1. Education Services Review 1 Wyn Williams – Programme Manager

2. Education Service Review Aims 2 “To review and resettle the relationship with schools ”

3. Engagement 3 Launch Events Programme Board HT Reference Group Consortia / Networks / Fora Governors & Bursars

4. Theme: Overall System Lack of trust in the LA Schools feel let down when most vulnerable Relationship described as ‘fractious’ & ‘broken’ Proud of overall good educational performance but areas to address Increasing pressure on schools budgets from 2015/16 Support for ‘independent, autonomous state schools’ BUT risks Lots of good collaboration...BUT some schools not engaging Strong interdependent relationships.BUT overall leadership weak Competitive education landscape can detract from wider purpose Roles & responsibilities across the system are unclear Information management needs to be more robust Range of views on support schools need - often paradoxical. Many Heads feel isolated and under intense pressure & scrutiny. Council slow to pick up on issues Not making most of community resources Place planning and landlord function needs clarity & sustainable framework put in place

5. Theme: SEN 5 Overspend on high needs block High numbers of statements Underachievement particularly at KS4 Frustrations with assessment process BUT has improved Been trying to agree SEND strategy for 8 years Principles consulted upon last year Strong support apart from ‘local schools for local people and inclusion’ General support to optimise opportunity to meet needs within mainstream setting ’...BUT some schools concerned about impact on floor target performance Leads to many schools feeling there is a lack of fairness around admissions Means children that could be in mainstream take up special school places Some complex needs having to be met out of City / independent sector High comparative expenditure on transport Expectation of top up funding Focus often amount of support rather than outcomes / reducing dependency Schools purchasing own support even where services commissioned elsewhere

6. Theme: Services to Schools Benchmarks show BCC overall as medium cost / medium performance High buy back rates not a proxy for satisfaction Key message is variability of service delivery – some services not up to standard / some depends on who you get Experience difficulty in accessing services and desire to ‘put the offer in one place’ Budgets cuts and lack of investment mean services creaking – leads to mistakes Low capacity in some services means schools have to go to market Cost structure of some services make them uncompetitive Volatility of the Council means services are unstable and find it difficult to invest & plan over medium term

7. 7 Theme: Commissioning Examples of schools and schools / community coming together to commission and co-design services Feeling that more schools and communities take control then the better the outcome and strong appetite to do more of this Schools purchasing services where there are capacity gaps or service model doesn’t work for them – paying twice Some examples of jointly commissioning with other agencies but more opportunities to do this Procurement of services often based on time rather than outcomes Joint commissioning could be mechanism for building collective leadership and driving improvement

8. Principles 8 Congruent with self-improving system Builds capacity through joining up with partners Delivers immediate impact and sustains momentum Brings coherency and synergy across system Enhances role clarity and accountability Creates ownership with schools Reflects size and complexity of the city - Aligns with national policy Brings stability

9. 9 National Models Charitable Trust Schools as trustees Grant funded by LA and traded income Mix of curriculum, business and specialist support to schools and children Buckinghamshire Learning Trust Joint venture company between Staffs County Council and Capita Aims of improving educational outcomes, developing services and creating jobs Mix of curriculum, business and specialist support Entrust Private / not for profit organisation given 10 year contract Included children’s centres, school support, early years provision and adult education on behalf of Hackney Council After contract expired HLT assumed responsibility for all of Hackney Council educational responsibilities Hackney Learning Trust Not for profit schools company 80% shares with schools / 20% HCC School improvement, curriculum support; ICT; HR; financial support; governor support Herts Learning Trust

10. 10 Birmingham Solution LA focus on delivering core statutory duties with emphasis on vulnerable children & young people and schools at risk. Core remit: place planning; fair access; being a champion and advocate for vulnerable children and young people; ensuring there is framework for school to school improvement; intervening in schools where there are concerns; landlord responsibilities. Service offer outside the core statutory to sit as a proposition across BEP and Services for Educations (S4E) District structures to be developed to provide collaborative leadership and Co- design/co-commissioning to ensure services meet local needs and mechanism for partners to hold one another to account New role of District Co-ordinator to sit within BEP to provide local face of education

11. Next Steps 11 Modelling Resources Report End June Consultation as Part of Service Review / Budget Cycle Transition Planning Implement April 2015