Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member for Best Start for Children and Families.

In February 2023, a scrutiny panel report which investigated the impact of Covid-19 on the language development of Early Years and Key Stage 1 children in Camden was presented to the CSF Scrutiny Committee. The scrutiny panel was made up of elected members and co-opted members from the CSF Scrutiny Committee. The report requested that the Cabinet Member for Best Start for Children and Families prepare a response to the recommendations from the investigation and to report back to the committee.

The findings of this enquiry revealed that the Covid-19 pandemic had led to a language delay in Early Years in Camden, which could have ramifications for later academic attainment and is likely to disproportionately impact disadvantaged children. This report contains the Cabinet Member for Best Start for Children and Families’ response to these recommendations.

The Scrutiny Panel’s inquiry and praise for the service was gratefully received. Most recommendations are agreed upon. Several recommendations advocate for key members to communicate to national government about identified areas for improvement and/or additional funding. In light of this, Cllr Boyland, Cabinet Member for Best Start for Children and Families, is actively engaging in ongoing discussions with Cllr Georgia Gould, Leader of the Council, on how best to take these recommendations forward.

Consideration was given to the report of the Cabinet Member for Best Start for Children and Families.

Debbie Adams, Head of Early Years, summarised the Cabinet Member’s responses to the recommendations from the scrutiny panel which investigated the impact of Covid-19 on the language development of Early Years and Key Stage 1 children in Camden. The Cabinet Member had sent apologies for this meeting but would be setting up a session for interested Members to discuss the response report.

The Chair stated that informal responses to the scrutiny panel report had also been recently received from Helen Hayes MP (Shadow Minister for Children and Early Years)

and from David Johnston OBE MP (Minister for Children, Families and Wellbeing), on behalf of Gillian Keegan MP (Secretary of State for Education). The responses had been circulated to Committee Members.

The Chair thanked the Cabinet Member for the report and invited questions and comments from the Committee. The following was discussed:

·       In relation to the response to the scrutiny panel’s recommendation 1, a Co-opted Member asked how schools were chosen to participate and if only maintained schools were included. It was confirmed that the nine schools invited to be involved in the project were carefully selected from across a range of deprivation levels. Due to the success and benefits to schools, schools had been encouraging other schools to get involved in Phase 2 of the screening tool work, including PVI (Private, Voluntary and Independent) nurseries.

·       In relation to the response to the scrutiny panel’s recommendation 3, it was confirmed that the Council did not support the recommendation precisely, however the important role for volunteers was recognised in the form of Parent Champions who represented the community. In response to a question, it was confirmed that Paren Champions were DPS (Disclosure and Barring Service) checked, received special training, and were supported and supervised in a formal scheme.

·       In relation to the response to the scrutiny panel’s recommendation 6, a Co-opted Member asked how the ‘Best Start or Baby’ scheme performance would be evaluated and who was accessing the service. In response, it was confirmed that Best Start for Baby was universally offered to children in Camden. The Council was able to access child health records and identify children who had not accessed any services. Through the Family Hub Outreach Strategy, there was a small team of officers who contacted families to check in on the wellbeing of a child. Before the statutory school age there were children who were not visible to services and this scheme would reach those families. In evaluating the impact, the benefits they were trying to achieve through the scheme were lifelong outcomes. In this age group it was difficult to prove cause and effect from schemes like this, but in their work they were trying to develop secure attachments for children which would hopefully prevent issues later down the line, therefore a longitudinal study would be needed to determine the impact.

·       A Member noted that the answers to the recommendations focussed on 0-5 year olds when many children who were in reception during lockdown were now in key stage 2 (KS2). In response, it was confirmed that the funding which had become available to the service was for children born during the pandemic, but officers understood the impact from the pandemic spanned over older age ranges. There was some work in schools, such as the Kids Talk project where parents were invited to sessions which focussed on encouraging development of a good home learning environment and was attended by a significant number of parents.

·       In relation to the response to the scrutiny panel’s recommendation 4, a Member noted that the report stated that 21% of speech and language therapist posts were vacant and the situation was a wider national issue. The Member suggested that Camden should consider employing a number of their own therapists and sell their services to schools directly. In response, it was acknowledged there was a national shortage in the profession and more training into the profession was needed. Officers confirmed they would relay the suggestion to the Cabinet Member.

·       In relation to the response to the scrutiny panel’s recommendation 8, a Member asked what work was taking place to manage the growing demand for SEND.

·       In relation to the response to the scrutiny panel’s recommendation 13, a Co-opted Member asked how the specialist research project referred to could be funded.

·       A Member asked officers which recommendation they thought could make the most difference to Camden children. In response, it was confirmed that it was hard to exactly pinpoint what could make the most difference, however there was a lot of work going on in this space. That work included new birth visits and early communication support, all Health Visitors undergoing the new birth observation training, and consistent messaging across mediums and practitioners. Camden Kids Talk launched in 2021 which had made an impact because it was not just centred around one intervention but a theory of change and collective responsibility, which meant the training was a broad offer to all practitioners working with children in the borough (e.g. midwives, health visitors, early year practitioners, family workers etc). There had also been a skills audit for staff. This year there would be a profile data collection carried out at the end of the Reception year which would track the benefits of the three years of interventions.

RESOLVED –

THAT the Committee note the report.