Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED to • scrutinise the Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language in respect of matters considered and agreed by Cabinet, and any key decisions taken, during the period 9 May – 14 October 2024; identify any areas arising from those matters determined within this period which Committee wish to further scrutinise, as part of revisions to the committees published work programme, in relation to Education and Inclusion and Welsh Language.
RESOLVED to 1. receivethe contentof CentralSouth Consortium’sreport provided in Appendix 1; 2. scrutiniseand commenton theinformation provided; consider whether they wish to scrutinise in greater depth any matters contained in Central South Consortium’s report.
RESOLVED to 1. consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4; 2. consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration; request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
Apologies of absence were received from County Borough Councillors Binning, Emanuel, Hickman and Preedy and Co-opted Member Mr M Thomas.
In accordance with the code of conduct, the following declarations were made: Ø County Borough Councillor M Ashford – Personal Interest item 3 – ‘I am a Governor of Pontyclun PS which is mentioned in the report’. Ø County Borough Councillor J Brencher – Personal Interest item 3 – ‘I am a Governor of Maes-Y-Coed Primary School, and a former Governor of Coed-Y-Lan Primary School and now on Ysgol Bro Taf’. Ø County Borough Councillor S Evans – Personal Interest item 3 – ‘I am a Governor of Ysgol Gyfun Cwm Rhondda as referenced on page 23 of item 3 and my son attends Tonyrefail Community School’. Ø County Borough Councillor C Lisles – Personal Interest item 3 – ‘I will be a on the Governing Body of Ysgol Afon Wen when it officially starts’. Ø Mr L Patterson, Co-opted Member – Personal Interest item 4 - ‘I have a child with ALN who receives education within an education setting within RCT’.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED to • scrutinise the Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language in respect of matters considered and agreed by Cabinet, and any key decisions taken, during the period 9 May – 14 October 2024; identify any areas arising from those matters determined within this period which Committee wish to further scrutinise, as part of revisions to the committees published work programme, in relation to Education and Inclusion and Welsh Language.
The Service Director Democratic Services and Communications presented the report to Members acknowledging this was an opportunity for Members of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee to scrutinise the decisions undertaken by the Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language within the period set out in the report and to ensure the appropriate mechanisms were in place to effectively scrutinise the Executive. A Member stated that it was good to see the impact on so many schools and their engagement across the whole period of the Eisteddfod, and asked if there were any plans to build on the momentum gained, and to continue to create those opportunities for young people. The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language agreeing with the Members comments around the Eisteddfod, stated what a fantastic event and showcase it was for the county borough, and in particular young people, including those that attended, as well as performed, and the ways in which schools participated. In terms of ways to build upon that, he acknowledged there was a whole range of things going on within the music service that engaged with thousands of children and young people every term throughout the county borough. A Member sought clarification around opportunities in terms of youth representation in regard to the Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education (SACRE), The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language advised that whilst he wasn’t a Member of SACRE, this fell to the Cabinet Member for Environment & Leisure, he followed the work of SACRE, and acknowledged the youth engagement aspect of the Committee had been the missing link, in recent years. The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language advised that he would liaise with Officers to provide an update but acknowledged that it had been identified as one of the key things to look at and work on in terms of youth participation with SACRE. A Member noted that because of the Committee’s TOR, Members were limited to asking questions on decisions made in the last 6 months, and asked if the brief was too narrow for all of the bi-annual scrutiny sessions. The Service Director Democratic Services and Communications acknowledged that the approach taken had only been in-situ for 12 months, and could refine and develop the approach, as the Committee moved forward. What would be important was setting parameters around the arrangements, very much to maximise the opportunity on what were already incredibly busy and pressurised scrutiny work programmes, but the Service Director Democratic Services and Communications was happy to reflect on the approach and arrangements in another 12 months, so would take onboard that feedback, with the mechanism for this feedback through the Overview and Scrutiny Committee but acknowledged that some Cabinet Members’ portfolios spanned numerous Committees, so it was harder to pick up representation and scrutinise, so there were a number of areas that could be tweaked and refined, moving forward with this approach. The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language acknowledged the TOR for the Committee, but felt this wasn’t the only opportunity, as there were a number of different mechanisms in place to hold Cabinet Members to account and advised that his door was always open. A Member noted the Committees Task and Finish Group in respect of Sustainable Communities for Learning and acknowledged that Members had visited a number of schools, which had been enlightening and insightful , seeing the work of the local authority and thanked the Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language for the opportunity for those visits. The Member noted that as part of the Committees Work Programme, the Committee had been given the opportunity to act as consultees on the proposals to establish a new Welsh medium primary school for 3 to 11 year olds as part of the Llanilid housing development and the proposed change of language medium of Dolau Primary School from dual language to English medium, at its meeting in September. The Member was pleased to see this investment in a new Welsh medium school and wished for that investment to continue, particularly across all schools in RCT, but in-line with the WESP, particularly in terms of Welsh Medium provision. The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language agreed with comments around the Sustainable Communities for Learning and acknowledged one of the Council’s key priorities was to have the best educational facilities for young people to succeed and thrive, having visited many of the new schools himself, across the whole county borough. From a Welsh Medium perspective, he explained that the investment has been quite significant having visited Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Llyn y Forwyn, the new Welsh Medium Primary school, which was coming on well, with additional funding spent in Ysgol Gyfun Rhydywaun, in terms of the new block and investing quite heavily using WG funding in early years provision, which was a key driver in terms of increasing numbers of learners, as part of the WESP. He continued that the scale of ambition could be seen in the investment, and in respect of the Llanilid development, it was noted there were a few thousand houses proposed, and would require a new school, and fed into the ambitions around the WESP, increasing the number of Welsh learners in year 1 by 10%, and would have the best facilities for young people to succeed, if approved by Cabinet. A Member referred to the Statutory School Organisation - Proposal to Close Trallwng Infants' School With Pupils Transferring to Coedpenmaen Primary School, and asked what the main drivers for the change were, was it educational attainment or was it saving money. The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language prefaced his answer by acknowledging that the proposal to Close Trallwng Infants' School was out for consultation at the moment, so his comments would be limited, but in terms of saving money, it was about making a school sustainable for the future, and what had been seen across the whole of Wales, and the UK, was a falling birth rate, which had resulted in a large numbers of surplus places within schools throughout Wales. He acknowledged that the funding formula was directly driven by pupil numbers, and with schools, could become something of a financial burden of falling numbers and the sustainability of the school. So in terms of the rationale, it wasn’t about saving money, it was about looking at the sustainability of that school moving forward, and the declining number of pupils at that school, and it was also about the very best facilities for young people as well. The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language encouraged all Members to submit to the consultation. The Chair reminded Members that they would be considering this item, along with the item on the Statutory School Organisation - Proposal To Close Tref-Y-Rhyg Primary School with Pupils Transferring to Tonyrefail Community School at the Special meeting next week but appreciated that the Member wouldn’t be present at that meeting. A Member asked in relation to Cwmaman Primary school, if the proposals to enhance Additional Learning Needs Mainstream Learning Support Class Provision within RCT were approved, how much of an impact this would have in enhancing the current capacity for ALN provision. The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language explained he didn’t have any information regarding Cwmaman Primary School specifically, although was happy to take up with Officers outside of the meeting. In terms of the consultation on the Proposals to enhance Additional Learning Needs Mainstream Learning Support Class Provision within RCT, this was out for consultation at the moment, although acknowledging that it was a pressure area for not just RCT, but local authorities across Wales, advising Members of a meeting, that he, along with the Leader of the Council and, other Cabinet Members and Leaders across Wales, had attended with the Cabinet Secretary for Education, where the matter was raised directly, in terms of the increasing demand for places within support classes and special schools, so a key pressure identified by the local authority, with the investment put into match that, but acknowledged that there was always more than could be done. The Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language continued that in terms of the proposals under consultation, the local authority was seeking to increase the number of classes across the county borough, and in terms of the numbers being seen within special schools, there was a need to build a new special school in RCT, which would be built on the former council site in Clydach Vale, which would be a significant investment, noting than whilst the places would be relatively high numbers, demand was likely to continue, hence why Officers had been tasked with looking at satellite centres, which would help to deal with the pressures, with Cabinet considering two satellite centres, which he detailed. Following consideration, it was RESOLVED to • scrutinise the Cabinet Member for Education, Inclusion and Welsh Language in respect of matters considered and agreed by Cabinet, and any key decisions taken, during the period 9 May – 14 October 2024; identify any areas arising from those matters determined within this period which Committee wish to further scrutinise, as part of revisions to the committees published work programme, in relation to Education and Inclusion and Welsh Language.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED to 1. receivethe contentof CentralSouth Consortium’sreport provided in Appendix 1; 2. scrutiniseand commenton theinformation provided; consider whether they wish to scrutinise in greater depth any matters contained in Central South Consortium’s report.
The Director of Education and Inclusion Services began by acknowledging that the Principal Improvement Partners (PIPs) would provide a presentation of the report, so there was nothing specific to raise at this point but was happy to respond to any questions, following the presentations. The PIP Secondary, Through and Special Schools then introduced the report, acknowledging the new approach to the report, and thanked the Chair for her time, along with colleagues and Officers in RCT, who had provided feedback to inform the new style of reporting. The PIP Primary Schools then advised that the report then reflected some of the impact that had been seen in the schools, with case studies linked to transitions, governance and ALN, so some of the impact could be seen and some of the data brought to life. The Headteacher Llanharan PS then took Members through a short presentation, which shared the improvement journey of Llanharan PS. The PIP Primary Schools then continued to talk around the improvements made to Llanharan PS, acknowledging alongside the PIP Secondary, Through and Special Schools the impact of the work of CSC, alongside RCT Officers and the schools itself. Members were informed that embedded in the report were podcasts. A Member sought clarification around the timings of the intervention from CSC. The Headteacher clarified the timings around the interventions, explaining her absence, and acknowledging she had only been back in school a couple of months when the Estyn inspection had taken place, so had sought support as soon as she came back, but was aware there was work to do, with the school improvement plan (SIP), recognising that work and the progress needed to be made. A Member sought further clarification around the timings, asking if there were interventions from the time the Headteacher was absent, therefore pre-empting any issues that may arise should an inspection be called. The Headteacher confirmed that the IP had worked with the acting Headteacher at the time, so had received support. A Member asked if there was anything else additional in terms of the support from CSC that the Headteacher would have liked to have seen, pre or post inspection. The Headteacher explained that she couldn’t say that there was any additional support, that she wasn’t able to seek for herself, being quite open to support, and knowing the right channels to get that support, with a lot of support available for Headteachers in RCT, and that it was her job to seek out the support needed, acknowledging she had never received a negative response. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services acknowledged that it was to the school’s credit that after being placed in a follow-up category with Estyn, the Headteacher and her leadership team, really came together and worked really closely in partnership with CSC to make the necessary improvements and it was evident from the regular progress meetings convened, that steady progress was made as a result of that support. A Member asked if, where there is reluctance to seek support, whether the example in Llanharan, could be used as a case study. The PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools, CSC acknowledged that Llanharan was a really good example, recognising there were vulnerabilities around that for leaders to step up, so CSC and the local authority (LA) worked really closely, acknowledging the relationship IPs had with schools and the communication, meant there was a clear understanding of the needs. The Assistant Director for Partnerships and Improvement acknowledged the legacy of categorisation, with Headteachers realising that they didn't have to worry about published colour, and admitting vulnerability didn't mean a Headteacher would be negatively represented in the press, it meant they could get the support they needed, so there was a real culture of support now where Headteachers were looking more towards support, as opposed to waiting for Estyn to come in and uncover it. The Head of Achievement RCT – primary sector explained that the Headteacher, was one of three head teachers who were prepared to stand and talk to their peers in a headteachers meeting about the experiences warts and all, with that session very rewarding, with a lot of positive feedback from colleagues present. So ultimately, it was a way of reaching out to people and people realising that it was not with any kind of judgement that support was offered, but that once support was provided, that moves you forward in your journey. A Member asked for assurances from CSC and the LA that systems were in place to help schools and ensure it was known if a school was falling behind, before an Estyn inspection. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services acknowledged that there were termly information sharing processes to ensure that support was timely and happened as swiftly as possible. The Assistant Director for Partnerships and Improvement also provided clarification around the programme of work for IPs, acknowledging that the most important part was around self-evaluation, ensuring it was accurate and reflected the needs of the school, so the priorities would be accurate ones, written into the School Development Plan (SDP), with the IP, at regular intervals, meeting with leaders to look at first hand evidence around whether the school had made progress towards those priorities, and considering schools that are off-track, the reasons why, which could trigger additional support, if needed. The Assistant Director for Partnerships and Improvement highlighted the need for schools to be honest. The Chair thanked the Headteacher, Llanharan Primary School, acknowledging it wasn’t just important to have the report, but hear from practitioners themselves, following which the Headteacher left the meeting. The Improvement Partner then presented Case Study 2, which illustrated the range of support provided for a school causing concern, as well as illustrating collaborative working between CSC and LA Officers in providing support and challenge to help to secure improvements in the school. A Member, acknowledging that Members had been given a description of a school with endemic problems, sought clarification around if these had come to light before or after Covid. The PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools, CSC acknowledged that Covid had been a difficult time for many within the profession, following which there was a period of action short of strike action (ASOS), which slowed the process down and was a barrier, and had negatively impacted the journey of improvement. A Member sought clarification if there were any correlations between poor governance and school performance and the level of confidence being seen across the region. The PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools, CSC acknowledged there were a variety of approaches being seen across the LA and wider across the region, and following Covid there had been a lot of change within governing bodies, with a loss of many experienced governors. So, the level of training had been picked up and the professional learning offer for governors had been updated, as well as working with LA Officers to make sure all bases were covered and explaining the governing body self-assessment tool kit. The Assistant Director for Partnerships and Improvement acknowledged that being a school governor was an incredibly difficult role to fulfil, in order to hold school leaders to account on a whole range of issues, with the PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools having identified that the IP had a significant role to play in meeting with individual governing bodies and working closely with them around what individual support that governing body needed. The PIP for RCT Secondary and Special Schools, CSC added that where leadership was good and strong in schools, that schools made progress and learners did well, recognising that a governors role was vital. The Assistant Director for Curriculum and Professional Learning, CSC provided further information and context around the professional learning programme. A Member referencing Case Study 4, and the initial phase of 21st Century schools and asked if there were any lessons learned from the first phases and whether a report was produced. Members heard from the PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools, and Director of Education who provided clarification and context, before hearing from the Head of Achievement and Wellbeing for secondary and through schools in RCT who reiterated in terms of the first phase, what was learned was every school was individual and every single school had its own issues as well as its own positives, so it was very difficult to have a collective view, before providing further context and examples. A Member noted that the data presented throughout the report was interesting, but noted that at 8.2, this was the only comparison made with another county, so felt it would have been useful to know how the results of the Estyn inspections compared to previous years, acknowledging there had been significant improvement, so it would have been nice if this had been pointed out and celebrated. The Member, referring to item 5, enhanced monitoring sought clarification around the figures. The Assistant Director for Partnerships and Improvement, CSC provided clarification around the figures, and confirmed that it was a rolling programme, with schools in and out throughout the academic year. The Member, then referring to item 7, IPs, noted that the report stated there were currently 12 IPs in the county of which 7.2 were full-time equivalent, and asked if this was enough to meet the needs of all schools in RCT. The Assistant Director for Partnerships and Improvement, CSC acknowledged, this was an equation done when categorisation was started, so the approach was still followed, but with any service and situation, more was always better, however CSC were still able to provide a service that was of value and credible to schools with the 7.2 equivalent. The Member, referring to Appendix A, funding, noted that the costs associated with school improvement were actually higher than the contributions received, noting that CSC had subsided what was needed, and asked if this was a one-off or was likely to continue, and whether the expenditure was sustainable. The Acting Managing Director, CSC, provided Members with an overview of how CSC was funded, explaining the figures and that there was a further £200k contributions from other sources, that would either come from grant funding, or from interest income on funds on the balance sheet, or from income generated by outsourcing support, for example, outdoor education to another LA. In the current financial year, WG funding was no longer received, but work was done with LA’s to look at the funding envelope within the LA education grant and use that funding to support school improvement. The Member asked if CSC provided professional learning on a cross-phase basis. The Assistant Director for Curriculum and Professional Learning, CSC, confirmed that quite a bit of the professional learning was 3-16 or 3-19 sometimes, which supported progression in Curriculum for Wales (CfW), as well as phase specific things like qualifications networks, foundation learning networks, etc., with much of the support on areas of learning, curriculum, governance, teaching, etc, were 3-16. The Member asked CSC what areas were going well and what were the areas for improvement. The PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools advised that this was part of CSC’s business plan, whereby this report had focussed specifically on the work of CSC in RCT, although acknowledging the process and structures in place e.g., Joint Committee, Governance etc., but took on board some of that information could be distilled. In addition, with the comparison with Estyn, this was specific to RCT, in the areas that needed development, and could do something comparative, so would take that on board. A Member sought clarification that if there was a lack of funding, would the service still be provided regardless. The Acting Managing Director, CSC, provided Members with clarification and context around the middle tier review, which was currently underway, which would look at models of school improvement going forward, in the backdrop of financial austerity, acknowledging that it would be needed, but would move into a different model and function. A Member sought clarification around comparators with for example, previous years or with other LA’s. The PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools agreed that it would be quite useful to have some of that information, as had been illuded to, for future reports. A Member asked if there was a specific example of an intervention undertaken with a school to address attendance and exclusion, as referred to in page 29, paragraph 11, recommendation 3. The PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools explained that CSC worked in collaboration around attendance and exclusion and wellbeing, working closely with LA colleagues, providing context around the professional learning provided for RCT IPs, acknowledging that approaches were closely aligned. The PIP Secondary, Through and Special Schools added to this, by providing an example, acknowledging it was high on the agenda, consistently and also acknowledging the Step 4 provision and funding. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services acknowledged that one of the strengths was the Directorate’s use of data, which informed strategic priorities, and provided a number of examples of practice, acknowledging that in addition to that, PIPs sat on the SMT teams meetings, where discussions relating to attendance and exclusions were pretty standard, as part of that agenda. A Member noted that he was not keen on the Infographics, which seem to raise more questions, than answers and sought clarification around the engagement figures. The Member also felt there was a lot of abbreviations. A Chair felt that a glossary would be useful for future reports, and in terms of the Infographic felt it was a personal preference, acknowledging it showed a snapshot, with the report providing more narrative. The PIP for RCT Primary and All-Age Schools explained in relation to the clarification around engagement, that this was a frustration, and that they couldn’t always engage leaders that they wanted to engage with, putting on a significant amount of training via a rolling programme, but acknowledged that it wasn’t always a focus for them at a particular time e.g., not a part of their school improvement priority. In terms of the Infographic, that was something new this year, to make the information snappier, but took onboard the criticism and acknowledged the request for a glossary of terms for future reports. The Assistant Director for Curriculum and Professional Learning, CSC continued that the professional learning offer was there for schools to engage with to meet their needs, so wouldn’t expect 100% or 50% engagement, with the whole point strategic planning of professional learning to support the priorities for improvement, and would happen with IPs and school leaders, and should be embedded in SDPs, with bespoke support offered where appropriate and comparative data could be provided, compared to LA’s. The PIP Secondary, Through and Special Schools also reassured Members when these figures were seen, they would ask the same questions, acknowledging sometimes it was around releasing staff, linked to funding but also about prioritising what their needs were right now, with each school looking different. A Member asked, if relation to school attendance if there was any corelation between failing schools and falling attendance, and whether there were any good examples of how to improve, as well as learning from others, from a CSC perspective. The Acting Managing Director, CSC, acknowledged in relation to sharing good practice, that the Headteacher Coed-Y-Lan Primary School, had shared their multi-faceted approaches to improving attendance in the school, to Joint Committee, as well as at the Headteacher Group, and also Regional Stakeholder Group, as well ask confirming she had been asked to attend Management Board. In addition there were artefacts added to a section of the CSC website, with the Acting Managing Director, CSC advising it was one of the things CSC did well, in sharing that practice across the region. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services added there where schools where the practice was strong in RCT as well, and schools were invited to present at termly wellbeing meetings, as well as at an imminent family engagement and community schools conference, which was another opportunity to share good practice. The Chair acknowledged that CSC may have had more to present, but hoped the discussion had been valuable, with a lot of detailed questions, and positive feedback, so maybe a discussion in future around the balance. Following consideration, it was RESOLVED to 1. receivethe contentof CentralSouth Consortium’sreport provided in Appendix 1; 2. scrutiniseand commenton theinformation provided; consider whether they wish to scrutinise in greater depth any matters contained in Central South Consortium’s report.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED to 1. consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4; 2. consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration; request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
The Service Director Democratic Services and Communications presented the report to Members which invited the Committee to formally respond to the Council’s consultation on the proposals to enhance Additional Learning Needs mainstream Learning Support Class (LSC) provision within Rhondda Cynon Taf (RCT). The Head of Access & Inclusion then took Members through the report and invited questions and comments from Members. A Member agreed with the provision and asked if it would help to reduce the number of out of county placements and thereby save money. The Officer explained that by creating more in-county specialist provision this did reduce the need for out of county provision for RCT pupils, and was one of the main aims, to maintain educational placements within pupils local community. It was noted that with Children Looked After (CLA) there were some RCT pupils who attended educational provisions or resided outside of RCT, as well as sometimes having CLA from out of county residing or accessing educational provision within RCT, so very often there were reciprocal arrangemets in place. A Member referring to page 54, paragraph 6.6, noted it said from September 2024, RCT had 3 Welsh medium LSC provisions, 2 Primary Phase LSCs in YGG Awel Taf and 1 Secondary Phase LSC in Ysgol Garth Olwg, and presumed there were 2 classes in YGG Awel Taf? The Officer acknowledged there was one class for the old foundation phase, and one for children aged 7 to 11, so 2 classes would run from ages 4 up to age 11. The Member acknowledging a recent visit to Cwmaman PS, felt it was going to be a fantastic setting for the new LRC class. Members acknowledging the increase in ALN and LSCs, sought clarification around research being carried out to predict future increase in numbers. The Officer explained the statutory duty under the new ALN legislation to keep the sufficiency of provision under review continuously, so the data was looked at and analysed annually, to look at any increased demand in a particular area of ALN, to review that provision. The Officer acknowledged that undertaking a statutory consultation took a year, so tried to plan in advance, and engage in LSC consultations on a regular basis and there was reference in the report to continuing to keep everything under review, including Welsh Medium ALN provision. A Member queried the costs associated with the proposals. The Member questioned why children were transported, although acknowledged the LA’s responsibility. The Officer explained that at this stage, this was still a consultation, but if the consultation progressed, the funding would be additional funding and wouldn’t impact on the schools mainstream budget. In relation to transport, these were made in line with the Council’s transport policy so it was only if they met the RCT threshold that they would access that transport, although in reality the majority of pupils accessing specialist provision had transport to their setting, because they tended to live outside of that particular school catchment area, but it was to the nearest most suitable specialist provision that they could access. A Member, acknowledging that increased costs with home to school transport, as indicated in the report, asked what kind of cost analysis had been done, although appreciated it may be difficult to say at this point. The Member sought clarification that headteachers were consulted on the proposals on the respective schools, before being brought to Committee. The Member sought clarification if the placements would remain in the LSCs or would transfer to the new special school in Clydach Vale, or if there was demand for both e.g., as with Ysgol Hen Felin. Disparity was noted within the report and a Member requested that a consistent approach be applied to all school mentioned within the report in respect of details relating to Estyn Inspections / reviews. The Officer explained in relation to transport costs, it was very difficult to do an analysis, because it was never known exactly which pupils would be accessing the provisions and where they lived and how many would require home to school transport in line with the policy although it was acknowledged there would be an increased cost to transport. The Officer confirmed that headteachers were consulted before the report was taken to cabinet. In relation to placements remaining in the learning support classes, the Officer explained it was very difficult to predict, for early years classes, explaining to Members what would be done in terms of assessment and observation, but acknowledging that in the main, it wasn’t imagined there would be a huge transfer from those learning support classes into the special school, so would try and maintain placements within the learning support class provision. The Officer acknowledged, in relation to Penyrenglyn, that the emphasis in this report, was in relation to the school provision for ALN, so this was an oversight. The Member sought clarification in respect of potential renovation costs to ensure that the provision would be able to run. The Officer explained that schools had primarily been chosen that had a 21st Century environment, although couldn’t say there would never be any level of improvement that would need to be done, but that would be minimal and there was access to grant funding as well, in relation to ALN, specifically in relation to capital investments, that wouldn’t be additional cost to the Council. A Member referring to page 86 and 87, item 4, of the consultation response proforma, asked that future reports were accurate in relation to the Equality Act 2010. The Officer advised this was noted and it would be reviewed. A Member acknowledged support of the proposals, due to clear demand but raised concerns in relation to access to such support through the Welsh Medium provision and reflected on the importance of promoting the Welsh medium provision in relation to the 2050 goal of one million Welsh speakers and in line with the outcomes of the WESP. The Officer acknowledged that there was reference to keeping the sufficiency of ALN provision under review, within the report and it did specifically refer to Welsh Medium, which would be done. Members were reminded of the two additional learning support classes opened this year with pupils placed in those classes, for the primary phase, which would be monitored and were not at capacity at this point but explained the placements panels, which would analyse the number of placement consideration requests (PCRs), that had come from Welsh Medium schools and how many are determined to meet criteria, so that patterns and trends can be seen, as with other referrals that come in through other referral processes, so this was very much at the forefront of what was being done, and in line with outcome 6. The Officer acknowledged that the 3 classes that had opened were geographically all in the south of the county borough, although noted what had recently been done with English Medium LSC’s, in opening more classes in the Cynon area which hadn’t been needed previously but based on more recent trends and demand, so acknowledged the responsiveness in relation to analysing data, and if there was a need a further proposal would be taken to Cabinet. Following consideration, it was RESOLVED to 1. consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4; 2. consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration; request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
The Chair thanked all for attending the evening and recognising the very useful discussion. A special meeting of the Committee would take place virtually on the 24th October, which had been added to the calendar of meetings for this year. Following this, the next meeting of the Committee would take place on the 10th December. The Chair thanked Members for their contributions, acknowledging that meetings were long, but this went to demonstrate the quality of the questions and the discussion, which was always a pleasure to behold as Chair. The Chair concluded by thanking Officers as well for their honest answers.
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.