Councillors will be asked to make any declarations of interest in respect to items on the agenda.

There was one declaration of interest made:

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on 09 December 2025.

The minutes of the meeting which took place on 09 December 2025 were agreed as a true and accurate record.

To receive reports on business which in the opinion of the Chair, should be brought forward for urgent consideration.

The Chair referred to the recent SEND inspection and formally placed on record thanks to all officers, school staff and young people who were involved in the inspection process, noting that at the previous meeting the Panel had been awaiting the outcome of the inspection.

David Haley (Director for Children’s Services) advised the Panel that:

a)     The Ofsted report had now been published and was available on the Ofsted website;

b)    In all areas tested by Ofsted, which aligned with the key priority actions reported to the Panel at its previous meeting, inspectors had judged that effective action had been taken and expected progress had been made across all areas;

c)     The report was described as a very strong and positive report, highlighting the coming together of the whole partnership across Plymouth, supported by Members, the Council, and health and education partners;

d)    Members were encouraged to read the report in full, and thanks were extended to the Panel for its support throughout the improvement journey.

In response to questions, the Panel discussed:

e)     Whether the Ofsted report could have been circulated to Members in advance of the meeting, and it was acknowledged that while the report had been circulated widely, including to Cabinet, it may not have reached all Panel Members directly;

f)      That a link to the report would be circulated to Members, either during the meeting or, if not technically possible, at the earliest opportunity following the meeting;

g)     During a recent visit to Coombe Dean School, the Headteacher had praised the input and support provided by the Council and partner organisations in the delivery of SEND provision for children attending the school;

h)    Members were encouraged to read the report in full, noting that it read as a particularly positive and affirming account of the work undertaken;

i)      Inspectors had emphasised that children were at the centre of the system and that there was evidence of a sustained cultural shift, with improvements described as non-superficial;

j)      Inspectors had fed back verbally that Plymouth’s young people “absolutely shone” during the inspection process, reflecting positively on the whole partnership;

k)     The inspection was a monitoring visit rather than a full inspection, involving Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission (CQC), and had drawn on the contribution of schools, school leaders, health partners and Council officers.

The Chair thanked all partners and officers for their work.

Councillor Laing (Deputy Leander and Cabinet Member for Children’s Social Care, Culture and Communications) and Councillor Cresswell (Cabinet Member for Education, Participation and Skills), introduced the Q3 2025/26 Performance Report and discussed:

a)     That referrals through the Families First model had decreased and were now below both England and statistical neighbour averages, with re?referral rates also improving;

b)    That these trends reflected the early positive impact of the Families First front door model, supporting more proportionate decision?making and ensuring families received the right level of support at the right time;

c)     That at Key Stage 2, the proportion of pupils achieving the expected standard in reading, writing and maths exceeded national, regional and statistical neighbour averages;

d)    That at Key Stage 4, the proportion of pupils achieving a strong pass in English and maths also remained above national and statistical neighbour averages;

e)     That outcomes for children in care relating to Education, Employment and Training (EET) had improved through joined?up working between the Skills Team, the Virtual School and dedicated EET advocates, while overall Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET) rates for 16–17 year olds remained low;

f)      That rates of children subject to Child Protection Plans, children in care and repeat plans remained above England and statistical neighbour averages and continued to be an area of focus;

g)     That overall absence, persistent absence and persistent absence among pupils with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) remained above national and regional averages, with a citywide place?based attendance plan in place, though improvements were not yet fully reflected in the data;

h)    That the timeliness of issuing EHCPs within the 20?week statutory timescale remained a significant concern, with only around 17–18% completed within timescales, largely due to capacity challenges within the Educational Psychology Service;

i)      That work was underway to address this through prioritisation, improved allocation processes, engagement with parents and carers, and exploration of longer?term workforce solutions, including growing local Educational Psychology capacity;

j)      That outcomes for care leavers in Education, Employment or Training remained below comparative averages, alongside ongoing challenges around suitable accommodation, though positive developments included the opening of a Care Leavers’ Hub and the Connect to Work programme.

In response to questions, the Panel discussed:

k)     The Government’s pledge to create 10,000 additional foster care placements nationally by 2029, which was welcomed as placing foster care on the national agenda, though further detail was required to understand the local impact for Plymouth;

l)      That Plymouth had achieved a shift towards having more in?house foster carers than independent fostering agency carers, supported by an improved local authority offer;

m)   That delays in issuing EHCPs were not marginal but significant, and remained an area of high risk, requiring ongoing scrutiny and transparent communication with families;

n)    That agency Educational Psychologist capacity remained difficult to secure nationally, despite funding being identified locally;

o)    That Ofsted registration delays for new local authority children’s homes remained a significant barrier, with timescales reported as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

Councillor Laing (Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Children’s Social Care, Culture and Communications) introduced the Children’s Services Finance Report and highlighted the following key points:  

a)    Children, Young People and Families Directorate continued to face significant financial pressures, primarily due to rising costs associated with independent specialist and residential placements, compounded by limited placement availability locally, regionally and nationally; 

b)    The service was managing increased demand alongside higher costs per individual care package, with strategic workstreams underway to address those pressures, including the Families Homes programme, enhanced fostering recruitment, strengthened partnership working and service redesign aligned to the Families First Partnership;  

c)    There was on-going workforce challenges, with particular difficulties in securing permanent staff, resulting in continued reliance on agency and interim staff to maintain service continuity;  

d)    There was a £1.485m adverse movement between Quarter 2 and Quarter 3, with a total £5.216m adverse variance against the budget within Children, Young People and Families, driven predominantly by placement pressures. New residential placements were significantly above the assumed average cost, with some placements costing between £10,000 and £25,000 per week, making accurate forecasting extremely difficult;  

e)    While sophisticated forecasting models were used, Children’s Services remained a demand?led service and could not fully predict sudden or complex cases entering care, meaning that cost pressures were driven more by placement cost than overall numbers of children in care, which had remained relatively static;  

In response to questions raised it was reported that:  

f)     The proposed 90% reduction in accumulated SEND deficits was very positive but subject to detailed guidance, the publication of the SEND White Paper and the development of a partnership action plan aligned to national reform expectations;  

g)    The SEND Board would be the appropriate forum to develop and approve the required action plan and even if approved, the Council would still need to manage the remaining 10% revenue impact over future years; 

h)    In relation to pressures created by population movement into the city and the challenges this posed for forecasting demand, officers explained that while demand could be modelled using population data and comparator analysis. Individual circumstances could not always be anticipated, reinforcing the inherent uncertainty within a demand?led service;  

i)     The key pressure was placement sufficiency and cost inflation rather than increased numbers of children entering care, with market imbalance leading to higher costs for replacement placements; 

j)     Councillor Laing highlighted on-going national engagement to address placement cost inflation, including discussions with the Children’s Commissioner’s Office and representatives from central government, and stressed the importance of continued collective lobbying to address what was widely recognised as a broken market; 

k)    The Panel welcomed progress in bringing provision back in?house, noting the successful acquisition of the Council’s first children’s home and plans to acquire further homes, while acknowledging the significant time and complexity involved in achieving registration and operational readiness; 

l)     The future SEND reform plan should be brought back to the Panel for scrutiny, and officers confirmed that work was underway on an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

Councillor Cresswell (Cabinet Member for Education, Skills and Apprenticeships) introduced the report on Early Years Entitlement and highlighted the following key points: 

a)    Early Years Entitlement in Plymouth showed strong progress and an increased impact for families, reinforcing the importance of early intervention in securing the best outcomes for children; 

b)    Funded early education uptake had increased by 26.4%, with 93% of parents reporting that they had secured their first?choice provider, reflecting confidence in the sector and the effectiveness of sufficiency planning; 

c)    Childcare places and quality had continued to expand, including the delivery of approximately 50,000 hours of SEND inclusion funding, supporting nearly 9.5% of funded children with early and emerging SEND needs; 

In response to questions raised it was reported that:

d)    The barriers experienced by families and providers around flexibility and affordability was being working through closely with the Department for Education; 

e)    Visits to expanded nurseries and school based nursery provision, highlighted the visible progress children had made not only in learning but also in social development and school readiness, aligning with the Government’s ‘Best Start in Life’ policy; 

f)     SEND inclusion funding was particularly pertinent given the wider discussion on SEND during the meeting and it was confirmed that funding rates and allocations had been reviewed to ensure sufficient provision for increased numbers of funded children, including those newly eligible from September 2026. Members were reassured that SEND inclusion funding had been taken into account as part of the annual funding consultation process; 

g)    Improved processes for engaging with parents had helped address concerns around funded hours and to navigate the system more effectively; 

h)    While most parents secured their preferred provider, around 40% reported challenges relating to childcare flexibility rather than cost, often linked to work patterns. The Council continued to challenge providers where practices appeared inconsistent with statutory guidance, while recognising the limitations of operating within a private childcare market and national regulatory framework; 

i)     The Panel welcomed the progress outlined in the report, particularly the increase in uptake, the strength of partnership working and the growing number of children benefiting from early education provision across the city. 

The Panel agreed to note the report. 

Councillor Cresswell (Cabinet Member for Education, Skills and Apprenticeships) introduced the report and highlighted the following key points:  

a)    CaterEd was a long?established local organisation which had provided school meals across Plymouth for almost ten years and had played a particularly significant role during the COVID?19 pandemic in supporting children and families; 

b)    Despite sustained efforts by the CaterEd Board to balance the organisation’s finances, rising costs over a prolonged period, including food, fuel and staffing costs, had rendered the company no longer financially viable;

c)    CaterEd would be unable to continue trading beyond the 2025–26 academic year and the Board of Directors had taken the decision to cease school meal provision in order to avoid wrongful trading; 

d)    CaterEd had experienced financial pressures for several years, but diminishing reserves and a sharp escalation in costs over the last 12 months had significantly worsened the position; 

In response to questions raised it was reported that:  

a)    Plymouth City Council had not made the decision to cease trading and this decision sat with the CaterEd Board of Directors. A Delegated Decision however had been taken by the Council to provide support to allow CaterEd to continue operating until the end of the current academic year, to protect children and schools and ensure continuity of meal provision while alternative arrangements were put in place;  

b)    Responsibility for providing school meals sat with schools and Multi?Academy Trusts, rather than the Council, and CaterEd’s shareholder arrangements reflected this governance structure;

c)    The Council could not lawfully subsidise CaterEd indefinitely, particularly where this could result in unequal treatment between schools using different providers, and that the Council did not have the resources to underwrite the business long term; 

d)    CaterEd’s financial difficulties had been known for some time, but the point at which continued lawful trading was no longer possible had become clear during the previous academic year as costs escalated rapidly; 

e)    There were concerns raised about the loss of a locally based, cooperative catering provider which paid the Living Wage and prioritised healthy, locally sourced meals, particularly given the importance of hot school meals for many children; 

f)     The national free school meal funding rate was widely regarded as insufficient, particularly when compared with higher rates in Wales, Scotland and London. Members expressed frustration that inflationary pressures had not been adequately reflected in national funding increases; 

g)    A reduction in pupil numbers, falling school rolls and a gradual reduction in the number of schools using CaterEd had further undermined the long?term viability of the model; 

h)    It was acknowledged that while the Council had supported CaterEd through to the end of the academic year, longer term sustainability would have required national policy and funding changes beyond the Council’s control; 

i)     There were concerns raised regarding the cessation of CaterEd’s wider community meal provision and the potential impact on vulnerable adults. It was noted that this fell outside the scope of the current item and would need to be considered  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

Councillor Cresswell (Cabinet Member for Education, Skills and Apprenticeships) introduced the School Assessments and Standards Report and highlighted the following key points:

a)    The data demonstrated a pattern of steady improvement across the system, with several notable strengths. Early years outcomes had improved, with phonics performance remaining above national levels and strong attainment in literacy and mathematics. Progress was also noted against Early Learning Goals; 

b)    At Key Stage 2, combined reading, writing and mathematics outcomes had continued to improve and were now above the national average. Pupils with English as an additional Language performed particularly strongly, and outcomes for pupils eligible for free school meals exceeded national benchmarks in several measures; 

c)    At Key Stage 4, Plymouth outperformed its statistical neighbours across most headline measures, particularly for disadvantaged pupils, pupils receiving SEN support and those with English as an additional Language, with outcomes showing marked improvement compared to pre?pandemic performance; 

d)    Key Stage 5 outcomes, including A?levels and applied general qualifications, had continued to improve year on year, including for children in care; 

e)    Attainment for children in care at Key Stage 2 was broadly in line with or above national outcomes, and that targeted interventions at Key Stage 4 had contributed to improved English results and a significant reduction in the number of pupils leaving Year 11 with no qualifications; 

f)     There were positive impacts of targeted one to one interventions and it was noted that several Plymouth schools had received letters of congratulations from Bridget Phillipson MP,  Secretary of State for Education in recognition of strong performance, including schools serving areas of higher deprivation; 

In response to questions raised it was reported that:  

g)    Some cohorts, particularly those experiencing disrupted transitions during lockdowns, had been disproportionately affected, but there was increasing confidence that recovery was being embedded, particularly for pupils who had benefited from a full ‘Early Years’ experience; 

h)    It was acknowledged that some very young children had been babies during lockdown and that the longer?term impact on these cohorts would continue to be monitored. 

i)     Members discussed the interpretation of data for smaller cohorts, including children in care, noting that results could be disproportionately affected by the performance of a small number of pupils. Officers confirmed that this was recognised within the analysis and that trends over time, rather than single?year data, were used to inform improvement planning. 
The importance of benchmarking against national, regional and statistical neighbour comparators was emphasised, alongside the value of sharing best practice between schools, particularly where strong outcomes had been achieved in areas of high deprivation. 

j)     Members raised questions regarding the potential relationship between good nutrition and educational attainment, reflecting on the role of high?quality school meals. Officers advised that while no local research had been undertaken, there was strong national evidence linking nutrition, social development and learning outcomes, particularly in primary education. 

k)    Officers reported that 67% of children achieved a good level of development at the end of Reception, with Plymouth  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

The Chair introduced the item, noting the value of young people contributing to scrutiny discussions and welcomed Lily and Stuart Hogg (Practice Manager) to the meeting.

Councillor Laing (Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, Culture and Communications) introduced the report and highlighted the following key points:

a)    The purpose of the work was to explore how AI could responsibly support the workforce, improve efficiency, and create more time for practitioners to work directly with children and families.

b)    The report set out opportunities, safeguards and governance considerations, emphasising that human oversight and statutory safeguarding responsibilities must remain central.

c)    The Panel’s discussion would be an important step in shaping how innovation could strengthen services while maintaining quality assurance;

d)    There were important questions regarding quality assurance and deployment risks which required reassurance.

Stuart Hogg (Practice Manager for Participation) introduced feedback gathered from young people, highlighting that:

e)    Young people showed interest in AI, with mixed views ranging from cautious optimism to scepticism.

f)     Concerns included:

              i.        Environmental impact

             ii.        Data safety and accuracy

            iii.        Risk of losing the voice of children and young people

            iv.        Consistency of use across practitioners

g)    Positive opportunities were identified, including improving coordination systems (e.g. school transport) and potential support for disadvantaged pupils.

h)    A key concern was that AI must not develop into safeguarding decision-making roles or introduce risk.

The following questions were asked by Lily:

The Panel agreed to note the action log.

The Panel agreed to add the following items to the work programme:

·         Families First Partnership Assurance

·         SEND White paper and Maturity Matrix