Verbal Update.
Minutes:
The Panel received a verbal update from the Cabinet Member for Children, Schools & Families on developments within her portfolio, followed by a verbal question and answer session with the Cabinet Member. The following update was provided by the Cabinet Member:
· The Cabinet Member advised that Haringey had achieved the highest grade in relation to the recent local area Ofsted/CQC inspection and that this had been confirmed by the inspection body.
· The Council was moving forward with the Safety Valve programme and it was meeting most of its targets.
· The OSSME unit was open for children with autism. Similarly, the base at Earlsmead was open with four children attending. It was hoped that this would increase to 15. Work was underway at Alexandra Park primary for children with emotional, social, mental health support needs. Work was also starting at the Brook for children with additional complex needs. The Cabinet Member commented that the government seemed to be developing a more inclusive approach to SEND with provision through mainstream schools.
· The SEND white paper was expected in the autumn. It was commented that the organisation was lucky to have a DCS who was also vice-president of the association of Directors of Children’s Services.
· The government has expanded Free School Meals but this won’t happen until September 2026. A lot of work was being done to understand how this would be delivered. The government had extended eligibility to children whose parents were on Universal Credit and removing the current income cap of £7400.
· The Cabinet Member noted that there was also the Mayor’s free school meals programme and that there was work to be done to get families to apply for it who were also eligible for FSM through the government scheme. The Cabinet Member commented that children would not be bringing their pupil premium with them. There was a working group in place to look at these type of issues.
· The Cabinet Member advised that she was hoping to convince schools to join a joint procurement exercise to reduce food costs to schools.
· The Cabinet Member advised that she had visited the three government funded pilot breakfast clubs in Haringey – Earlham, Holy Trinity, and St. Mary Priory. The service has produced a video of the visit and the Cabinet Member encouraged Members to watch it.
· The inaugural meeting of local authority governors took place and there were 15 governors in attendance. The Cabinet Member commented that there was work to be done to raise the level of knowledge of governors.
· The Cabinet Member advised that the Council had submitted a long submission to the Select Committee on special needs. The Cabinet Member advised that she would send this round to head teachers and the chairs of governors.
The following arose during the discussion of this item:
a. The Panel sought clarification about how the government’s announcement on Free School Meals (FSM) would interact with the Mayor of London’s pledge on FSM. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that the government funded FSM for all KS1 pupils, but within that cohort some of those children would be eligible to receive the Pupil Premium based on their parents being in receipt of benefits and being below the income threshold. The Cabinet Member emphasised that for those children it was important that they were registered through the government scheme, so that the school could receive £1400 additional funding per pupil. For juniors, FSM was not universal and only children whose families were below the income threshold would receive them. The Mayor’s scheme would fund the rest. The Cabinet Member set out that 26% of Haringey’s school children were receiving FSM.
b. In relation to a follow-up, the Cabinet Member advised that children would be receiving the exact same meal regardless of which scheme they were eligible for, however the Mayor’s scheme actually paid more per head to the school than the government’s scheme. However, it was important that those who were eligible for Pupil Premium to be registered under the government’s scheme.
c. The Panel sought the Cabinet Member’s views in relation to the funding for the breakfast club trial, in light of concerns that the funding provided did not match the funding required for provision of healthy meals. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that she had met with the heads of the three schools and acknowledged that they had different experiences based on the size of the school and the number of pupils involved. The Cabinet Member advised that she got the impression that the heads of both Holy Trinity and St Mary’s were determined to make it work. The Cabinet Member emphasised that she wanted schools to buy into joint procurement in order to maximise the economies of scale and reduce the cost of the food.
d. The Director advised the Panel that the annual engagement meeting was part of the inspection framework for the Area SEND inspection and that as part of the follow-up to the inspection, they came back to speak to the Council annually about the progress made since the inspection. The Panel noted that there was annual submission compiled in response to this and that the inspection body did not have any concerns with the latest submission. The Corporate Director advised that there were still things that the service was not happy with, such the wait times for speech and language therapies.
e. The Panel enquired about school closures. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that two schools were due close because of falling pupil numbers. These were Tiverton and St Peter’s & Gildas. The Cabinet Member commented that it was regrettable and that nobody wanted schools to close, but that the numbers were the numbers. St Peter’s & Gildas would have four pupils below Year 6 until the end of the term. In context, it was noted that Hackney has eight schools closing.
f. The Panel enquired about what could be done to support school provision in Haringey for the Jewish community, rather than attending education settings in Hackney. In response, officers advised that they worked closely with community leaders to find solutions, but that that there were challenges related to the statutory requirements behind building schools.
RESOLVED
Noted.