Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Julian Fulbrook and Margaret Harvey.

There were no declarations.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: ‘In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for twelve months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to having your contributions recorded and broadcast, including video when switched on, and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes’.

Any Other Announcements

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair announced the following: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If you are addressing the Committee your contribution will be recorded and broadcast.”

Welcome to new Committee Member, Cllr Patirica Leman

On behalf of the Committee, the Chair welcomed Cllr Patirica Leman as a new Committee Member, replacing Cllr Shiva Tiwari.

Requests to speak at the Committee on a matter within its terms of reference must be made in writing to the clerk named on the front of this agenda by 5pm two working days before the meeting.

The Chair stated that two deputations would be presented to the Committee which would be considered in turn.

Deputation 1 – AI technologies and special educational needs and disability (SEND) support

Dana Klopot presented their deputation statement, on the topic of AI technologies and SEND support, included within the supplementary agenda (pages 3-4).

The Chair thanked the deputees for their presentation and invited questions and comments from the Committee. The following was discussed:

·       A Member expressed interest in the potential of AI, but raised concern over a possible increasing administrative burden on staff, given reduced capacity in recent years. They noted that SEND needs in Camden were highly intersectional and questioned whether AI solutions would fairly apply, because some demographic groups already underserved were often failed in AI models due to the lack of data and recognition. In response, the deputee confirmed the aim was to create AI applications that benefitted every individual, both in Camden and globally. They emphasised that AI could support day-to-day needs by analysing patterns and providing timely resources, which could currently take years to access. The AI technology was scalable, affordable, and highly efficient.

·       A Member asked for clarification on how an AI system would work, specifically integrating into current systems and its ability to identify early signs of neurodivergence. In response, the deputee explained that the technology could identify signs of neurodivergence as early as age two and could then offer solutions to providers. They highlighted the use of sensitive data, in compliance with regulations, enabling the system to detect signs of neurodivergence through prompts and mathematical analysis. The deputee described the use of a ‘neurodiversity bank’ that would continuously learn and improve its accuracy by analysing more data, allowing it to better identify needs and provide early interventions. The system would act as a centralised platform for support and resources.

Members requested that officers prepare a written response to the deputees.

Action By - Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion

Deputation 2 – Environmental impact of school uniforms.

Hugo Keane and Alexandra Milenov presented their deputation statement, on the topic of the environmental impact of school uniforms, included within the supplementary agenda (pages 5-9).

The Chair thanked the deputees for their presentation and invited questions and comments from the Committee. The following was discussed:

·       A Member expressed support for the research, but raised a concern about the cost, noting that polyester was inexpensive while cotton tended to be more expensive. They asked how the issue could be addressed while keeping uniforms affordable. The deputee highlighted that, with fellow parents, they had compared uniform costs and found that high street shops often offered cheaper, more environmental options than the prescribed uniform and it was possible to offer better, non-polyester alternatives within the typical £250 uniform budget. The deputee recommended reimagining the uniform, possibly phasing out the blazer, as a simple first step.

·       A Member suggested that schools could recycle uniforms and asked what systems or incentives were in place at schools to support this.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meetings held on 8 October 2024.

RESOLVED - 

THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 8 October 2024, subject to the correction, be agreed as an accurate record.

There was no urgent business.

Report of the Director of Children’s Prevention, Family Help and Safeguarding, Children and Learning.

This report provides information about complaints made to the Children’s statutory services in the London Borough of Camden during the twelve months between 1^st April 2023 and 31^st March 2024. It is a statutory requirement to produce an annual report which is published on the Council’s website.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Relational Practice.

Nana Bonsu, Director of Relational Practice, introduced and summarised the statutory annual report which provided information about complaints made to the Children’s statutory services in the London Borough of Camden during the twelve months between April 2023 and March 2024.

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

·       A Member raised concerns about the representation of ethnicity in the complaints data, noting that it did not align with the general ethnic composition of young people in Camden. They questioned whether this discrepancy reflected satisfaction among ethnic minority groups, or discomfort in engaging with the complaints process. Members asked whether the current data provided good representation or whether certain demographics were underrepresented in complaints. In response, officers explained that Corporate Services did not currently collect ethnicity data, but planned to introduce a feedback form to gather demographic information from 2025. For the current report, ethnicity data had been manually sourced from the MOSAIC (integrated service for children and young people with disabilities and their families) database, which was incomplete but provided some insight. Officers emphasised the need for more granular data in future reports and noted that current figures did not capture complaints resolved informally before Stage 1 of the process. Officers recognised the potential barriers faced by some demographic groups, including language challenges, and highlighted the importance of ensuring equitable access to advocacy and offer clear communication about what to expect from services. They proposed exploring benchmarking to assess whether the level of complaints reflected a confident and empowered user base. Additionally, officers noted the importance of gathering feedback through alternative channels to ensure the voices of all service users were heard.

·       A Member raised concerns that some residents might not be aware of their right to complain or that they could contact councillors. They noted that complaints data might not fully reflect issues, as by the time people reached the complaints stage, their situation might have significantly deteriorated. The Member also queried why there were more complaints about Children in Need services than Children Looked After services. Officers explained that the higher volume of complaints related to Children in Need services was likely due to the size of the service, which was one of the largest within the department. They noted that Children in Need and Child Protection services involved more direct contact with families than some other areas, such as the Children Looked After or Quality Assurance services. Officers highlighted that the nature of the work in these services, particularly around support and risk, introduced complexities that could influence how families experienced the service. They acknowledged that decisions made in these areas were often challenging and emphasised the importance of communicating respectfully and effectively with families during difficult times. Officers suggested that the context and dynamics of the work were likely factors influencing the complaints data.

·       In relation to the table in section 4.2, a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

Over the last 5 years there has been a significant reduction in demand for school places within Camden and the wider London area. Forecasts of pupil demand have also been created in times of unprecedented change and challenge for families in Camden. Specifically, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have fundamentally altered people’s lives and changed patterns of migration within central London and Camden Borough specifically. The impacts of these have reduced the anticipated level of demand for school places across the Borough.

Since 2018 the Council, in partnership with its family of schools, has removed 10 forms of entry from our reception intake, responding to a reduction in birth rates of over 30% across the borough. These difficult decisions including four school closures, the most recent being the closure of St Dominic’s Catholic Primary School, ensure that our family schools remain both sustainable and responsive to the needs of their communities.

The forecast data continues show supressed birth rates within London and Camden alongside the continued effect of reductions in families moving into Camden during the COVID period. Whilst the peak of surplus anticipated from last year is not forecast to increase our new forecasts indicate that Camden will reach that peak sooner, and that the marginal increases towards the end of the planning period will not be realised to the same extent.

Primary:

The surplus over the reception year admission number is estimated to rise 6.7% in 2023 to 28% by 2032/33.

Secondary:

The Secondary Year 7 surplus is estimated to increase from 12% in 2023 to 21% by 2032/3. 

This level of anticipated surplus provision within both phases does require responses overtime to ensure the sustainability of our school offer. The Council in collaboration with schools has established a School Place Planning Group of school leaders to develop a school place planning strategy with aligned implementation plan focused on schools most acutely impacted by falling roles.

Ensuring Camden has the right number of school places is both the Council’s statutory responsibility and aligns with our We Make Camden principals and are fundamental to the implementation of the Councils Education Strategy ‘Building Back Stronger’. Preventing schools becoming financially vulnerable and thus subject to unplanned change, helps maintain strong, safe and open communities. Good and outstanding schools promote independent healthy lives and support robust growth and jobs. 

The data and forecasts of the demand for school places within Camden is reviewed annually by the authority and made publicly available. Our review incorporates all underlying demographic data including: existing provision and capacity, actual registered births and fertility, the latest Greater London Authority (GLA) forecasts for births and their relationship to school rolls, together with the additional pupils associated with new housing developments. The analysis is used to help us make informed decisions about the future organisation of school places.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Education and Inclusion.

Nick Smith, Head of Education Commissioning and School Organisation, introduced and summarised the report which set out the composite and live data projections for school places and demonstrated the basis for school place planning decision-making in Camden. There had been five years of unprecedented change, with fluctuations caused by Brexit, the pandemic and other external factors. The latest data did not indicate a further decline in pupil numbers, however it also did not show an upturn in demand in the near future. The reduction in pupil numbers had immediate budget implications for schools, such as challenges in delivering a full curriculum. The long-term trend raised questions for the Council about the sustainability of the system going forward. While surplus provision had already been removed, there was still a forecasted surplus of school places in the future. Primary schools, secondary schools and different geographical planning areas of the borough faced different contexts, but Camden had been at the forefront in working to alter provisions to match demand.

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

·       A Member highlighted the high proportion of pupils in independent schools in Camden, noting that Camden had 31 independent schools compared to Islington’s seven. They asked if there was any scope for collaboration with London Councils or other boroughs to encourage pupils into the maintained sector. Officers responded that Camden was already working with other local authorities and London Councils, which had released papers lobbying government for funding to address falling rolls. They noted that private schools in Camden often imported pupils from both London and further afield, which was not too different from Islington. Camden would welcome a joint approach to encourage more pupils to move into the maintained sector and the Cabinet Member for Best Start for Children and Families had an interest in this topic. However, officers pointed out that while this initiative could help, it would not solve the entire issue, as the private sector could not be treated as a homogenous group. Some private school families had never engaged with the state sector, while others had tried to apply for school places but were not awarded their first choice due to the admissions criteria and then left the state sector.

·       A Member asked about the differences between the secondary and primary school populations and how that impacted planning. Officers confirmed that the secondary population differed from the primary population primarily due to the locations of schools; some secondary schools were located near borough boundaries and drew a significant portion of their pupils from outside Camden, whereas primary schools tended to have more local catchment areas in pockets within the borough.

·       A Member asked whether the risks associated with a continued long-term decline in pupil numbers had been considered, particularly in terms of the potential impact on schools budgets. In response, officers explained that there was ongoing engagement  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion and Chief Executive Officer, Camden Learning.

This report discusses the prevalence of persistent absence in Camden’s schools and an overview of our work to ensure education is inclusive for all children. Overall attendance in Camden schools in 2023/24 has improved from previous years but remains below pre-pandemic levels and the proportion of pupils considered persistently absent is higher than comparable national rates. This report details our current work to improve attendance and inclusion of students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and an overview of existing alternative provision and support for children known to social care, including looked after children.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion and the Chief Executive Officer, Camden Learning.

Vikram Hansrani, Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion, and Chris Roberts, Senior Adviser for Safeguarding & Inclusion at Camden Learning, introduced and summarised the report which provided information on the prevalence of persistent absence in Camden’s schools and provided an overview of work to ensure education was inclusive for all children, including alternative provision.

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

·       In relation to section 3.2, a Member asked if the Council knew who were the 1,505 persistently absent primary school children and how they were supported. In response, it was confirmed that Camden Council with Camden Learning was working with schools to help planning and address the issue. This work was also part of the Youth Mission to tackle the issue. It was noted the secondary school level of persistent absence was higher at nearly 2,000 and it was a system wide issue. Where there were more severe cases of persistent absences, children would be referred to other support services, instead of other milder targeted approaches within schools for less severe cases such as resetting messaging.

·       A Member said that there should be empathy shown to children with SEND in mainstream settings who were struggling, also raising there may be absences related to medical appointments which were marked against them. In response, officers said this report referred to current challenges and included data for special schools, where SEND had a high level of persistent absence. It was noted that often children could miss a whole day for an appointment and Camden would like to improve messaging to encourage families to attend school for a half-day on appointment days where possible, or that families try to request appointments out of school hours where possible.

·       Members asked for more detailed information to be included in a future report about the background, outcomes, and destinations of children in alternative provision. In response, officers noted that there was a current focus on integrating the SEND strategy with alternative provision, aligning with the 2022 Green Paper and the associated SEND Improvement Plan from the Department for Education (DfE). Officers would ensure all alternative provision data was captured in the SEND Strategy progress report in February 2025.

·       A Co-opted Member said this report was a good start, however it was lacking information in the following areas: it was hard to identify when, why and which groups of children were not at school; the variations between genders or variations between schools was unclear; the report was vague on which initiatives were successful or why certain interventions had been chosen; CAMHS (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services) was not referenced in the report; in relation to section 4.5, there was no mention of targeted interventions for children at higher risk; and there was little information on the impact of the interventions which had been chosen.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Executive Director Children and Learning.

This report provides an outline of the 2024/25 work programme (Appendix 1) and provides an update on actions requested at previous meetings (Appendix 2).

Consideration was given to the report of the Executive Director Children and Learning.

Tim Aldridge, Executive Director Children and Learning, summarised the work programme.

In relation to item 8, a Co-opted Member requested a new iteration of the school place planning report, which would include details on strategic forward planning and decision-making scenarios, based on points raised in the discussion. In response, it was confirmed that possible meeting dates to consider this report and other options for communicating the work with the Committee would be reviewed. It was noted that the work programme for the remainder of the municipal year was busy, and officers would need sufficient time to prepare this type of strategic report. Depending on the content, prior communication with schools might also be necessary before a public report. A Member suggested that, instead, a briefing session or workshop on the topic could be arranged for Committee Members.

In relation to item 9, Members requested a more detailed report on persistent absence, to include information about the types of measures being used, further SEND data, case studies, and responses to questions raised in the discussion. It was confirmed that there would be a discussion outside of the meeting on how best to present the information to the Committee.

RESOLVED –

THAT the report be noted.

The Children, Schools and Families Scrutiny Committee is asked to note the meeting dates for the remainder of the 2024-25 municipal year:

·       Tuesday, 10 December 2024

·       Tuesday, 14 January 2025

·       Monday, 24 February 2025

The next meeting would be on 10 December 2024. The remaining meeting dates for the 2024/25 municipal were noted.

There was no urgent business.