Source · Select Committees · Education Committee
Second Report - Educational poverty: how children in residential care have been let down and what to do about it
Education Committee
HC 57
Published 8 July 2022
Recommendations
15
Para 46
The Schools White Paper sets out a new backstop power for local authorities to direct...
Recommendation
The Schools White Paper sets out a new backstop power for local authorities to direct trusts to admit children. This is a very welcome step forward. It would enable the local authority to immediately secure an education place for the …
Read more
Department for Education
View Details →
24
Access to specialist mental health support is essential in supporting children in care, and the...
Recommendation
Access to specialist mental health support is essential in supporting children in care, and the Government must commit to funding specialist mental health support for every school. It must also invest targeted funding to fully level-up spend per-child on mental …
Read more
Department for Education
View Details →
44
Para 108
The Government’s 2022 SEND Green Paper sets out proposals for a more inclusive education system...
Recommendation
The Government’s 2022 SEND Green Paper sets out proposals for a more inclusive education system with enhanced mainstream provision for learners with special educational needs. As these reforms are taken forward, the Government must set out its plan to ensure …
Read more
Department for Education
View Details →
45
The Government must also increase its investment in SEND provision to ensure that children in...
Recommendation
The Government must also increase its investment in SEND provision to ensure that children in care, alongside all pupils with SEND, get the support they need to thrive in education. Children in care are more likely to have experienced educational …
Read more
Department for Education
View Details →
49
Para 116
The Government must expand existing the existing Civil Service care leaver internship scheme and other...
Recommendation
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.
Department for Education
View Details →
57
Acknowledged
Para 135
The Department must set out their response to the £2 billion expenditure proposed by The...
Recommendation
The Department must set out their response to the £2 billion expenditure proposed by The independent review of children’s social care, indicating how much additional funding they believe is necessary to ensure the care system is fit for purpose, how …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government states that it is carefully assessing the recommendations of the care review, including the recommendation to introduce a new funding formula for children's and young people's services, but provides no specifics on the funding request.
Department for Education
View Details →
58
Acknowledged
Para 136
For far too long, some private providers have extracted significant profits from the public purse,...
Recommendation
For far too long, some private providers have extracted significant profits from the public purse, operating under a monopoly market. At the same time, they have not demonstrated equivalent value for taxpayer money in terms of improved outcomes for the …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government shares concerns that some providers are making excessive profits and are investing £259 million of capital funding to increase the number of places in open and secure children’s homes run by local authorities. The government will present the implementation strategy which will outline the detailed response to recommendations from both the care review and CMA report shortly.
Department for Education
View Details →
Conclusions (43)
1
Conclusion
Para 5
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.
3
Conclusion
Para 18
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 …
4
Conclusion
Para 19
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 …
5
Conclusion
Para 26
It is welcome that the Department has announced a further year of funding for the extension of Virtual School Head duties to include all children with a social worker. Children with a social worker face significant barriers to education, but unlike looked-after children, have not had the benefit of a …
7
Conclusion
Processes to scrutinise how local authorities are spending their Pupil Premium Plus grant are insufficient. There must be strengthened accountability with clear penalties for local authorities who are not properly spending the grant on raising the educational attainment of looked-after children. (Paragraph 30) Educational poverty: how children in residential care …
9
Conclusion
There is a cliff-edge in Pupil Premium Plus funding when a looked-after pupil turns
16
Conclusion
The needs of looked-after pupils do not suddenly cease to exist when they turn
12
Conclusion
Para 43
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 …
13
Conclusion
Para 44
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 …
14
Conclusion
Para 45
Under section 497 of the Education Act 1996, the Secretary of State has the power to take legal action against local authorities who are not meeting their statutory duties 46 Educational poverty: how children in residential care have been let down and what to do about it relating to the …
17
Conclusion
Para 48
The Department must introduce a reporting and accountability requirement for local authorities to provide data on how many admissions of looked-after children have been contested or refused by schools. It should be made mandatory for local authorities to report all instances of schools blocking admissions to Office of the Schools …
18
Conclusion
Para 49
Much more needs to be done to speed up school admissions for looked-after children. We heard from Ofsted that it can take “many months” for a local authority to go through the admissions adjudications process.
19
Conclusion
Para 50
Where the involvement of the Schools Adjudicator is required for admissions decisions for looked-after children, these decisions must be made within a maximum 20-day timeframe.
20
Conclusion
Para 57
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 …
21
Conclusion
Para 58
Responsibility and accountability for getting looked-after children into their most appropriate local good or outstanding school should lie with the Virtual School Head.
22
Conclusion
We have highlighted the need for clear sanctions for schools who refuse to admit looked-after pupils, enforced through the impact on the school’s Ofsted judgement. We have also highlighted the need for much quicker decisions to be made by the Schools Adjudicator when the admissions code is breached. And the …
23
Conclusion
Para 60
Ofsted must make outcomes for looked-after children a limiting judgement on a school. If a school is not delivering good or outstanding progress and outcomes for looked- after pupils, it should not be able to gain a good or outstanding judgement. Ofsted should amend its education inspection framework to reflect …
25
Conclusion
Para 65
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 …
26
Conclusion
Para 66
All looked-after children should be receiving full-time education in a DfE registered school—it is unacceptable for local authorities to settle for unregulated education provision as an alternative.
27
Conclusion
Para 67
The 2022 Schools White Paper proposes a new statutory framework to govern children’s movements to ensure that education placements are made in the child’s best interests, especially where the child is vulnerable. Looked-after children, who are particularly at risk of moving between schools and missing education, must be prioritised within …
28
Conclusion
Para 68
The 2022 Schools Bill sets out a new duty for local authorities to maintain a register of children not in school. Alongside this, the Department must issue guidance to clearly outline how it will hold Directors of Children’s Services to account where the looked- after children they are responsible for …
29
Conclusion
Para 69
As part of the proposed register of children not in school, the Department must set out how it will collect and publish data on how many looked-after children are falling through the gaps by missing education or being ‘educated’ in unregulated education provision. This data should form part of a …
30
Conclusion
Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 places a duty on local authorities to provide children with suitable full-time education. However, there is no Departmental guidance outlining how this responsibility should be implemented, and no clear consequences for non-compliance. Given that Ofsted has identified that 9% of a sample of …
31
Conclusion
Para 73
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 …
32
Conclusion
Para 79
The Department has banned unregulated accommodation for children under 16. We hold deep concerns that children aged 16 and 17 can still be placed in unsafe, unsuitable accommodation without care or oversight. No looked-after child should be living in a setting without some form of regulation by Ofsted. It is …
33
Conclusion
Para 80
The Department must aim towards banning unregulated provision for looked-after children once it has addressed placement sufficiency issues using the mechanisms outlined by The independent review of children’s social care. In the meantime, while these reforms are being undertaken, the new set of standards for unregulated provision should be implemented …
34
Conclusion
Para 86
41% of looked-after children are placed outside of their local area, and 8,098 children had at least two placement moves over 12 months. A system that is working well does not boast these numbers. Frequent placement moves are destabilising for the child, and all too often result in missed education, …
35
Conclusion
Para 87
Where this is in the child’s best interest, every looked-after child should be cared for in a local care placement, receiving their education at a good or outstanding local school. The Department must take greater responsibility for overseeing the placements system and for driving funded system change to reduce the …
36
Conclusion
Para 92
Current national-level data is not available to illustrate the scale of gaps in education for looked-after children. It should be a priority for the Department to ensure this data is collected and published, so that responsible parties can be held to account when looked-after children are missing education.
37
Conclusion
Para 94
The Department must make it a priority to collect and publish national data on how often school places are not being provided within the statutory 20 school days timeframe for looked-after children under an emergency care order. The lack of data means there is currently no visibility into the scale …
38
Conclusion
The Department has set out a new legal requirement for local authorities to maintain registers of children not in school. The Department must issue clear guidance to local authorities on the definition of a child missing education, to ensure that all looked- after children not in the roll of a …
39
Conclusion
Para 96
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.
40
Conclusion
The Department must ensure looked-after children are quickly able to access vital mental health support services in a timely way despite being placed out-of-area or moved around. The child must not be disadvantaged in terms of waiting times if they are placed out-of-area, and consideration must be given to maintaining …
41
Conclusion
Para 100
The Government’s SEND reforms must move towards a less adversarial system that places less strain on children and families.
42
Conclusion
Para 106
Over 90% of SEND tribunal decisions are made in favour of the parent and child. But where a child with SEND lives in residential care, and does not have a school place or Education, Health and Care plan that meets their needs, they may effectively have no right of appeal …
43
Conclusion
Para 107
All looked-after children must have an independent advocate whose function is to champion their best interests, ensuring they are admitted to the best, most appropriate schools, and that they are fully supported to appeal to SEND tribunals where their Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan does not meet their needs. …
46
Conclusion
Para 113
41% of care leavers aged 19–21 are not in education, employment or training, up from 39% in 2020. This is a shameful reflection of an education and careers system that routinely—and without consequences—fails far too many looked-after children. Too often, the potential of care leavers is not being realised. With …
47
Conclusion
Para 114
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.
48
Conclusion
Para 115
Careers and employability outcomes for care-experienced young people up to age 25 should be a core part of the Virtual School Head remit. Every Virtual School should have a designated careers lead whose function is to promote and support the career outcomes of looked-after young people. This should be done …
50
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Para 120
Just 2% of care leavers go on to do an apprenticeship. The apprenticeship wage rate— £4.81 per hour for apprentices aged 16–18 or aged 19 and over and in the first year of their apprenticeship—is prohibitive for young care leavers living independently. This rate is not designed with the needs …
Government Response Summary
The government recognizes that care leavers face additional barriers to apprenticeships, which is why they introduced the £1,000 bursary for care leavers, but believes employers should pay apprentices wages.
55
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Para 133
A record 80,850 children are in care. Early intervention is key to tackling the needs of vulnerable families and children before they escalate. The record rise of children in care cannot be disconnected from the 48% reduction in early intervention spending over the last decade. Short-changing early intervention is a …
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the rising number of children in care and the reduction in early intervention spending. They reiterate existing investments in local services and vulnerable families but maintain that councils are best placed to decide how to spend their funding.
56
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Para 134
Local authorities must tackle the imbalance between the 48% reduction in early intervention spending, and the 34% rise in spending on costlier downstream interventions over the last decade. Local authorities cannot simply achieve this by reshuffling spending priorities and reducing essential support for children at the crisis end. The independent …
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the imbalance between early intervention and downstream spending and reiterates existing investments in local services and vulnerable families. They state that local councils are best placed to decide how to spend their available funding.
59
Conclusion
Acknowledged
We continue to be extremely concerned by media reports of children’s homes— including the recent case of Calcot Services for Children—failing to meet the needs or ensure the safety of the vulnerable children in their care. In the case of Calcot, their children’s homes had been rated good or outstanding …
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges concerns about children's homes and states that the Minister met with Ofsted to discuss actions being taken. Ofsted will write to the Committee separately on the issue.