Agenda item

 To scrutinise the latest figures and the Council’s performance.

Cabinet Member Martyn Groucott and Morwenna Wagstaff introduced the report. Dr Wagstaff answered the members’ questions with Keeva McDermott:

• The Chair asked for clarity between the numbers of children excluded in 5.2 and 5.3 of the report. It was clarified that the table in the report refers to instances of fixed-term exclusions, which can range from half a day to a longer period. The number 520 represents the unique learners who experienced exclusions, while the 1810 instances include repeat exclusions for some learners. Therefore, some children had multiple exclusions, leading to the higher number of instances.
• A member asked for how long problems can be attributed to the pandemic, and if the problem will be generational. Dr Wagstaff emphasised the anxiety and stress caused by the pandemic and explained that, for children, its impact varied depending on their age and the protective factors in their lives. The pandemic disrupted key developmental stages, affecting social skills, emotional regulation, and behaviour. While the hope is that the impact will phase out, some children, especially the more vulnerable, may experience long-lasting effects.
• It was asked if the number of FSM children who are currently absent on any given day (1 in 4) might get worse. Dr Wagstaff noted that many children who were educated at home during the pandemic now find it challenging to return to the busy and noisy school environment, and some children, particularly those with complex needs or barriers to learning, preferred the online learning style and find it difficult to re-acclimate to traditional schooling. There has been an increase in the population of children receiving education other than at school (EOTAS) due to mental health and emotional needs, particularly anxiety about attending school. The hope is to enable these children to move on to positive post-school options and prevent them from becoming not in education, employment, or training (NEET).
• A member asked if it would be possible to have a detailed breakdown of exclusions by school, including the stories behind them, possibly in a closed session. It was explained that while detailed breakdowns of exclusions by school are scrutinised through various checks and balances, including Pupil Disciplinary Committee meetings and independent appeals, sharing such detailed information publicly could risk identifying individuals. However, it might be possible to provide this information in a closed session for scrutiny purposes. The Chair suggested that for a particular concern, members pick up directly with the team.
• Clarity was sought about the connection between the appointment of the CYP Data officer and exclusions. It was clarified that the appointment of the Data Officer has improved the capture and use of data around exclusions, making the recording process more robust and streamlined. A lot of work has gone into how reintegration is managed safely, using learner behaviour risk assessments.
• Further detail was sought about managing pupils coming back mainstream education from the Pupil Referral Unit, especially given the reductions in school staff. It was explained that a comprehensive risk assessment and management process is in place. This involves multi-agency collaboration to ensure that the risk has been sufficiently reduced before reintegration. The process includes phased returns, increased support during high-risk times, and continuous monitoring to ensure safety and well-being.
• A member asked about the availability of data prior to 2021 and national comparable data. The officer explained that national comparable data is provided by Welsh Government, but it is typically a year and a bit in arrears. The local authority also looks at comparison with consortia partners, but consent to share this data was not obtained from other partners. Therefore, the most recent national data is not yet available for the period in question.
• It was asked if it is possible to quantify the long-term cost of an exclusion, and therefore quantify the savings made by an intervention. Officers responded that Welsh Government’s three-year trend data is still incomplete for the period in question so it is challenging to provide a comprehensive analysis. The analysis of exclusion data involves looking not just at the exclusion numbers but considering internal sanctions that might not be recorded in the same way but still affect the child's education. NEET data is not readily available and would be difficult to ascertain. However, efforts are being made to consider various pathways and mixed offers to prevent exclusions and support reintegration, though there are challenges in resourcing, such as reduced support for work experience.
• A member asked if there is a profile over time looking at issues that were underpinning even before the pandemic, such as adverse childhood experiences, neurodevelopmental challenges, etc. Dr Wagstaff explained that the data analysis is now more robust, and the local authority monitors and has a strong profile of vulnerable learners, including those with barriers to learning, additional learning needs, contact with social care, and those living in poverty. The analysis reflects that these groups are more likely to be excluded, and there is a focus on ensuring schools make reasonable adjustments to support these learners.
• It was further asked about the viability of the additional capacity to support pupils, families, and schools given the significant deficit for the Pupil Referral Unit. Dr Wagstaff responded that the capacity of the PRU has been a concern, with the population within the units doubling. The local authority is responding by increasing capacity and moving into new bases to provide better provision. The aim is to offer preventative interventions to avoid permanent exclusions and manage reintegration safely.
• Clarity was sought about the authority’s offer for education other than in school (EOTAS). The EOTAS offer is broad and complex, including PRU, medical provision for children too unwell to attend school, and small group learning. The provision is person-centred and varies based on the child's needs, with the aim always being to reintegrate the child back into school.
• It was asked if the quality assurance procedures for EOTAS stand up to the rigour mentioned in the Estyn report. Dr Wagstaff explained that the local authority has developed more robust quality assurance processes for EOTAS, including a commissioning officer and a structured review cycle. There is ongoing work to ensure the provision meets the needs of learners and complies with the ALN Act requirements.

• A member asked how much capacity there is within the schools for children to be excluded from the classroom but still kept in the school, being taught within the school, rather than being excluded and sent home. The officers explained that schools have various interventions and provisions for children excluded from the classroom but still within the school. This includes emotional literacy support assistants, in-house support, and other targeted support to address specific needs. The approach varies by school, and there is an expectation that schools make reasonable adjustments to support these learners.

• A member asked how the authority ensures the welfare of staff who are dealing with risky, disruptive behaviour and distress from vulnerable children. The officers explained that the welfare of staff is a significant focus, with various projects and pilots in place to support their well-being, including supervision pilots. The health and safety of staff are considered in risk assessments and reintegration plans for students. The local authority acknowledges the impact on staff and works to ensure their safety and well-being through comprehensive processes and support mechanisms.

Chair’s Summary:

Members expressed gratitude about the usefulness of the recent Members’ Seminar on this topic and thanked staff in all schools for their work. The Chair noted that the skillsets required for staff now are broader and more complex than previously, and recognised the difficult judgements Heads need to make regarding exclusions. He wishes to remind all parents that the best place for their child is in school, particularly given the high correlation between complex problems in life and non-attendance. The report and recommendations were moved.