PAPER A

POLICY COMMISSION MEETING

Meeting	Children and School Results Commission
Ref	CPC 01/02/06
Date	Wednesday, 1 February 2006
Place	Committee Room 1, County Hall, Newport, Isle of Wight
Purpose of meeting	Formal public meeting
Attendance	Commission members – Cllrs Melanie Swan (Commissioner), Wendy Arnold, George Cameron, Deborah Gardiner, Gill Kennett, Lady Pigot Co-opted (voting) – Mrs Urszula Topp (RC Diocese) Apologies – Canon David Isaacs (C of E Diocese) Cabinet member – Cllr Patrick Joyce Cabinet Secretaries – Cllrs David Pugh, Alan Wells Officers – Mr Simon Dear, Mr Rob Faulkner, Mrs Prue Grimshaw, Mr Steve Laycock, Mr Keith Simmonds, Mr Paul Thistlewood, Miss April West. Other members present – Cllr Andy Sutton
Agenda Items
1. Notes of previous meeting	The notes of evidence of the meeting held on 7 December 2005 were agreed.
2. Declarations of interest	Cllr Gardiner declared a personal interest in the Draft IW Children and Young People’s Plan and the Joint Area inspection items as her husband was an employee of Connexions.
3. The Draft Isle of Wight Children and Young People’s Plan 2006 - 2009	Papers considered :- Report of Mr S Dear, IW Children’s Trust Development Advisor together with draft Isle of Wight Children and Young People’s Plan 2006 to 2009. Stakeholders present :- Mrs Rusty Hanlon, Mrs Cathy Foulkes, Lelya Hamroush, Sami Hamroush, Idris Hamroush, Bethany Hayton, Scarlett Hayton, Shannon Steen, Michelle Wright and Lynne Chinnery representing Ryde Development Trust and YouthSpeak.. Representatives of YouthSpeak gave a presentation to the Policy Commission on their involvement in the development of an adventure play area in Oakfield. A video of the work involved in the project, their involvement in the Children’s Big Day Out at Brading Roman Villa and how young people should be able to contribute to the development of policies and services for children and young people. In making their presentation the following issues were highlighted :- i. There was widespread community ownership of the Oakfield Play Scheme resulting in minimal vandalism of facility. ii. It was important to engage older young people first as these were more likely to become disengaged. iii. The involvement of older young people made them to feel valued members of the Community. iv. Profile of the IW Youth Council needed to be raised. v. Important to ask young people what they wanted provided rather than providing what other people thought they wanted. vi. Need to avoid duplication of services and facilities. vii. Some young people preferred not to have a structured event such as sport. viii. If children became involved in initiatives then parents would get involved. ix. Activities required co-ordination particularly if they involved voluntary assistance. x. Police should become more involved with young people within their community. In outlining the proposed Children and Young People’s Plan Mr Dear highlighted the following issues :- i. Consultation process was planned to commence the following day. ii. Plan to be finalised for 1 April 2006. iii. Use of talk-back panels, each costing £1,600, to obtain the views of young people, iv. These panels would be located at appropriate locations and any suggestions will be included where possible, v. Evolving draft plan being refined in accordance with best practice and will include hyperlinks with all other relevant plans and policies. vi. The key priorities were linked to Department of Education and Skills phrasing and local identification through the Annual Performance Assessment and advice from the Children’s Social Care Inspectorate.
4. Special Educational Needs (SEN) Strategy (C6/05) and Schools Exclusion Centre (C3/05)	Paper considered :- Report of Mr R Faulkner, Head of Pupil Services and presented by Mr S Laycock, Principal Educational Psychologist. Evidence :- Special Educational Needs Strategy i. Poor response to consultation process with only 25 returns despite details being sent to all Heads, Chairs of Governing Bodies, Rural Community Council and details on the Eduwight site and a notice in the County Press. ii. Majority of responses were supportive of actions proposed within the strategy. iii. The parental satisfaction survey proposed would also include pupils subject to the home tuition service. iv. Legislation may be introduced from September 2007 which would require a pupil excluded from a school to receive education at the 6^th day rather than after 15 working days and parents would be required to ensure that their child was in a secure environment whilst excluded. v. Since the Policy Commission considered the SEN Statementing Processes at its 3 August 2005 meeting the Council had ensured that the SEN Code of Practice had been adhered to. vi. The Commissioner referred to the discussions at the 3 August 2005 meeting relating to provision of transport and outlined why this should be extended to include the small number of pupils which attended an independent school through parental choice. Officers did express concern as to the financial and legal implications of this being part of the Council’s policy. vii. Development of access to statementing process through the internet so progress can be tracked would be ground breaking. viii. Training opportunities to be developed for staff and parents and this to include the development of multi-agency teams within the principles of the Children’s Trust. Action required The Cabinet Member for Children should take the SEN Strategy to Cabinet for adoption and that consideration should be given to amending the transport policy to read “that where a specific mainstream or independent school is assigned by the local authority and named within a child’s statement, that school is considered for transport purpose to be the home school.” Schools Exclusion Centre i. Consultation on possible Schools Exclusion Centre undertaken alongside that for the SEN Strategy. ii. Poor response to consultation process with only 24 returns despite details being sent to all Heads, Chairs of Governing Bodies, Rural Community Council and details on the Eduwight site and a notice in the County Press. iii. The provision of a specific Centre for students with poor behaviour was unrealistic. iv. Maintaining the existing system is not sufficient. v. Flexible provision required to meet a range of difficulties and based on the good work being achieved through clusters. vi. Provision of facility for pupils with medically related problems could free up capacity in a Pupil Referral Unit. vii. Possible extension of practical and vocational activities through the WISE (Workshop In Support of Education) had been supported. Action required A draft Blue Paper be prepared for consideration by the Policy Commission on the costed options of providing a specific Schools Exclusion Centre against a range of alternative options.
5. Joint Area Review – Progress Report 1	Paper considered :- Report of Mr I Sandbrook, Acting Director for Children’s Services and presented by Mrs P Grimshaw, Head of Children and Family Services and Mr K Simmonds, Head of Learning Effectiveness together with a powerpoint presentation. Evidence :- i. Joint Area Review will be undertaken alongside Inspections on the Corporate Assessment, Youth Offending Team and Youth Service in May 2006. ii. Final report will be published on 14 August 2006. iii. The 3 neighbourhoods that will be subject to in-depth study would be Pan, Ryde St Johns and Totland. iv. All year 6, 8 and 10 students in Middle and High Schools would be surveyed. v. Importance of celebrating success.