was necessary to use resources corporately (for stakeholder engagements for example). The necessary resources will need to be provided to support transformation. All the recommendations are linked. For example, supporting 97 schools is a challenge for all support services provided. It is intended that school organisation is approached from the perspective of having a vision of what the estate will look like rather than on an ad hoc basis. It has been said that Powys cannot compete with England. Powys has to compete with England, and this needs clever movement and inspirational leadership across the whole Authority. It will be necessary to get to the position where the number of learners enables an offer that can compete with providers out of county. At the Headteachers and Governors conference there was an appetite to get on with transformation and for a Vision that might drive this.
Scrutiny has had sight of the Schools Major Improvement programme and would not wish to see investment in schools which will be affected by schools’ organisation.
The Portfolio Holder noted this view but confirmed that current learners should not be taught in poor conditions.
Member buy-in for school transformation is essential. A Member training session was recently held but only approximately half of Members attended. Members will agree that changes are needed until a change is proposed in their ward.
The Portfolio Holders both agreed this Inspection together with the new curriculum offered a period for exciting change.
Is it possible to link with other providers such as Universities to run courses in Powys?
The Service Improvement Officer advised that to engage with partners it is necessary to be on the front foot and at the moment every secondary school is trying to survive. If the vision for education includes lifelong learning there will be opportunities for Universities to engage.
As a scrutiny member who had attended the Schools Conference it was confirmed as enthusiastic and it was now down to the Members to deliver the necessary decisions.
In relation to the Portfolio Holder report the following gap was noted:
· Ensure school buildings in poor condition are improved having regard to the proposals outlined in the school organisation policy
Recommendation 5: Continue to improve the financial management in schools and take appropriate action to address schools with significant deficit budget.
The use of intervention remains a thorny issue as the relationship between the school, Finance Service and Schools Service can be affected by intervention. The level of resource to support schools has already been highlighted. It must be acknowledged that some schools are managing their budgets well. All schools have Local Education Authority LEA Governors but not all LEA Governors are Councillors. LEA Governors, who are not Councillors, have received no specific training on their role and therefore are not given any direction from the Local Authority.
There are schools with large deficit budgets. The revised funding formula provides funding to run an in year balanced budget. There is no opportunity to pay back deficits without taking money meant for pupils.
The Portfolio Holder for Education confirmed there were a number of schools with Improvement Notices and in at least one case the actions of the LEA Governor had helped a school make the right decision. Much progress has been made in schools in a deficit position. It is the responsibility of the Section 151 Officer in conjunction with the School’s Service to serve an Improvement Notice.
The Portfolio Holder for Finance advised that the first step was for schools to produce an in year balanced budget. Trying to implement changes to staffing structures is a struggle and is resource intensive. Each month the outturn is reported to Cabinet and this has shown a sharp decline in reserves. The overall budget for schools is sufficient but it is spread across too many schools and this has implications on the ability of central services to support the current number of schools.
The Portfolio Holder for Education acknowledged the need to specifically train LEA Governors and to provide some training sessions such as Investigation or Complaints training as bespoke sessions when needed by a school.
The Service Improvement Officer confirmed that current learners could not be expected to suffer as a result of decisions made some years ago. The Formula Funding review consultation will propose changes to payback periods which scrutiny will have sight of. Other changes include addressing in-years changes in school roll where pupils move to a different Powys school which will signal that resources are for pupils. Live benchmarking of data will be maintained. At present the Funding Formula has been designed to ensure that schools of all sizes can exist, and it must be ensured that the Formula does not become an anachronistic relic. It will also be necessary to improve the quality of financial management in schools by professionalising the role and introducing cluster Bursars.
The proposals relating to pupils that move school will be welcomed by the receiving school but has the impact on the school that has lost the pupil been considered? The cluster Bursar is a fantastic idea that has been successfully trialled however, when the trial ended the three small schools refused to buy into the scheme and it has ceased.
The Service Improvement Officer noted that this was information that needed to be communicated and that when things worked this needed to be celebrated.
In relation to the Portfolio Holder report the following gap was noted:
· Agree and implement appropriate arrangements for use of intervention powers
The Chair concluded that this was not a regular report. Scrutiny would look to be involved in every part of the process. The Portfolio Holder confirmed that the involvement of scrutiny was welcomed, and he was looking for support when Community engagement takes place.
The Interim Head of Education thanked Estyn for the report and hoped that scrutiny was assured addressing the recommendations was being taken seriously. Three things came out of the Headteachers Conference; this needs to be addressed at pace, it will be necessary to engage with the community and that this needs to be taken forward together.
The Chief Executive expressed appreciation for the challenge and looked forward to receiving comments from scrutiny.
The Portfolio Holder noted that scrutiny would find responses to issues raised previously by scrutiny in the PIAP. He confirmed that scrutiny comments were valued and would be taken on board.
The Chair accepted the need not to divert resources from current issues and that scrutiny would be looking for the response to previous questions within the PIAP and whilst there would be flexibility a response to recommendations was sought.
The Lead Estyn Inspector thanked Members for the opportunity to observe the meeting with frank and open discussion that had been helpful. Estyn would return at the end of November to facilitate an Improvement Conference which was the beginning of the process of follow up. This will look at the initial plans and will include three representatives from the Inspectorate, Members, the Chief Executive and Senior Leaders. From this meeting it is likely that a few suggestions are made. This will be followed by a Progress Conference where the same group will start to consider progress against recommendations (and will be limited to this in their remit). The outcome of the Progress Conference will be either to recommend a further Progress Conference or, if progress has been made, a final Monitoring Visit.
Supporting documents: