Agenda item

Purpose: To provide Children’s Scrutiny with information on school attendance in West Berkshire. This report outlines how West Berkshire Council is meeting its statutory duties in relation to school attendance. It provides an overview of our strategic approach, operational delivery, and multi-agency collaboration to support children and families, with a focus on reducing persistent and severe absence. It draws on the approved Attendance Strategy 2025 and the Improving School Attendance Delivery Plan 2025–2026, demonstrating a strategic, multi-agency, and child-centred approach to improving attendance outcomes across the local area.

Melissa Perry (Principal Education Welfare Officer/Lead Officer for Safeguarding) presented the report on Local Authority Statutory Duties Around Attendance (Agenda Item 7).

The following points were raised in the debate:

·       Officers indicated that the reasons for absenteeism were multi-faceted.

·       After the Covid pandemic, attendance in West Berkshire had been worse that the national average, but performance had since improved, and it was now better than average.

·       Members noted that there was no explicit mention of bullying in the report – officers indicated that this was one of a wide range of issues affecting attendance.

·       It was explained that each school sought to address issues through its own tailored action plan.

·       Officers confirmed that the statistics in the report included pupils from Traveller communities.

·       It was suggested that West Berkshire Council should compare itself to similar local authorities. Officers explained that, with the exception of Reading, the other Berkshire authorities were regarded as statistical neighbours.

·       Officers were encouraged to read the Covid and Recovery Task and Finish Group report, since this had highlighted impacts on attendance and had recommended reallocation of resources to address these.

·       Members asked if there were individual schools that had been particularly successful in improving attendance, and whether learning could be shared with other schools. It was confirmed that schools were matched so weaker ones learned from stronger ones.

Action: Officers to provide detailed statistics on individual schools that had been most effective in improving attendance.

·       It was suggested that leaders of strongly performing schools could be invited to attend a future meeting of the Committee to share insights on how they had improved attendance.

·       It was requested that acronyms be explained in all future reports.

Action: Officers to explain acronyms in all future reports.

·       Officers explained that the Attendance Team only provided advice to schools and did not employ any Education Welfare Officers (EWOs). However, many schools employed their own family workers. The importance of providing early support for families was recognised.

·       It was noted that the Council offered comprehensive training for schools and their attendance leads, and was in regular contact with schools throughout the year to discuss their needs.

·       Officers confirmed that the Attendance Working Group included representatives from: the Parent Carer Forum, Youth Service, Thames Valley Police, Youth Justice Service, schools, Social Care, Complaints, Virtual School, and the voluntary sector.

·       Members asked if the loss of Council EWOs had put extra pressure on schools, and if this had led to issues around attendance. Officers explained that the role of local authorities in relation to attendance had changed, and the Council was managing as best it could to meet statutory responsibilities.

·       It was noted that funding had been devolved to allow schools to employ their own staff, and the current WBC service had been co-designed with schools.

·       Officers confirmed that stats were used to inform how resources were deployed to deliver focused projects with schools.

·       It was hoped that the Attendance Strategy would lead to improvement. Officers indicated that the Strategy would continue to evolve over time.

The Committee voted to suspend Standing Orders to permit Olive Kayongo (SEND Parent Carer Forum Chair) to speak. Ms Kayongo made the following points:

·       Some children and young people were unable to attend schools because their mental health was so severely impacted.

·       Some children experienced suicidal thoughts and were being kept home for safeguarding purposes.

·       Some neurodivergent children experienced significant challenges - although they wanted to be educated, they struggled to be in school.

·       Local evidence suggested that the problem was getting worse for SEND children.

·       Parents had told the Parent Carer Forum that they found it challenging to navigate the system - some were worried about fines, while others struggled to communicate that that their children could not attend school for medical reasons.

·       Key groups were autistic children and those with sensory difficulties. In some cases, children were in school, but they were not receiving education, because they could not learn in that environment. Others could not get beyond the school gates.

·       Parents needed to be heard and services co-produced to support them.

Members entered into further debate and the following points were discussed:

·       It was confirmed that alterative options to school were explored where appropriate, including the iCollege. The aim was to identify issues as quickly as possible.

·       Officers indicated that reasons for persistent absence were multi-faceted and staff worked with each school to develop tailored plans.

·       It was stressed that, as with safeguarding, every service within Children’s Services had a part to play in addressing attendance.

·       It was explained that ‘persistent absence’ referred to attendance rates of less than 90% and ‘severely absent’ referred to attendance rates of less than 50%.

·       Members noted that some schools had members of staff appointed to lead on attendance, which delivered good results. These roles often included other responsibilities (e.g., safeguarding, or behaviour) that were linked.

·       It was suggested that it may be helpful for the Committee to do a deep dive scrutiny review to look further at issues around attendance.

ACTION: The Committee to programme a deep dive review on Attendance.

RESOLVED to note the report.

The Committee voted to resume standing orders.