CASE STUDY LEA: City of Stoke on Trent

Context

The City of Stoke-on-Trent has a population of 254,000. Its economy has depended on traditional industries, notably ceramics and mining, which have declined steadily or disappeared over 25 years. Unemployment is on a par with the national average overall, but there are pockets of very high unemployment, particularly for young men. Much employment is low wage. The statistics indicate that the population is less healthy than is the case nationally. Drug misuse is at a high level. On the basis of the 1997 national Index of Local Conditions, Stoke-on-Trent is the 48th most deprived district in the country. Of the adult population, 5.8 per cent have a higher education qualification, compared with 13.5 per cent nationally. The Basic Skills Agency estimates that 18 per cent of adults are functionally illiterate. (Source: Ofsted report 10/1999) In the last 20 years the population of Stoke-on-Trent has fallen by 3.7%, Staffordshire Moorlands by 0.7% and Newcastle has grown by 4.1%. The movement reflects the fact that the city has a greater proportion of the lower working-class than would be expected in a city of a similar size. (Source: Census of Population County Reports and 2001 Key Statistics)

Background

Over the past five years the LEA has been steadily reviewing and developing its programme of provision for key stage 4 pupils who have been excluded, or are at risk of exclusion. An important first step in 1998 was to carry out a review of all the alternative provision within the LEA. This led to a rationalisation of the service, including the decision to end PRU provision as a ‘one-size fits all’ service. A strategic lead by the LEA has resulted in the position where there is a good tracking system to identify missing pupils. This uses data from a variety of sources. Schools understand their role in making every effort to prevent exclusion, and the central position of the Education Welfare Officers in managing the route into alternative provision, whether as a proactive linked prevention strategy, or following exclusion. There is a central Forum, which serves both a strategic and operational function. This body provides monitoring of the system, and provides a venue for the solution of difficulties in placements and the identification of different placements. The senior managers of the local FE Colleges are fully signed up to a policy of inclusion. All courses are available to pupils age 14-16, and if there is reluctance on the part of individual staff to participate different solutions are found. The provision was surveyed by HMI in March 2003. The findings were positive in most respects and the LEA has found it helpful to use the identified areas for development alongside its own agenda as it develops further the extent, range and quality of provision.

The Practice

The 1998 Survey of provision for disaffected pupils age 14-16 covered both Staffordshire and the City of Stoke on Trent. It was based on visiting schools and centres, and included the views of pupils. It covered four major themes: initiatives to keep disaffected pupils in school; initiatives to reintegrate pupils into school; initiatives for excluded pupils in colleges; initiatives for excluded pupils using training providers. The survey identified 11 areas for attention and these formed the development plan for the provision. In

summary the issues included: the need to identify as early as possible those pupils ‘at risk’ of exclusion; the need for change in schools to review the way in which they deal with pupils experiencing problems, including the appropriateness of the curriculum at KS4; the poor level of literacy and numeracy of many pupils, and the impact of this on their overall experience; the use of assessment at all stages; links with parents; funding; and evaluation. There is now a clearly described process for schools to follow when requesting alternative placements for pupils who are at risk of exclusion. The way in which the school has used support services available to it is recorded in the referral form which has to be sent to the Forum. It is expected that the school will have evidence of support at the level of school action plus. For all pupils there is basic personal information including the reason for referral, age, ethnicity, whether permanently excluded, or excluded for a fixed term, if the pupil is still on the school roll, SEN details and whether the pupil is looked after by the Authority. Other information is also requested, such as attendance, KS3 SATs results, summaries of IEP and PEP or statement as appropriate, brief social and health reports. The involvement of other agencies, with contact details for key workers, allows links to be made within and between agencies. If a pupil has a statement of special educational need then there has to be a fully constituted review meeting. The school’s EWO, 12 out of 17 secondary schools being supported by a full-time officer following delegation of the service, has responsibility for managing the referral. Details on the form are checked before a case is considered at the monthly meeting of the Forum, the body which co-ordinates the provision. The Forum was first established in 1997 following local government reorganisation, and is a multi agency body which operates at both the strategic and operational levels. It provides a mechanism for inter-agency planning and decision making for pupils who are out of school, or at risk of being excluded. A key function of the Forum is to enable the LEA to monitor the whereabouts and progress of pupils whom the Authority has the duty to educate, but who are not attending a mainstream school. The Forum structure includes 5 operational working groups which cover reintegration; training providers; alternative education routes; Looked After Children and Youth Offending Teams; Child Adolescent Mental Health Service. The Forum has 5 objectives: to reduce levels of exclusion; to reduce levels of absence; to provide full time appropriate education for all by September 2002; to raise levels of attainment and achievement for all; to achieve these through more effective joint working with a wide variety of statutory, independent and voluntary organisations. The Forum is responsible for establishing a network of high quality and effective alternative provision for KS4 pupils. It has the authority to work across agencies, and to co-ordinate approaches to sources of funding. The Forum manages the placement of pupils permanently excluded from school, and facilitates access to placements for pupils at risk of exclusion. Schools may arrange their own placements, up to the equivalent of two days each week as part of their own support programme but the LEA policy is that schools may only access providers for full-time placements through the Forum. Each training provider has to enter a tendering process, which is supported by good documentation developed in conjunction with lawyers. The contract specification includes a clear service requirement, which includes provision for excluded pupils, but also provides places for pupils with medical conditions which prevent attendance at mainstream or special school, those with alcohol or drug addiction, young homeless, young offenders and young parents. Service standards include time limited production

of individual action plans and the desire for all participants to achieve nationally recognised qualifications including GCSE or equivalent, and strategies to enable pupils to progress to post 16 provision, in conjunction with the Connexions service. The providers are required to give a monthly report to the Forum which includes records of individual pupils’ academic progress, attendance and progress towards the targets contained in individual action plans. The tendering process identifies the number of places which the LEA will, at maximum, require. Providers and the LEA agree that 60% of the funding will be allocated, with the additional 40% being dependant on the number of pupils finally provided for. This gives the LEA some control over the rise and decline in numbers without committing funding. It also generates some spare capacity which schools can access and pay for. Funding for pupils in the scheme is based on the cost of individual places, which are averaged out so that the charge to schools is the same. When a school requests a full time placement as part of a preventative programme the Forum charges the average cost of a place which is more than the AWPU allocation, but less than the amount charged following the permanent exclusion of a pupil. From June 1st 2003 the LEA is making use of European Social Fund and other sources to provide six full-time Connexions Personal Advisers to work with pupils in alternative provision. The PAs come from a variety of backgrounds including social work, probation service, teaching and youth work. They are jointly managed by the former co-ordinator of the teenage pregnancy programme within the LEA and the 14 – 19 Development Manager within the local Connexions Team. They will have access to training and support through both the Connexions Service and the LEA which will include the Diploma for Personal Advisors. . It will be the role of the school’s PA to ensure that the pupil’s career plan is used to give guidance on suitable placement to the Forum. Part of the challenge is to link the work of Connexions Service PAs, and EWOs, particularly when a pupil is still on the register of a mainstream school to ensure that attendance issues are pursued rigorously. All providers and young people in alternative provision are being involved in a major development with the introduction of the Pacific Institute programme Investment in Excellence. This is part of the LEA strategy to raise aspirations and achievement for all through a range of motivational programmes focussing on personal and professional development. The young people involved will have access to the Pacific Institute `Go for It’ programme, facilitating their development to achieve positive outcomes for their future lives.

Overall Impact

A comment made in the 1998 survey, which was repeated in the HMI visit was that there has been limited monitoring of the quality of the provision and its impact. Measures of success currently focus on sustained attendance and engagement and continued involvement in education and training post 16. Data on all participants has been difficult to collate, but the development of Connexions tracking is addressing this. During the past two years monitoring by the Forum has shown that about 50% of the pupils sustain the courses. One reason for directly employing Connexions PAs is to overcome the difficulty that school-based EWOs have in supporting pupils on alternative programmes to the same extent as those attending the school.

Of those who do complete the course about 85% do stay in education and training, usually with the College or training provider where they were placed. Longer-term tracking with Connexions is intended to provide more complete data on involvement and employment. The LEA Education Officer for Social Inclusion is looking to establish monitoring and evaluation procedures which build on the expectations of the tender service requirements. Visits have been made to providers to observe work in progress, conduct work scrutiny and interview participants. There are plans to increase the rigour of this work, and to make use of the improved sources of data. For further information contact Lyn Frith, Education Officer – Social Inclusion lyn.frith@stoke.gov.uk CASE STUDY DATE: July 2003.