Recommendations & Conclusions
14 items
1
Conclusion
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
We were highly concerned to be told by the Department that their most up-to-date data on characteristics of children in children’s homes is from an ad-hoc 2016 data release—now seven years out of date.
Government response AI summary
The government will publish the recommended breakdowns in the 2023 releases.
Read full response →
Department for Education
2
Recommendation
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The Department must annually publish statistics on looked-after children, disaggregated by placement type, including key metrics on gender, ethnicity, age, special educational needs, and rates of out-of-area placements. (Paragraph 6) Overcoming the odds: education outcomes and the lack of post-16 funding
Read more
The Department must annually publish statistics on looked-after children, disaggregated by placement type, including key metrics on gender, ethnicity, age, special educational needs, and rates of out-of-area placements. (Paragraph 6) Overcoming the odds: education outcomes and the lack of post-16 funding
Show less
Government response AI summary
The Department will publish the recommended breakdowns in the 2023 releases, in conjunction with the department’s policy on confidentiality. They have committed to publishing additional stability analysis in November 2022.
Read full response →
Department for Education
3
Conclusion
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The Department’s data on the educational outcomes of children in care does not distinguish between placement type. Existing data is not good enough, it does not provide the visibility into the education of children in care that we would expect to see. The poor-quality data is a barrier to scrutiny …
Read more
The Department’s data on the educational outcomes of children in care does not distinguish between placement type. Existing data is not good enough, it does not provide the visibility into the education of children in care that we would expect to see. The poor-quality data is a barrier to scrutiny and accountability, and hinders the development of targeted, evidence-based interventions that could raise the attainment of looked-after children.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government commits to publishing the recommended breakdowns in the data in the 2023 releases.
Read full response →
Department for Education
4
Recommendation
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The Department must urgently tackle the black hole of data on the educational outcomes of children in children’s homes. It must commit to annual data publication through a data dashboard on outcomes for looked-after children which is disaggregated by care placement type, including flagging when the child is living in …
Read more
The Department must urgently tackle the black hole of data on the educational outcomes of children in children’s homes. It must commit to annual data publication through a data dashboard on outcomes for looked-after children which is disaggregated by care placement type, including flagging when the child is living in unregulated provision. We would expect this to include data on progress, attainment, attendance, suspensions and exclusions.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government commits to publishing the recommended data breakdowns on the educational outcomes of children in children's homes in the 2023 releases, in conjunction with the department's policy on confidentiality.
Read full response →
Department for Education
12
Conclusion
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The School Admissions Code is not working in the interests of looked-after children. The admissions system is weighted in favour of schools, and against the interests of looked-after pupils. The absence of sanctions means it is a risk-free process for schools to refuse to admit a looked-after child. This enables …
Read more
The School Admissions Code is not working in the interests of looked-after children. The admissions system is weighted in favour of schools, and against the interests of looked-after pupils. The absence of sanctions means it is a risk-free process for schools to refuse to admit a looked-after child. This enables some schools to take an adversarial stance against admitting looked-after children without facing any consequences.
Show less
Government response AI summary
Looked-after children already have priority in school admissions, and guidance states that schools judged 'Good' or 'Outstanding' should be prioritised for their placement.
Read full response →
Department for Education
13
Recommendation
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The Department must take greater responsibility for policing the school admissions system to ensure it is working in the interests of looked-after children. There must be a clear sanctions mechanism in place for schools who consistently refuse or delay admissions of looked-after children. The lever for this accountability should be …
Read more
The Department must take greater responsibility for policing the school admissions system to ensure it is working in the interests of looked-after children. There must be a clear sanctions mechanism in place for schools who consistently refuse or delay admissions of looked-after children. The lever for this accountability should be the impact on the school’s Ofsted judgement. Where schools are refusing to admit looked- after children, this should be a limiting factor for their Ofsted rating.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government states that looked-after children already have priority in school admissions and that guidance prioritizes schools judged as 'Good' or 'Outstanding' by Ofsted, with exceptions for evidence-based reasons. They state children should never be placed in a school judged inadequate unless there are exceptional …
Read full response →
Department for Education
20
Conclusion
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
All too often children in care face a David versus Goliath battle to gain admission to their local good or outstanding school. Despite the law clearly stating that good and outstanding schools should be prioritised for looked-after children, children in children’s homes are in fact less likely to attend the …
Read more
All too often children in care face a David versus Goliath battle to gain admission to their local good or outstanding school. Despite the law clearly stating that good and outstanding schools should be prioritised for looked-after children, children in children’s homes are in fact less likely to attend the best schools than their peers. This is indefensible.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government states that looked-after children have priority in school admissions and that statutory guidance prioritizes good and outstanding schools. They note there may be exceptional circumstances where it may be more appropriate that a looked after child is not placed in a school judged …
Read full response →
Department for Education
21
Recommendation
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
Responsibility and accountability for getting looked-after children into their most appropriate local good or outstanding school should lie with the Virtual School Head.
Government response AI summary
Looked-after children already have priority in school admissions, and guidance states that schools judged 'Good' or 'Outstanding' should be prioritised for their placement.
Read full response →
Department for Education
25
Conclusion
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
Research by Ofsted has identified that of a sample of 2,600 children living in children’s homes, 9% of children in residential care are receiving ‘education’ in unregulated settings, and a further 6% are not in education, employment or training. The true picture may be even worse. We’ve heard concerns that …
Read more
Research by Ofsted has identified that of a sample of 2,600 children living in children’s homes, 9% of children in residential care are receiving ‘education’ in unregulated settings, and a further 6% are not in education, employment or training. The true picture may be even worse. We’ve heard concerns that even the Department does not know how many looked-after children not in school, and that its current processes for tracking the education of looked-after children are insufficient.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government will publish breakdowns of data relating to looked-after children not in school in the 2023 releases.
Read full response →
Department for Education
31
Recommendation
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
Before the start of the next academic year—at the very latest—the Department should issue robust guidance on how the section 19 duty on local authorities to provide children with a suitable full-time education should be fulfilled by local authorities. Where local authorities are failing to discharge this duty, the sanction …
Read more
Before the start of the next academic year—at the very latest—the Department should issue robust guidance on how the section 19 duty on local authorities to provide children with a suitable full-time education should be fulfilled by local authorities. Where local authorities are failing to discharge this duty, the sanction should be in the form of limiting their Ofsted rating.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government states that regulations have been laid that mean no child under 16 can be placed in unregulated accommodation and that they have already committed to introduce national standards for supported accommodation for 16- and 17-year-olds overseen by Ofsted.
Read full response →
Department for Education
39
Recommendation
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The Department must take overall responsibility for monitoring the register of children not in school, and must set out clear and robust accountability for local authorities who fail to secure full-time places at good or outstanding DfE registered schools for the children they are responsible for looking after.
Read more
The Department must take overall responsibility for monitoring the register of children not in school, and must set out clear and robust accountability for local authorities who fail to secure full-time places at good or outstanding DfE registered schools for the children they are responsible for looking after.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government states that looked-after children have priority in school admissions and that guidance prioritises schools judged to be good or outstanding, unless there are exceptional evidence-based reasons.
Read full response →
Department for Education
47
Recommendation
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The Department must publish education, employment and training outcomes data disaggregated by care placement type. The absence of disaggregated data is a barrier to scrutiny and accountability and hinders the development of targeted, evidence- based interventions.
Read more
The Department must publish education, employment and training outcomes data disaggregated by care placement type. The absence of disaggregated data is a barrier to scrutiny and accountability and hinders the development of targeted, evidence- based interventions.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government commits to publishing education, employment and training outcomes data disaggregated by care placement type in the 2023 releases.
Read full response →
Department for Education
49
Recommendation
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The Government must expand existing the existing Civil Service care leaver internship scheme and other employment schemes, increasing the number of places so that more care leavers can take advantage of, and benefit from, these opportunities.
Government response AI summary
The government states that the Civil Service care leaver internship scheme has enabled around 700 care leavers to take up posts and encourages departments to offer vacancies. They are keen to create similar opportunities in other public sector employers and highlight the role of the …
Read full response →
Department for Education
53
Conclusion
Second Report - Educational poverty: ho…
Accepted
The current lack of statutory support for young people leaving residential care is deeply unjust. The Department’s own evidence rightly acknowledges the “cliff- edge” transition from residential care to independent living at age 18. Staying Close offers a chance to fix this and the pilot has shown promising results including …
Read more
The current lack of statutory support for young people leaving residential care is deeply unjust. The Department’s own evidence rightly acknowledges the “cliff- edge” transition from residential care to independent living at age 18. Staying Close offers a chance to fix this and the pilot has shown promising results including 75% reduction in eviction rates, 50% reduction in the proportion of young people not in education, employment or training (NEET) and 55% increase in reported emotional well-being. A national rollout would end the current postcode lottery of support for young people leaving residential care, supporting care leavers to stay in their local areas where they have put down roots.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government has announced funding of £36 million over the next 3 years to extend the Staying Close programme and has asked the What Work’s Centre for Children’s Social Care (WWCSC) to evaluate its effectiveness.
Read full response →
Department for Education