Transcript Document
SCRUTINY COMMITTEE PRESENTATION A Better Education for Children in Care Sue Steven Regional Adviser, Education Protects Team, DfES Head of Looked After Children Education Service, Calderdale MBC NATIONAL AND LOCAL PROGRESS • Quality Protects (1998). Guidance on the Education of Children & Young People in Public Care and Education Protects (2000). • • Social Exclusion Report (2003). KEY MESSAGES - GUIDANCE •BARRIERS TO EDUCATIONAL SUCCESS - instability, trauma, low self esteem, disrupted schooling • MULTI-AGENCY CO-OPERATION/TRAINING - partnership working between education and social services is crucial - joint training to share knowledge and expertise/gain understanding CORPORATE PARENTING/ADVOCACY •Prioritising education •Having high expectations •Inclusion – changing & challenging negative attitudes •Continuity and stability •Early intervention & priority action •Listening to children CORPORATE PARENT “GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU” Designated Teacher Elected Members School Staff Community Staff (eg.Leisure Services) Foster Carers Local Authority Departments (eg.Health) Residential Staff Social Worker DESIGNATED TEACHERS/ PERSONAL EDUCATION PLANS A designated teacher in each school who understands about the ‘Care’ system and the impact of ‘Care’ upon education. Schools have to decide who is the most appropriate person to fill this role. Someone with sufficient authority to influence school policy and practice and act as both a resource and advocate for the child. The designated teacher should ensure speedy transfer of information between agencies and individuals and ensure that each child has a PEP, Personal Education Plan. Every child in public care needs a Personal Education Plan. SOCIAL EXCLUSION UNIT STUDY •2001 – fewer than 1 in 4 local authorities met the target of half of care leavers obtaining 1 or more GCSE equivalent. •SEU commissioned to look at what more could be done to improve life chances by analysing the problem, talking to children and staff and delivering cross-government plans. •5 Key Issues: –Lack of stability –Time out of school –Insufficient help with education –Need for more proactive support from carers –Need for help with emotional health and well-being RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LOCAL ACTION (6 AREAS) •Planning. •Prioritising children in care in Local Government policies. •Support for children in care. •Advocating •Training for children in care. and support for social workers, carers and teachers. •Better use of data to inform service improvements. WHY DO WE NEED P.E.P.s ? Research states: Still a lack of partnership working between SSD and Education Care plans and statutory reviews have proved insufficient L.A.C. still under achieving educationally Critical need for education planning Practical action planning needed to identify tasks/responsibilities/ timescales. School /education is often the only stability for some young people Active involvement in thinking and planning together, ensures dividends for all involved ARE THEY JUST MORE PAPERWORK? WHAT ARE PEPs? A plan which •Profiles education in the minds of professionals, carers and young people. targets and reviews – Who will do it? When? How? What? •Creates •Brings key players face to face around a table •Identifies minor issues which can dramatically affect the big picture eg. transport, parental consent, parents evening attendance and homework. •Builds upon strengths of young people and identifies needs/access to services and support. •Records progress and positive achievements. •Highlights forward planning for long term issues eg.transitions,work experience. •Should incorporate any other plans eg. I.E.P.s, Statement of S.E.N. •Gives the designated teacher a tool to act as an advocate in school/trigger support in a timely way. •Allows the young person to ‘have a say’. •Ensures partnership working. Stability in education is integral to care planning to ensure successful outcomes. WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS? • Instability of lives of L.A.C. • Professional cultures • View that it is only a paper exercise • Carer’s culture • Human resources • Low expectations • Lack of ownership from SSD and education management • Lack of corporate ownership HOW DO WE TACKLE THE ISSUES? •High quality training for carers and professionals – preferably multiagency to share knowledge and inform about the P.E.P process. Provision of budget to finance supply cover, child care costs. •Joint ownership of P.E.P.s by SSD and Education to promote partnership working at both operational/strategic level. •Develop good practice at P.E.P meetings : - key players face to face/ focus on practical issues and targets with outcomes and timescales/profile home support and out of school opportunities/use data to inform planning/clarify Who? What? How? When?/involve the young person •Advocacy and support from all professionals to minimise moves for stability e.g placement panels, care plans. •Develop corporate parenting role across the council to profile LAC / raise awareness and expectations. New duty on Local Authorities to promote the education of children in care (Children Bill). •Effective central monitoring systems in place to monitor both quality and quantity. e.g. Local Authority ‘LAC’ education service, Independent Reviewing Officers, SSD Team Managers in Supervision. •Flexible management : combine P.E.P.s with LAC or SEN Reviews to avoid duplicity but ensure P.E.P.s are not marginalised. If high social work vacancies, use contingency plan of LAC support service or designated teachers leading on PEPs.