Wrthi'n llwytho
Mae'r cofnodion wedi'u cyhoeddi. Does dim crynodeb wedi'i ysgrifennu eto.
Apologies for absence were received from: County Councillors A W Davies, B Davies, C Robinson and J Ewing. Co-Opted Member M Evitts. Officers Marianne Evans.
There were no declarations of interest from Members relating to items for consideration on the agenda.
The Committee did not receive any disclosures of prohibited party whips which a Member has been given in relation to the meeting in accordance with Section 78(3) of the Local Government Measure 2011.
The minutes of the 2nd May meeting were proposed and seconded, the Committee members present were in agreement that the minutes were a true and accurate reflection of the meeting, subject to a correction noted by Councillor Gareth E Jones regarding a typographical error (“SOT” corrected to “SWOT”) corrected prior to the meeting and ratified accordingly by the Chair.
Background Councillor Pete Roberts and Richard Jones presented the report, highlighting the key findings as: • Estyn Inspection Outcomes: Since inspections resumed in April 2022, every Powys secondary and all-age school inspected had been placed in a follow-up category—either Estyn Review, Significant Improvement, or Special Measures. This was described as a “stark statement” of underperformance. • Primary School Performance: While primary schools fared better, a higher proportion than the national average were also placed in follow-up categories. Eleven schools received positive spotlights, but concerns remained. • Systemic Challenges: The report identified long-standing, systemic issues in leadership, teaching quality, and pupil outcomes. These were not isolated to individual schools but were evident across the system. • Exam Results: The 2024 results were the first post-pandemic set without moderation. Outcomes were below 2019 levels, with significant underperformance in key indicators such as the number of pupils achieving 5 A*-C grades. • Performance Gaps: Boys, FSM pupils, and pupils not eligible for FSM all underperformed compared to their family school averages. Attendance remained below pre-pandemic levels, particularly in secondary schools. • Leadership and Teaching: Estyn highlighted weaknesses in school leadership, particularly in self-evaluation and line management. Teaching lacked challenge and failed to promote pupil independence. • Integrated Business Plan (IBP): The IBP outlined strategic actions over five years, including leadership development, improved school support, and better use of data. Officers emphasised that this was a whole-council responsibility. Points raised by the Panel: Responses received from Officers or Cabinet Members. Leadership and Accountability · Members questioned whether officers in the local authority accepted responsibility for the findings in the Estyn report. · Committee asked whether officers had visited other local authorities to learn from best practice. · Members sought clarification on whether examples of good practice had been identified and brought back to Powys. · What systems were in place to hold school leaders accountable for pupil outcomes. · Queried how leadership capacity was being built and sustained across the authority. · Asked how the impact of leadership decisions was being monitored and reviewed. Officers accepted that the local authority bore responsibility for the leadership challenges identified in the Estyn report. He emphasised that leadership needed to be strengthened at all levels, including within the local authority itself. Officers confirmed that they had visited other local authorities such as Torfaen, Newport, and Pembrokeshire to learn from best practice and had already begun implementing new strategies, including a Powys Leadership Programme for senior and middle leaders. Governance • Members asked how governors were being supported and trained to challenge schools effectively. • Questioned the role of local authority governors and how vacancies were being addressed. • Committee asked whether there was a process to monitor governor engagement and effectiveness. • Raised concerns about whether the process of appointing governors could be improved. Officers confirmed that 32 local authority governor vacancies existed, with 9 in progress and 23 in the application stage. They acknowledged that the appointment process needed to be more efficient and transparent. Dr Richard Jones stated that the local authority was responsible for filling these vacancies and that elected members played a key role in nominating suitable candidates. Officers also confirmed that governor training was being enhanced, including sessions on effective questioning and holding school leaders to account. Pupil Numbers and Post-16 Education • Members asked what the numbers of post-16 learners were, including those being educated at home or out of county. • Inquired about the net effect of pupils leaving or entering the county for education. Officers acknowledged that they did not have the precise number of post-16 learners being educated out of county readily available during the meeting. However, they committed to providing accurate figures later. Dr Richard Jones confirmed that the local authority was aware of the issue and was working to improve data collection and analysis to better understand learner movement and its impact on outcomes. Challenge Advisors and School Improvement Advisors (SIAs) • Members asked about the capacity of SIAs to support and challenge schools effectively. • Raised concerns about the consistency of support provided by SIAs. • Questioned whether there were sufficient resources to ensure effective school improvement. Officers confirmed that there were currently 5 full-time primary and 2.2 FTE secondary School Improvement Advisors (SIAs). They acknowledged concerns about consistency and capacity and stated that the SIA model was under review. A new structure was being developed to ensure that SIAs could provide more effective support and challenge, with a focus on first-hand evidence and collaboration with school leaders. Support for Disadvantaged and Less Academic Pupils • Committee asked how schools were supporting less academic pupils and those with additional learning needs (ALN). • Sought reassurance that pupils were being given the tools to succeed beyond academic qualifications. • Asked whether there was evidence that the attainment gap for disadvantaged pupils was being closed. The importance of supporting all learners was acknowledged, including those who were less academically inclined. They confirmed that the Cap 9 score was used to measure a broad range of qualifications, including vocational subjects. Welsh Government was also developing new indicators to better reflect the achievements of all learners. Officers stated that the Integrated Business Plan (IBP) included actions to ensure that all pupils received the support they needed to succeed. Additional Learning Needs (ALN) • Members asked whether the current support for ALN pupils was adequate. • Questioned the impact of ALN pupils on mainstream classes and whether this had been considered. • Asked whether there were common themes in ALN provision that needed to be addressed. • Inquired about the review of specialist centres and the timeline for its completion. The Director confirmed that the local authority recognised the challenges posed by ALN in mainstream settings. He stated that a review of specialist centres was underway and that Wave 3 of the ALN strategy was in progress. Officers acknowledged that some schools were struggling to meet the needs of ALN pupils and that this could impact the wider classroom. They committed to improving support, training, and resources for schools to manage these challenges effectively. Post-16 Outcomes and Cross-Border Movement • Members asked how many learners were leaving Powys for post-16 education and why. • Questioned the impact of this movement on Powys’ overall performance. • Speculated whether the best-performing students were those leaving the county. • Called for a cross-border deep dive to better understand learner movement and its implications. Officers confirmed that Powys ranked 14th out of 22 local authorities for post-16 outcomes, which was a significant concern. They acknowledged that many learners were leaving the county for better opportunities and that more data was needed to understand this trend. The Portfolio Holder for a More Prosperous Powys emphasised the need for radical reform of the post-16 system and stated that the current model was failing many learners. Officers agreed and committed to further investigation and engagement with stakeholders. Curriculum and Funding • Committee asked whether schools were able to deliver a broad and balanced curriculum with current funding levels. • Questioned whether the 1:25 funding ratio was sufficient to meet curriculum demands. • Asked about the relationship between funding and the breadth of curriculum offered. It was confirmed that a review of the 1:25 funding ratio was underway to determine whether it allowed schools to offer a broad and balanced curriculum. They acknowledged that some schools were dropping subjects due to funding constraints and that this could affect outcomes. The local authority was working with schools to explore more flexible funding models and ensure that all learners had access to a suitable curriculum. Parental and Community Engagement • Members asked how the local authority was improving communication and trust with families. • Requested how feedback from parents and carers was being gathered and acted upon. • Asked what strategies were in place to engage young people and communities more effectively. The Director stated that the local authority was working to rebuild trust with families and improve communication. He confirmed that a youth engagement strategy was being developed and that schools were being encouraged to involve parents more actively. Officers acknowledged that some parents might be disengaged due to their own negative experiences of education and that this needed to be addressed through targeted outreach and support. Data and Performance Monitoring • Committee Members asked whether more baseline data could be provided to measure progress against key performance indicators (KPIs). • Questioned how schools were performing compared to their family groups. • Were consistent themes of strengths and weaknesses across schools that could be addressed strategically. Officers confirmed that the IBP included clear KPIs and that baseline data would be added to allow for effective monitoring. They acknowledged that performance varied across schools and that more needed to be done to share best practice. The local authority was developing new tools, such as data heat maps, to better understand school performance and target support where it was most needed.
Observations: The Committee noted: That the School Standards and Improvement Report highlighted systemic and long-standing challenges in Powys’ education system. That since April 2022, all secondary and all-age schools inspected had been placed in Estyn review or statutory follow-up categories. That primary schools had a stronger profile, but a higher-than-average proportion were still placed in follow-up categories. That the 2024 exam results were the first post-pandemic results without moderation, and outcomes were below 2019 levels. That performance varied across schools, with some doing better for free school meal pupils than others. That the Integrated Business Plan (IBP) was being developed to address the issues raised by Estyn and internal evaluations. The Committee welcomed: The honesty and transparency of the School Standards and Improvement Report. The development of the Integrated Business Plan and its focus on sustainable, system-wide improvement. The commitment to termly updates to the committee on school standards. The engagement with other local authorities to learn from best practice. The intention to improve governor training and support. The proposal to improve communication and accountability between schools and the local authority. The development of a Powys leadership programme for senior and middle leaders. The use of secondments to bring external expertise into Schools. The Committee requested: A deep dive into cross-border pupil movement, both pre- and post-16, to understand the impact on Powys’ education outcomes. More detailed data on post-16 learners, including those educated outside the county. Clarification on the number of pupils in elective home education and those educated out of the county. A review of the process for appointing and monitoring local authority governors. The Committee remained unconvinced about: The effectiveness of current support for pupils with Additional Learning Needs (ALN) in mainstream settings. The capacity of the current challenge advisor system to provide consistent and effective support to schools. The adequacy of school funding and its impact on curriculum breadth and outcomes. The robustness of leadership accountability mechanisms at both school and local authority levels. The sufficiency of parental and community engagement strategies in supporting school improvement. The Committee expressed concern about: The high number of local authority governor vacancies and the complexity of the appointment process. The inconsistency in challenge advisor support and the impact of high turnover on school improvement. The potential for predetermination in the Integrated Business Plan regarding the establishment of a new Welsh-medium school. The impact of ALN pupils on classroom dynamics and the adequacy of support for teachers and schools. The apparent disconnect between the Mid Wales Education Partnership’s success in Ceredigion and its limited impact in Powys. Scrutiny Recommendations to Cabinet 1. The Committee recommended a comprehensive review of the current support for pupils with Additional Learning Needs (ALN) in mainstream settings. This included an evaluation of the adequacy and consistency of ALN support across schools, an assessment of the impact of ALN pupils on classroom dynamics and teacher workload, a review of the training and resources available to staff to meet diverse learning needs, and consideration of whether current funding and staffing levels were sufficient to deliver inclusive education effectively. The Committee emphasised the importance of ensuring that all pupils, regardless of need, received appropriate and effective support to thrive academically and socially. 2. The Committee sought clarification on the number of pupils being educated at home by choice (elective home education) and those attending schools outside the county. This was to assess the scale of these trends and their implications for Powys’ education strategy and support services. 3. It was recommended that the Cabinet ensured the provision of more granular data on post-16 learners. This included those attending institutions outside Powys, to enable a clearer picture of learner destinations, attainment, and the effectiveness of local post-16 provision. 4. The Committee requested a thorough investigation into the movement of pupils across county borders, both before and after the age of 16, by the Learning and Skills Committee. This was to better understand how such movement affected educational outcomes in Powys, particularly in terms of resource allocation, school planning, and learner progression. 5. Concerns were raised about the high number of vacancies for local authority governors and the complexity of the appointment process. The Committee recommended a review of the procedures for appointing and monitoring governors to improve governance capacity and effectiveness in schools.
Background: As this paper was presented to Cabinet on the 10th June, it was for Scrutiny to note. However, the Portfolio Holder for a Learning Powys requested observations and recommendations would be welcomed from the Scrutiny Committee. Points raised by the Panel: Responses received from Officers or Cabinet Members. Scope and Nature of Safeguarding Works • Members asked how many schools were affected by the safeguarding works. • Inquired about the types of safeguarding works being undertaken (e.g. fencing, traffic management, locks). • Questioned whether the safeguarding issues had only been identified as a result of Estyn inspections or whether they had been previously known to the authority. Officers informed that a total of 53 safeguarding projects were underway across the local authority. It had been clarified that this figure did not necessarily correspond to 53 individual schools, as some schools had been subject to more than one project. The nature of the safeguarding works varied, with projects including measures such as traffic management, the installation of fencing, and the fitting of locks. In many cases, a single project addressed multiple safeguarding concerns simultaneously. It had been confirmed that the identification of safeguarding issues had not been solely reliant on Estyn inspections. While Estyn had indeed highlighted several concerns, the majority of issues had been reported through a variety of channels. These included routine site visits by strategic property officers, reports from education colleagues, health and safety assessments, and, most significantly, direct reports from schools themselves. Estyn had therefore been one of several contributors to the overall safeguarding picture. Funding and Financial Clarity • Members questioned whether the £1.75 million funding was entirely capital expenditure or if it included revenue elements. • Requested a breakdown of the funding sources, including how much was being funded through grants, revenue, and borrowing. • Queried the accuracy of the stated borrowing cost of £55,000 per £1 million, noting inconsistencies with other council reports. • Asked whether borrowing assumptions were consistent across different reports and whether the methodology used was standardised. • Questioned whether the funding committed by Cabinet would be sufficient to complete all the safeguarding works identified at the time of the report. The total funding allocation of £1.75 million had comprised both capital and revenue elements. Specifically, £400,000 was expected to be secured through capital grants, £295,000 had been drawn from the revenue budget, and £1.055 million had been allocated as capital expenditure. This breakdown had been detailed in paragraph 10.2 of the Cabinet report. Members had raised concerns regarding the accuracy and consistency of the stated borrowing cost of £55,000 per £1 million. Officers had responded by explaining that borrowing costs varied depending on the nature of the assets involved and the method of calculation. As such, discrepancies between reports had arisen due to differing assumptions and methodologies. It had been acknowledged that greater consistency in financial reporting would be beneficial going forward. At the time of the report, officers had expressed confidence that the funding committed by Cabinet would be sufficient to address the safeguarding issues identified. However, it had also been acknowledged that safeguarding needs were not static. As further issues were reported and additional risk assessments were undertaken, the scope of required works could expand. Officers had therefore committed to keeping the situation under continuous review and to seeking additional funding if necessary. Project Delivery and Capacity • Members asked whether the local authority had the capacity, including contractors and procurement processes, to carry out the safeguarding works within a suitable timeframe. • Whether the works could be completed during the school summer holidays and whether schools would be given sufficient notice to make arrangements. • Asked whether the local authority was confident that the committed funding would be enough to bring all identified sites up to the required safeguarding standard. Officers had stated that they were confident in the local authority’s capacity to carry out the safeguarding works. They had requested realistic timeframes from contractors and had acknowledged that some projects, particularly those involving listed buildings or public rights of way, might require extended timelines due to their complexity. It had also been confirmed that efforts were being made to schedule works during school holidays, particularly the summer break, to minimise disruption. Schools had been consulted in advance, especially where works might interfere with exam periods or other key activities. Officers had reiterated that the funding secured would have a significant impact on the authority’s ability to improve safeguarding standards across the school estate, but that ongoing monitoring and flexibility would be essential. Communication and Oversight • Members asked when schools would be informed about the safeguarding works planned for their sites. • Raised concerns about communication with schools and asked whether a dashboard or tracking system was in place to monitor project progress and keep schools updated. Communication with schools had been identified as an area requiring improvement. Officers had acknowledged that schools needed timely and accurate information about planned works. To address this, a live dashboard system was being developed to allow schools to monitor the progress of safeguarding projects, view contractor details, and access scheduling information. This system aimed to reduce the need for schools to contact the strategic property team directly and to improve transparency across the board. Schools had also been consulted regarding the timing of works, with particular attention paid to avoiding disruption during exam periods. Officers had confirmed that schools would be informed in advance and that the dashboard would provide real-time updates. Contractor Responsibility and Liability • Members questioned whether safeguarding issues in new school buildings were the responsibility of the contractors. • Whether the local authority was holding contractors accountable for deficiencies in safeguarding provisions in recently completed projects. It had been explained that liability for safeguarding deficiencies in new school buildings depended on the specific terms of each contract. Generally, contracts for new builds included time-limited provisions that allowed the authority to hold contractors accountable for defects. Officers had confirmed that they were willing to engage with individual schools to review contract terms and determine responsibility on a case-by-case basis. This approach ensured that where safeguarding issues had arisen in recently completed projects, the local authority could pursue remedial action with the relevant contractors, provided the contractual conditions allowed for it.
Observations: Scrutiny made the following observations: The Committee requested that: · Confirmation that the safeguarding funding would be sufficient to address all identified issues. The Committee expressed concern: · The lack of clarity and accuracy in financial figures presented in the safeguarding budget paper. Scrutiny Recommendation to Cabinet: 1. The Committee asked for confirmation that the funding allocated for safeguarding was sufficient to address all identified issues. This followed concerns about the clarity and accuracy of financial figures presented in the safeguarding budget paper.
The responses from Cabinet were noted.
The work programme was noted.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.