Loading
The minutes are published. No summary has been written yet.
1.1 Apologies were received from Councillor Glyn Caron, Councillor Richard Overton and Michelle Jones. 1.2 The Chair reminded everyone that it was the last meeting before the pre-election period, and she thanked members of the Committee for their contributions during the previous year.
2.1 Councillor John Killick declared a personal interest in agenda item 6 as he was a member of Pontypool Community Council.
3.1 The minutes of the meeting held on 2nd February 2022 were confirmed as an accurate record.
4.1 With regards to the third action around the 27 open access provisions across Torfaen that were operated by the Youth Service, members of the Committee requested a more detailed breakdown of the provisions, including venues, frequency, partners involved and whether the provisions were available to specific age groups or characteristics. The SCI&SO agreed to forward the request on to the Education department and report back to the Committee. 4.2 In relation to the recommendations from the previous meeting of the Committee, Councillor Killick confirmed his disappointment that the reference to ‘capacity’ within the Education Achievement Service (EAS) Business Plan had been removed as he had raised the initial question in order to ascertain whether there was any support that the Committee could offer in this area. 4.3 Members agreed with the above and requested that they be provided with further clarification on what was meant by the term ‘capacity’ as mentioned on page 10 of the Business Plan (“If schools and educational settings have the capacity to secure improvement and engage with the support available from the EAS, this is the expected impact…”). 4.4 The Committee noted the action sheet. 4.5 The CLO left the meeting.
5.1 The SCI&SO introduced the report, provided a brief background and confirmed the suggested scrutiny activity. 5.2 Following Members’ questions and comments, the COE responded in relation to each report as follows: School Attainment / Performance and EAS Business Plan · All newly qualified teaching staff underwent an induction and additional supervision, led by headteachers, and the general offer was also accompanied by bespoke training. · Training was organised by individual schools and supported by the Local Authority (LA) where appropriate. · No specific concerns had been raised by headteachers or teaching unions regarding training for newly qualified teaching staff or trainees; however the COE would raise the issue with headteachers and report back to members of the Committee if any concerns were raised. Preparation for Additional Learning Needs (ALN) Code / Act · Attendance figures could be improved and had clearly been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic; however schools and the LA were working hard to make sure that all children attended school, which involved reaching out to parents and considerations around individual School Development Plans (SDPs). · The LA was in discussions with schools around the best use of surplus budgets, including additional support that may be required. The surplus budget for schools currently stood at approximately £8m due to extra funding attributed to the pandemic. Welsh in Education Strategic Plan (WESP) · To the COE’s knowledge the LA had not used agencies in order to employ teaching staff; however he would explore whether Ysgol Gyfun Gwynllyw had recently used an agency and report back to members of the Committee with his findings. 5.3 The Committee agreed to retain all of the items within the report for future monitoring.
6.1 The COE gave a brief introduction to the report, highlighting the following areas: • The Council had been very active in terms of delivering services regarding wellbeing; however limited progress had been made in terms of bringing together a system / tool for parents and professionals that included everything within the Wellbeing Offer for Children and Young People. • All Public Services Board (PSB) partners were keen to develop a system based on the Dewis system; however concerns existed around usability and whether or not Dewis would give a rich picture of the Wellbeing Officer in Torfaen. • Discussions with partners would be required around an alternative system, should the Dewis system not be deemed appropriate. 6.2 Following Members’ questions and comments, the COE and the SOE made the following main points: • Officers would be meeting with colleagues from Public Health Wales (PHW) to consider whether the Dewis system was the appropriate way forward in terms of a tool for professionals and users. It had become apparent that the appropriate tool would require significant investment and would need to be achieved on a partnership basis in order to provide the best possible offer. • The Dewis system was an information sharing tool for members of the public regarding social care issues; however the new system would need to be appropriate for professional users too. • Paragraph 4.3 of the report related to an ongoing piece of work around the Wellbeing Offer involving the LA, the EAS and partners. The availability of Council services had been rated highly by schools, and schools and young people were regularly approached for their views around shaping service offers. • Schools had agreed to an in-person conference in the summer term, which would focus on COVID-19 recovery, wellbeing and the possibility of re-shaping services. • On top of engaging with children and young people, regular engagement took place with parents via regional partnership groups and SNAP Cymru; however officers would be happy to consider any further consultation that the Committee wished to recommend. • The Youth Parliament in Torfaen would be named the Torfaen Youth Alliance (TYA). The intention of the TYA was to allow a meaningful representative voice across all children and young people, where they would have the opportunity to question leaders and decision makers. The SOE agreed to circulate the full framework document regarding the TYA with members of the Committee. • Links between the TYA and bodies such as the British Youth Council and Wales Youth Parliament were being explored in order to ensure information exchange amongst all young people. • The TYA had been set a budget of £10,000 for its first year, which would be reviewed annually, and they would be responsible for determining their own workstreams. • The development of an online system had been delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic and officers accepted that progress had not been as quick as they would have liked. Once a decision had been made regarding the use of Dewis or an alternative system members of the Committee would be informed. • During the summer term, a survey would be undertaken of children and young people to gauge their perceptions of need, the services they want to have access to and how these services could be delivered. The results of the survey would be shared with members of the Committee. • The LA was already well placed to support young people with complex and significant needs; however the LA was looking to join up the relevant services and worked closely with colleagues in Social Care. The views of children and young people would help re-shape services where appropriate. • The LA had worked very closely with Early Years settings in recent years, particularly in terms of identifying need and support attributed to the ALN Act. A framework was in place, including online resources and this was an area that was included on the Council’s risk register. Officers reassured members of the Committee that parents had been engaged via various groups. • Expectations and behaviour amongst parents and children had altered during the COVID-19 pandemic and it was important to discuss this area with schools, alongside any issues around developmental experiences. • School exclusion rates had started to rise for a variety of complex reasons, particularly in some secondary schools, with stress in the system and no typical experience existing across the board for pupils due to teacher absence because of COVID-19. The COE agreed to provide a breakdown of exclusions with members of the Committee. • The Children Services Development Plan (CSDP) was being led by the Chief Executive and members of the Council’s Leadership Team. A draft version would initially be shared with Cabinet, followed by wider consultation, including partners. Everyone would have the opportunity to be consulted and the process would also help shape the Council’s Corporate Plan. • Outcome measures attributed to the CSDP would need to be clearly articulated as it was a 5 year plan and would include new ways of service planning and rigorous performance management. • Each strand of the CSDP would be designated to an officer, regular monitoring would be shared with the Council’s Leadership Team and Cabinet would receive regular updates. • Should partners agree on the use of the Dewis system going forward, the project plan would need to be updated and funding would need to be identified during the 2022-23 financial year. Key decisions were required regarding the project, and it was anticipated that the project plan would be updated within the next 6-8 weeks. 6.3 The Chair thanked the COE and the SOE for their contributions to the meeting and they left the meeting. 6.4 On completion of their scrutiny activity, the Committee concluded by offering the following comments and recommendations for consideration: Recommendation 1 – Members requested a copy of the Children Services Development Plan as soon as possible and for this item to be included for consideration, as part of the Committee’s work programme, going forward. Recommendation 2 – Further participation and engagement required with parents, foster parents and wider communities so that they can help shape services, as part of the well-being offer. Recommendation 3 – Members agreed that Early Years / Impact of Flying Start should be included within the Committee’s visioning pack for consideration, as part of the Committee’s work programme, going forward. Recommendation 4 – As part of any preparatory work on policy development, children and young people need to be involved at an early stage and they need to be offered a number of options to be able to respond to such consultations and feel they can contribute freely within forums. Members felt that youth conferences were a good way in which to do this and should be considered appropriately. Recommendation 5 – The Executive Member to ensure that sufficient funding and resource is provided to increase pace of progress towards the well-being offer. 6.5 Whilst discussing the recommendations, members also requested a Project Plan update regarding progress being made in terms of the Well-being Offer.
7.1 The Chair confirmed that the next meeting would take place following the local government elections in May 2022. 7.2 The meeting ended at 11.35am.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.