Agenda item

Purpose: To present the proposed response to issues raised by the DfE Regional Director for the South East.

It was reported that it had not been possible to bring a report on the Response to the DfE Regional Director’s comments (Agenda Item 6) to the meeting as planned, and so it was proposed that substantive consideration be deferred to the next meeting. 

Officers confirmed that work was underway to agree with headteachers how best to use the Council’s investment for the current financial year. The one-year nature of the settlement had limited the ability to recruit permanent staff, but officers were working with the DfE Regions Group to explore options.

Members stressed the importance of responding to the serious concerns raised by the DfE Regional Director in a timely manner.

It was noted that there had not been much time between meetings of this committee, due to the previous meeting having been delayed. Also, the SEND Reform Plan had needed to be prioritised due to its pressing deadline. However, assurance was provided that work was ongoing to respond to Dame Kate’s letter and a full response would be reported to the next meeting in September.

Members were unhappy with the delay given the importance of the challenge and expressed concern about how this would be perceived by the DfE.

The Executive Portfolio Holder suggested that it would be better to provide a comprehensive response at the next meeting, rather than an incomplete position now, and that officers needed time to complete the work to an appropriate standard.

Reference was made to a recent press release, which had indicated that the attainment issue was fixed/on a sound footing. It was explained that the comments referred to improved results for pupils attaining a ‘Good Level of Development’. Also, the school improvement offer had shifted from a bought-in service to a district-wide service with expanded capacity.

The Committee was reminded that Dame Kate had said that the Council’s plan was sound, and that the key challenge related to resourcing. Additional resources had since been secured and work was ongoing to determine how these should best be deployed.

Action taken since receipt of the letter included:

·       Use of intervention powers in schools;

·       Removal of governing bodies where governance and oversight were not strong enough;

·       Establishment of interim executive boards at some schools;

·       Action to address leadership and outcomes, including the appointment of a new executive head at Kennet Valley Primary School.

The above actions reflected a firmer and more decisive approach to addressing underperformance.

It was noted that changes to the Ofsted regime would pick up on performance concerns, but the Council was proactively seeking to address this. Ofsted colleagues had recognised rapid improvement in schools following intervention.

The Council was working collaboratively with the DfE Region’s Team and schools were being directed to the DfE’s RISE programme to access evidence-based improvement support.

The Committee welcomed the actions that had been taken and felt reassured that progress was being made. It was suggested that this be a standing agenda item for future meetings.

It was noted that the performance dashboard would enable regular scrutiny of attainment measures.

Action: Progress on the response to the DfE Regional Director’s letter to be kept under regular review at future meetings.