Loading
There is no summary of this meeting yet. Summaries are written once the council publishes the minutes, which are its official record of what a meeting decided. They usually appear a few weeks after the meeting.
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.
There was none.
The minutes of the meetings held on 17/03/2026 were approved as an accurate record of proceedings.
There were no items selected from the Cabinet Forward Work Programme.
There were no items selected from the Scrutiny Forward Work Programme.
Members considered the performance monitoring items.
There were no questions on the annual report. Following scrutiny, the recommendation was supported to Council.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. Andrew Thomas gave an overview of the directorate. There are 4 heads of service in the directorate, with 1 head of service reporting to the Culture and Connection Committee and 3 head of service plans falling within the remit of this committee. Neath Port Talbot has about 6,700 staff, and 57 per cent of those staff work in the Education, Leisure and Lifelong Learning directorate. About 40 per cent of the council workforce work in schools. Young people make up about 29 per cent of the population, and about a third of those live in poverty or within the definition of poverty. There are 63 schools in total, made up of 53 primary schools, 5 secondary schools, 3 middle schools for ages 3 to 16 or 3 to 18, and 2 special schools. The directorate has responsibility for about 21,000 pupils. Members requested that the snapshot statistics referred to in the introduction be circulated, noting that they would be useful to have. Andrew Thomas confirmed that the snapshot came from the directorate improvement plan, which was being updated, and that it would be circulated to all committee Members within the next 3 weeks once completed. The committee then considered the Education Development section. John Burge outlined his area as Coordinator of the Child and Family Support Team. His service is divided into 7 or 8 teams and regularly brings reports to scrutiny on attendance, exclusion and safeguarding. During the previous 12 months, reports had also been brought on elective home education and vulnerable learners. The service also covers school governance. A governor support team provides training, advice and support to governors, attends meetings, and provides a paid professional clerking service to 12 schools. John Burge advised that the business plan also contained financial information, staffing information and learning from the previous inspection, including strengths and areas for further improvement. Andrew Herbert Deputy Education Co-ordinator then outlined the other strand of Education Development, led by Mike Daley. This area covers school improvement, supporting schools with teaching, learning, curriculum and leadership, and work to mitigate the impact of poverty through a community focused schools’ approach. Members questioned whether the budget for the service was sustainable, given inspection outcomes showing more schools underperforming than in recent years. Members referred to the team’s strong reputation for support and early prevention, but expressed concern that cost reductions would reduce capacity to secure improvement. John Burge advised that the budget for 2026 to 2027 was settled and in place, but that Welsh Government grant notifications continued to arrive very late in the financial cycle. He referred to a number of staff posts being dependent on grant funding and said support for future years would be welcomed during the next budget-setting round. The Members returned to the issue and linked wider school budget pressures to staff losses in schools, increased redundancies and the pressure on leadership teams. She referred to page 129 of the report and the expansion of the professional learning offer in response to Estyn findings, particularly around leadership, and queried whether school leaders already under pressure would have time to undertake additional training. Councillor Nia Jenkins Cabinet member for Education and Early Years clarified that redundancies are not made due to lack of finances; they are made because of falling pupil numbers. The Members maintained that falling rolls still translated into financial pressure and that schools were struggling to meet needs. She gave an example from a school where she was a governor, where the headteacher had taken on the SENCo role following staffing reductions. Andrew Herbert added that birth rates were falling, which was feeding through into pupil numbers. He advised that schools could only make a teacher redundant if class sizes could still be set within statutory limits. He also acknowledged a wider national challenge, referring to a picture across Wales in which just under half of secondary schools were entering Estyn follow-up. He agreed that pressure was particularly acute in smaller schools where staff were carrying multiple roles. Members asked about sustainability, referring to unmet Additional Learning Needs (ALN), increased behavioural and mental health pressures in schools, and evidence of strain in inspection findings. Andrew Thomas replied that he did not fully understand the question as framed, but made clear that he would welcome more funding for education. He referred to the £7 million additional funding put into ALN in the previous year, alongside pay and price increases. That £7 million had been intended to stem increasing school deficits arising particularly from ALN and inclusion costs. He distinguished between the direct impact of the ALNET legislation and the broader costs of supporting pupils who did not necessarily have ALN but did require support with mental health and social challenges. There was an undertaking going forward to seek to keep pace in the budget-setting process with increases in local authority and school-maintained individual development plans. He added that school deficits had previously been increasing by about £6 million a year, and that this had reduced to about £3.5 million in the last year. He also referred to discussions with Rhiannon Crowhurst and to positive progress by schools in developing recovery plans. He concluded that education across Wales had not been funded according to need for a long time. Members asked for information on how many of the 60 elected members were also school governors, referring to the original expectation that elected members would sit on school governing bodies. John Burge advised that he did not have the figure to hand but would obtain it and either circulate it or bring it to the next meeting. Members then added wider comments on school funding and the role of the Schools Budget Forum, speaking from his own experience of chairing governing bodies. He said that every school was different and that the key issue remained the level of funding available to local government from central government and Welsh Government. Members commended the officers present and said they were working for the same objective of securing the best outcomes for children and young people in Neath Port Talbot. Members expressed criticism of Estyn, with one Member commenting that they did not feel Estyn fully understood the schools within the county borough. The Member questioned the value of external inspection, stating their personal view that schools did not need Estyn to tell them what they were already aware of regarding performance and the challenges they face. Members asked for an update on the 6 schools identified in Estyn categories of either special measures or requiring improvement, including the progress of each post-inspection action plan and the likely timetable for exiting those categories. Officers advised that Melin Primary School is due to receive an Estyn monitoring visit between September and February, in line with the usual 12–18 month period following publication of the inspection report. In relation to Cefn Saeson Comprehensive School, officers reported that the school had received an Estyn monitoring visit during the week of the meeting. The school is monitored each term and officers were expecting feedback shortly. Based on the progress made to date, officers considered the school to be on track to be removed from Estyn follow-up arrangements during the next academic year, potentially within the first two terms. Officers advised that St Joseph's Primary School continues to make strong progress and that it is anticipated the school will be approaching the point at which it can be removed from Estyn follow-up arrangements. Members were informed that Crynant Primary School remains in the earlier stages of the improvement process. Officers noted that schools placed in special measures are typically subject to monitoring for around two years and that Crynant had, at that stage, received only two monitoring visits. Subject to continued progress, officers anticipated that the school would require approximately another year to complete its improvement journey. In relation to St Joseph's Comprehensive School, officers advised that the school's post-inspection action plan had been submitted and approved by Estyn. The school is making progress in implementing improvements, particularly in leadership and teaching. An Estyn monitoring visit is expected in approximately twelve months' time to evaluate progress against the action plan. The Chair asked about the late notification of grants from Welsh Government and whether advance indication could be obtained. John Burge confirmed that this issue was being pursued collectively across Wales through the 22 authorities and through the WLGA. He gave the example of a large grant for vulnerable learners, supporting ethnic minority children and Gypsy Traveller children, which had not been issued until mid-March. He confirmed that the matter continued to be pressed with Welsh Government. The committee then moved to the Support Services and Transformation section. Rhiannon Crowhurst introduced her portfolio, which spans education support services such as school catering, cleaning, bursar services, financial management for school budgets, the music service and the data unit, together with transformation work including the Strategic School Improvement Programme and the Wesp, employability, skills and poverty, all employability programmes, adult learning, the youth service and vocational pathways for 14 to 16 year olds. Around 950 or 960 staff are employed across these services. It was highlighted the diversity of the portfolio and the challenges arising from grant dependence, strategic work with Welsh Government and the size of some of the staffing groups. Members noted that the report stated the proportion of 16–18-year-olds identified as Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET) was among the highest in Wales and, at the 1 March 2026 snapshot date, was the highest in Wales. Members observed that this appeared to contrast with the Youth Service's reported achievement of its best-ever transition outcomes. They asked officers to explain the reasons behind this apparent discrepancy and what factors they believe are contributing to the NEET rate. Members also sought clarification on the specific actions and commitments being taken forward by the strategy group to reduce the number of young people who are NEET and improve outcomes for this cohort. Officers advised that Neath Port Talbot had the best performance in Wales for Year 11 leavers transitioning into education, employment or training. The weaker position in the 16 to 18 cohort arose because young people moved into wider services beyond education, such as college or apprenticeships, and could then drop out and fall off the council’s radar. The youth service had identified this as a significant issue and was treating it as a priority. The relatively new Youth Engagement Strategy Group includes stakeholders from the college, health, Careers Wales, the DWP and social services, with a shared focus on understanding and addressing the issue. The work remained at an early stage, with effort focused on identifying the nature of the problem and bringing information together across agencies within data protection constraints. The Members asked for the scrutiny committee to be kept updated on progress. Rhiannon Crowhurst confirmed that a report on Youth Engagement Strategy progress was already on the Forward Work Programme for the coming months. Andrew Thomas added that sustainability was a concern in this area because some posts had previously been funded through SPF. That funding had ended. The council had taken a decision to protect those jobs because the work links directly to the corporate plan commitment to give children and young people the best start in life. Those staff currently had employment security only until the end of 03/2027, and the posts would form part of the next budget-setting process. He noted that the Council could not genuinely claim to be meeting that objective if support for vulnerable young people moving into education, employment or training was not maintained. He also referred to earlier discussions with Welsh Government about whether the replacement Local Growth Fund could be used for under 16s. In the end, that had not been permitted, which was why the council had stepped in to protect the posts temporarily. The Director concluded by emphasising that supporting vulnerable young people into education, employment and training is a key strategic priority for the authority and one that will continue to be a significant consideration in future budget discussions. Members asked whether a voluntary sector youth forum group could be linked formally into the NEET work, as a number of youth groups were identifying young people with NEET issues and wanted a route to liaise with the formal partnership. Rhiannon Crowhurst agreed to speak to Jason to arrange this. The Members then turned to the school funding formula review. They referred to the earlier delay to the review process, due to the pandemic. The focus on ALN in the most recent review, and the potential value of a scrutiny working group to improve Members’ understanding of the formula and enable them to contribute to policy development. Members noted that, in the absence of significant additional funding, the funding formula remains one of the principal mechanisms available to influence how resources are distributed across schools. They felt that it would be beneficial for Members to develop a clearer understanding of the formula, engage with stakeholders, and contribute to discussions around any future changes as part of scrutiny's policy development role. Members also asked for clarification on the membership of the Schools Budget Forum. Rhiannon Crowhurst explained that the Schools Budget Forum is not a local authority committee, although the authority organises and supports it. It is constituted by schools and represents schools. Membership includes headteachers and governors, with representation from Welsh medium, faith, secondary, middle and primary sectors, together with Members as Cabinet Members, the Director, a representative from the Finance Director’s service, and officers including Rhiannon Crowhurst and Julie. Members also sit on the forum. Membership changes every 2 years and relies on willingness from schools and governors to participate. Rhiannon Crowhurst also gave an update from the forum meeting held the previous day. Future formula review items had been discussed, and the forum did not currently wish to pursue a formal funding formula review. Officers had, however, been asked to scope work on funding for ALN special schools and learning support centres. She said this would not amount to a formal review of the funding formula itself, as it sat somewhat outside that remit, but officers would develop the work over the next year. She added that a future workshop for scrutiny Members or for Members more generally could be arranged to improve understanding of elements of the formula. She emphasised that the statutory power to request changes sits with the Schools Budget Forum, while officers implement the agreed arrangements. Members then commented that school funding was a long-standing and complex system and that the wider issue was the national funding settlement, including the Barnett formula. Members returned to his earlier question about concerns raised during consultation on the funding formula. Rhiannon Crowhurst indicated that she could not recall the detail immediately. Andrew Thomas added that the prompt for the ALN review had come through a written request from the Schools Budget Forum to the director. Discussions between officers and forum members had then identified ALN as the first priority for review. He added that previous formula reviews had similarly been triggered by written requests from the Chair of the Schools Budget Forum asking that particular elements be reviewed. The committee then considered the Early Years and Inclusion section. Hayley Lervey outlined her service area. The early years team covers Flying Start childcare, the Flying Start programme, parenting programmes, the Think Family Partnership under Families First, the childcare offer and the children and families team, much of it funded through the Children and Communities Grant. The inclusion service covers the Additional Learning Needs support team, statutory ALN functions, specialist placements and out of county placements, support for learning services such as ASD and speech and language, and commissioned services from health, educational psychology, school-based counselling, wellbeing and behaviour services and children looked after. The service spans ages 0 to 25 and includes both post-16 ALN and early years work. Members were advised of the increasing demand and increasing complexity across the services. Members asked about the slower than anticipated expansion of Flying Start, which had been affected by capital project delays and registration timescales, and asked whether the programme was now where it needed to be. Hayley Lervey advised that good progress was being made, working closely with wider services across the directorate. She then referred to a letter received from Welsh Government the previous day linked to the new Welsh Government and possible changes in this policy area. The authority was therefore in a position where decisions would need to be made, but more detail was needed before those decisions could be taken. She said that Flying Start was progressing, but that it did not currently appear likely that Flying Start would continue in its present form, although certainty was not yet available. Andrew Thomas added that the letter had only been received the previous day and related to the free childcare offer within the Hundred Day Manifesto. Local authorities still did not know what would be required of them. He advised that the committee would receive update reports and likely decision reports during the autumn term. Members asked about the future of early years more generally, referring to Welsh Government indications that provision might in time extend to children from 9 months to 4 years old. Hayley Lervey replied that officers were still waiting for further detail, including how any extension would be funded and whether the funding would come at the expense of other services. The Members also raised questions about infrastructure and the capacity of wider teams, including health, to support such a change. She added that the proposal could help parents return to work, but that implementation timescales were unclear. Hayley Lervey said that officers had been asked to prepare a response to Welsh Government. She recognised the value of helping parents back into work, but cautioned against losing the wider benefits of Flying Start. Targeted support for key families and enhanced provision would be at risk if the model became childcare only. She confirmed that there would be an opportunity to respond, and that Members would be involved in consultation and future decision-making once more was known. Members supported the retention of Flying Start and referred to the strong funding and training support it provides to childcare settings, enabling them to meet high standards. She also referred to underfunding in childcare more generally and to the gap between the cost of delivery and the 30 hours funding model. She asked whether pressure was continuing to be applied to ensure that any future offer was properly funded and maintained safe ratios, quality and workforce standards. Hayley Lervey confirmed that there was a very passionate team in the childcare and Flying Start area, including Sarah as coordinator, and that the authority had already met with Members as Cabinet Members to discuss the issue. Provider engagement in training was high. She identified quality assurance of childcare provision as a key concern if changes moved ahead without proper safeguards. She said those points were being actively taken forward and that the authority was not alone in pressing them. Andrew Thomas added that the childcare lead of the Association of Directors of Education Wales had written on behalf of ADWE to the relevant Cabinet Members to emphasise that any roll-out of free childcare needed to maintain quality and to be delivered by appropriately skilled and qualified staff. Members asked whether the WLGA had a role in pressing Welsh Government on these matters. Andrew Thomas confirmed that the WLGA was involved in advocacy on behalf of local authorities, including the need for manifesto commitments to be fully funded and delivered at the quality expected by the profession. The Chair also expressed concern about workforce supply and the shortage of childcare providers, asking whether additional NVQ-level training would be required if the offer were expanded. Hayley Lervey replied that the authority still did not know what the detailed model or timetable would be. Different authorities operated different models. She said that staffing capacity, capital works and quality of children’s experience in childcare all remained important concerns, particularly in relation to school readiness. Officers also stressed the importance of maintaining quality within childcare provision. They noted that children's experiences in childcare play a vital role in supporting school readiness and successful transition into education. Ensuring that high standards are maintained must therefore remain a key consideration in any future changes. The Cabinet Member, Councillor Nia Jenkins thanked officers for the work that had gone into the business plans. She referred in particular to strong practice in Hayley Lervey’s service area and said the authority had been recognised by Estyn for good practice. She also confirmed that she had written directly to the Cabinet Secretary for Education and the Cabinet Secretary for Early Years, Anna Brychan and Sioned Williams, asking them to meet to discuss officers’ concerns. She said Neath Port Talbot was recognised for having high standards and she wanted those standards to continue. Members then added a wider point that, across all the business plans, it would be helpful to include a risk register or at least a clear statement of principal risks in future reports so that scrutiny could better monitor services. Andrew Thomas replied that the business plans followed the corporate template and he would check whether a risk section was already included. He confirmed that a directorate risk register and a strategic corporate risk register were maintained. He agreed that a risk section within future business plans would be useful, although he was not asking officers to rewrite the current plans. Following scrutiny, members noted the report.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. The Democratic Services Officer advised that home to school transport sits partly within education and partly within engineering and transport. James Davies Head of Service for Engineering and Transport had submitted his business plan and the sections relevant to this committee had been highlighted in yellow. Owing to diary clashes, James Davies and his officers were unable to attend the meeting. Any questions raised would be passed back to him for a written response outside the meeting. Members referred to the previous budget pressures and the work of the group established to improve the service following recent issues. She asked what the biggest current risk was in maintaining the service going forward. Rhiannon Crowhurst replied that the largest current risk remained the budget. She referred to the impact of the war and problems in the Middle East on petrol and diesel prices, which had affected transport operators and in turn the council. A significant number of contracts were due to be retendered during the year and were almost certain to return at higher cost because of fuel price rises. A paper was due to be taken to WHO within the next few weeks to identify the additional pressure this would place on the budget. She added that, despite work to reduce costs, factors outside the council’s control had eroded those savings. She also referred to Members’ seminar scheduled for the following week, where some of the work identified by the group could be discussed, and said that changes had to be made carefully because of the impact on children, parents and operators. Following scrutiny, the report was noted.
There were none.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.