Agenda item

Gwen Fennell, Virtual School Head Teacher went through the main points of her report.  Various issues were highlighted and clarified:

·       The VS Governing Body met on a termly basis and it had been agreed that Fran Oborski, as a Governing Board Member would report to the Corporate Parenting Board (CPB) with an update on the Virtual School

·       The Children in Care Awards for Primary Age Children had been a great success. The Secondary awards would take place in November

• All Schools across Worcestershire had received Attachment Training, regardless of whether they had Looked After Children on roll or not. A Looked After Child could be admitted to a Worcestershire School at any point. The training benefited all children and colleagues working in schools. Over 20 Schools had committed to the Attachment Aware Schools Project

·       When asked how outcomes could be measured it was explained that the VS Head Teacher assessed outcomes and progress of each cohort along with the Babcock School Improvement VS team member, reporting and updating the Governing Body on a termly basis; the Governing Body would then feed back to the CPB

·       It was clarified that there were no Looked After Children who were home educated

·       Members discussed the amount of help that Looked After Children should expect from their carers. It was explained that the contracts for Foster carers included a duty to support a child's education. Schools often held parent/carer workshops in how to support their children in education. The Virtual School currently  hold termly Carer Workshops; in the past there had been a good uptake, however this term the Story Telling workshop had to be postponed until later in November due to low numbers

·       It was clarified that schools had to justify how they wished to spend the Pupil Premium Plus in line with SMART targets set for each Looked After Child and how the funding would be used in order to achieve those targets. If they required more funding schools must complete an additional funding form justifying the need and detailing how they had spent the original allocated sum

·       Members were interested in the numbers of Looked After Children who were Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET). The VS Head Teacher had figures that suggested the numbers of Looked After Children who were NEET was reducing however the Data for Quarter 1 appeared to show higher numbers who were NEET

·       The Post 16 team had been reduced from 6 to 2 members with a main focus of working with those pupils who were at risk of becoming NEET and offering support where required. The PEP Co-ordinators and Area Learning Advocates were currently completing Post 16 PEPS with very little capacity. Social Care would be leading on both Post 16 and EYFS PEPs with the support of the Virtual School

·       It was recognised that some Looked After Children who finish Year 11 do not have sufficient qualifications and this hinders their next stage of education and employment. VS only receive funding for 5-16 years

·       The numbers of Looked After Children currently stood at 825 with over 550 at school age; over 150 of those were placed out of County

·       Results for all Key Stages for Looked After Children had improved from last year.  Worcestershire results for all pupils at Key Stage 2 were below the national figure apart from in Bromsgrove where the schools were improving by working together better

·       A District Council Member requested that it be made clearer how District Councillors could contribute to helping Looked After Children.

ACTION POINTS

·       A short report would be brought to the next meeting to clarify the numbers of NEETS and what could be done to help Looked After Children once they got to 18 and were looking for employment or training

·       The Chairman and The VS Head Teacher should discuss how future Annual Reports should be presented taking into account the request for an 'organisation plan' and a flow chart showing the Children's journey through care so that District Councils can see more clearly where they could contribute

·       A list of schools who had not completed their necessary training should be made available to Councillors so that they could encourage them to make staff available for the training.