Agenda item

Context:

We received a report from the Head of Achievement and Attainment in order to provide Members of the Children and Young People Select Committee the Annual Quality Assurance Report 2015 for the commissioned service provided by the Education Achievement Service.

Key Issues:

In September 2014, a revised process for quality assuring the work and impact of the Education Achievement Service was implemented across the region. This process followed an annual cycle and included monthly reviews and termly evaluations by the Local Authority School Improvement Lead and the Principal Challenge Adviser. At the end of the year the work and impact of the Education Achievement Service was evaluated in detail and presented to the Cabinet Member for further scrutiny and challenge.

The strengths of the service are noted and areas for further improvement identified. Outcomes from this process feeds into the directorate’s self-evaluation processes. Included in the report is an overview of the work of the Challenge Adviser, the role of the Principal Challenge Adviser and the Quality Assurance process.

Member Scrutiny:

A Member highlighted that the meeting report to Committee took place in August and questioned why it had taken so long to receive the report.  It was explained that officers did not have the full raft of information at the time the report was put together because the EAS were unable to provide the reports in a consistent format.  Officers had been gathering information and the Estyn inspection may have been cause for delay.  EAS had taken on board the issues raised and the bundle of reports were now of a different quality.  It was confirmed that next year comprehensive reports would be brought to Committee sooner.

We heard that the acronym BIS stood for Business Intelligence Service.  Members reiterated the need for explanations of acronyms within the reports.

Members suggested that the report should highlight concerns from the Senior Officer and Cabinet Member, however we noted that by this time the report is actually a summary.  Members were keen to scrutinise reports throughout the year in order to address any issues as they arise.

In response to a question regarding adequate engagement between schools and EAS we were informed that the level of engagement was driven by the support category.  Almost all schools would accept that the balance is right.

When asked where the EAS was currently letting us down, the Head of Achievement and Attainment explained that the BIS reports were not helpful, yet the challenge advisor reports had become increasingly better over time.  The National Categorisation Reports viewed by Estyn had not been through the QA process at the time they were requested and were still at a point of discussion.

A Member questioned if there were any areas where the EAS were letting the Authority down.  Officers believed that over the years the Challenge Advisor Team had changed and there was now a strong team providing consistent challenge within schools.  The BIS area was developing well and there was a good programme of support.

A Member asked the Cabinet Member if there was confidence that the reports from EAS were fit for purpose as per the Estyn letter.  The Cabinet Member explained that the EAS had grown into their role and report writing had been an area of development.  The EAS had received an inspection and was due another in the near future, and were therefore ensuring all was in order.

A Member requested further clarification on why we believe the EAS provided value for money.  The Cabinet Member explained that value for money was important in all aspects of the Council.  The EAS had broken the budget down to enable Cabinet Members to see what we were receiving and to identify if schools were progressing accordingly.  We were able to identify that targets were being met, and if they were not we would be asking different questions.  The targets set in schools were being achieved and standards were going up faster than the all Wales.  It was believed that the value for money was greater now than when it first started.

A Member questioned if the EAS were delivering effectively in Welsh education.  In response we heard that there the EAS provide two areas of support being Welsh as a first language and Welsh as a second language.  Although the Welsh team were one group they both work differently and different support was given.  The second language support was very good and the schools were doing very well.  Where Welsh as a second language had been identified as an area for development progress was swift with a good impact from the EAS team.  There were only two schools with Welsh as a first language often with a small cohort.  It was noted that many of the pupils who attended the schools were not from Welsh speaking homes and were being judged as they would be judged in all Welsh schools where a greater proportion of pupils were from a home where Welsh was spoken as a first language.  With only 2 schools to compare the average would be brought down which would therefore have an impact on the overall position of the Welsh first language schools, putting up 16^th and 20^th in Wales.  The support for the Welsh first language schools was provided by an experience challenge advisor, and things were developing and improving significantly.

A Member questioned if the reports had been well written would it have reflected a different position.  The Head of Achievement and Attainment confirmed that certain impacts identified in schools by officers had not been reflected in the reports. Improvements could be seen that were not appearing in the reports being received.  It was not thought that the reports would have changed what was being seen but rather would have confirmed and clarified what had happened.

In terms of a programme we heard that this was dependant on needs, and progress was monitored half termly.  The Cabinet Member confirmed that there were plans in place for all red schools and the Head of Governors would be asked if the plan was working and to identify progress being made.  Schools would be assessed to monitor the progress of the plan.

The Chair suggested it would be appropriate from a scrutiny point of view to receive reports sooner.  We were advised that the regional group were looking at a mechanism to enable even greater scrutiny of Red and Amber schools.  Further detail could be provided to Committee as it becomes available.

Recommendations:

The report recommended that the Children and Young People Select Committee receive the Annual Quality Assurance Report 2015 and that Members consider the current position and areas for improvement for the school improvement service provided by the Education Achievement Service.

It was also recommended that Members use this report to scrutinise the quality and impact of the Educational Achievement Service and challenge any underperformance.