Supporting Inclusive Schools – Extension to additional boroughs

The link between school exclusions and serious youth violence is increasingly clear. Reducing the number of children excluded or going missing inappropriately from education by supporting an inclusive schools approach is an integral part of the VRU strategy to keep young Londoners safe and in school.

The VRU launched the Supporting Inclusive Schools programme (SIS) in December 2019 to help create a more inclusive educational environment in participating schools and Pupil Referral Units. The programme consists of four different, but complementary, projects to support more inclusive schools in the capital. This is a two-year programme which was launched in January 2020 and will conclude in December 2021. The total funding for this programme is approved in DMPC 648 (£1.7M) and 673 (£460K) is £2.16m.

This programme which commenced delivery in April was originally offered to 13 London VRU Tier 1 priority boroughs. As not all boroughs opted for all four projects offered, it was assessed that the benefits of the SIS programme would be optimised by extending this offer to additional priority boroughs from Tier 2. This has necessitated an uplift to the current grant agreement with Tender Arts and Education charity, and Nurture UK, the two external delivery partners on the SIS programme.

The Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime is recommended to:

• Approve a variation to the grant agreement with Tender Arts and Education charity to increase the grant funding for the project A Whole Community Approach to Healthy Relationships from £459,922 to £566,018; an increase of £106,096

• Approve a variation to the grant agreement with Nurture UK to increase the funding for the project Nurturing London from £300,000 to £424,904; an increase of £124, 904

• To indicatively note the £182,802 (funded from existing available 2020/21 commissioning budget), to be carried forward into next financial year 2021/22.

1. Introduction and background

1.1. The link between exclusions and serious youth violence is clear. The Government’s Serious Violence Strategy (2018) identified truancy and exclusion as one of the risk factors for serious violence. In 2019 the APPG on Knife Crime’s report Back To School? highlighted the link between school exclusion and serious violence, as did the Timpson Review of School Exclusions and Croydon’s Vulnerable Adolescent Review.

1.2. Reducing the number of children excluded or going missing inappropriately from education by supporting an inclusive schools approach is an integral part of the Violence Reduction Unit’s strategy and objectives.

Boroughs

1.3. The VRU ranked boroughs for potential participation in the Supporting Inclusive Schools programme based on data from various local crime and public health indicators for borough and ward level resulting in three tiers of priority boroughs.

o The programme is currently delivering 13 Tier 1 boroughs, including: Brent, Croydon, Enfield, Hackney, Haringey, Lambeth, Lewisham, Southwark, Newham, Tower Hamlets, Westminster, Greenwich, Barking & Dagenham.

o The proposed additional three boroughs selected for expansion of this programme - Enfield, Hounslow and Waltham Forrest - are from Tier 2.

Programme components

1.4. The four projects offered to boroughs include:

(i) A Whole-community Approach to Healthy Relationships: Tender, the arts and education charity, are delivering a whole-school approach to preventing domestic abuse and sexual violence by teaching young people about healthy relationships; providing schools/alternative provision/PRUs with resources for this and training adults on how to support healthy relationship learning in schools. This will build on the successful delivering of a MOPAC funded pilot programme which is currently running in four schools in Croydon.

(ii) Successful transition to secondary school: The GLA’s Stepping Stones programme (complete with tool kits, resources and access to Stepping Stone network of schools) will help vulnerable children with the transition from primary to secondary school. The project, delivered by the schools themselves, will identify vulnerable pupils in the last term of primary school, support them through the summer to prepare for them for secondary school and provide mentoring, academic support and resilience building through their first year of secondary school.

(iii) A Whole-school Approach to Nurturing: NurtureUK, the inclusive schools charity, are delivering this whole-school approach to nurturing project. This builds on work that schools are already doing to be inclusive and nurturing to support the reduction in the number of children in these schools who are excluded or are going missing from school. This approach was used in Glasgow where exclusions across the city were reduced by 81 per cent over the last decade. Nurturing as a methodology, based on attachment theory, has been in use for over 50 years with proven results.

(iv) After-school Provision: The evidence suggests that the period after school is a particularly high-risk period for vulnerable children who are at risk of becoming involved in violence or becoming the victim of violence. Mapping individual incidents demonstrated that the spike in frequency in the late afternoon and early evening was attributable to incidents occurring on school days and close to home. The VRU has offered to £40,000 per borough for one year (April 2020 to March 2021, now with an extended delivery period to September, due to the impact of COVID19) for the provision of after school activity between 15.00 and 19.00 and school holiday activities for children and young people between the ages of 10 and 18, who attend a PRU, alternative provision setting, are at risk of exclusion or being affected by violence. This activity is delivered either by the PRU directly or outsourced to partner organisation with expertise in this area.

2. Issues for consideration

2.1. £0.55m is available against this programme is principally because not all boroughs opted for all four projects. Some boroughs had similar programmes already in delivery so opted not to participate. One borough (Newham) opted for only two projects and five boroughs (Westminster, Hackney, Hounslow, Lambeth and Tower Hamlets) opted for only three out of the four. This decision proposes to reallocate funding within the Supporting Inclusive Schools programme ensuring that as many of London’s pupils as possible get the support they need from their school to stay engaged, safe and to thrive.

2.2. As a result, the programme can be extended to an additional three Tier 2 boroughs (£422,143). This comprises the Tender uplift 106K, requested in this decision and the additional funding requires for Stepping Stones and Afterschool provision to reach the additional three boroughs, thereby reducing the underspend to £74,904.

2.3. On September 28th LB Croydon dropped out of the Stepping Stones programme. The school due to participate had to divert resources to deal with the impact of COVI19 and, despite their best efforts, felt they couldn’t manage to deliver Stepping Stones at this time. This added £50,000 to the underspend (£124,904).

2.4. The interest in the Nurturing London programme from across the 13 boroughs who have opted for it was very high with boroughs repeatedly requesting additional nurture schools if possible. As a result, and in an effort to support more schools at a particularly challenging time, the VRU is proposing to use this underspend of 124K to fund an additional 11 Nurturing London schools across participating boroughs.

2.5. This would ensure the programme allocation is spent to budget and more importantly support more of London’s most vulnerable children and the schools who support them with a proven model for increasing inclusive education.

3. Financial Comments

3.1. As per the table below, the uplift to Tender of £0.11m and Nurture UK of £0.12m will be funded from underspends within the other elements of the Supporting Inclusive Schools programme.

3.2. This original allocation towards Tender was £0.46m of which £0.16m was spent in 19/20, and £0.3m carried forward into 20/21. The proposed uplift therefore will increase the budget requirement in 20/21 to £0.41m.

3.3. The original allocation towards Nurture UK was £0.3m of which £0.04m was spent in 19/20, and £0.26 was carried forward into 20/21. The proposed uplift will therefore increase the budget requirement in 20/21 to £0.38m

3.4. this decision requests to indicatively note the carry forward £0.182m to next financial year (2021/22) to ensure that funding is available for the duration of the programme (up to December 2021). Processing of carry-forwards will take place at financial year-end.

4. Legal Comments

4.1. Paragraph 4.8 of the MOPAC Scheme of Delegation and Consent provides that the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime (DMPC) has delegated authority to:

• Approve bids for grant funding made and all offers made of grant funding; and/or where appropriate a strategy for grant giving.

• Approve the strategy for the award of individual grants and/ or the award of all individual grants whether to secure or contribute to securing crime reduction in London or for other purposes [see Guidance].

4.2. Paragraph 4.13 of the MOPAC Scheme of Delegation and Consent provides that the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime (DMPC) has delegated authority to approve all unforeseen variations and extensions to contracts with an original value of £500,000 or above, when the variation or extension is greater than 10% of the original value and/or is for a period of more than 12 months.

5. Commercial Issues

5.1. Paragraph 4.13 of the MOPAC Scheme of Delegation and Consent provides that the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime (DMPC) has delegated authority to approve all unforeseen variations and extensions to contracts with an original value of £500,000 or above, when the variation or extension is greater than 10% of the original value and/or is for a period of more than 12 months.

5.2. This is the first variation on this existing VRU grant agreement (please see section 5.3) .

5.3. The grant agreement for Tender Arts and Education was awarded via direct grant award (detailed in DMPC 648).

6. Public Health Approach

Evidence-based practice is fundamental to the implementation of a public health approach to reducing violence. Therefore, more research including the gather of good practice and ‘what works’ is required to deepen and broaden the evidence base around reducing school exclusions in London.

6.1 Evaluation of good practice to answer the question ‘what works and for whom?’ which must also

happen before policy and programmes can be effectively scaled up and sustained to contribute to population level outcomes (a core requirement for public health programmes).

7. GDPR and Data Privacy

7.1. MOPAC will adhere to the Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018 and ensure that any organisations who are commissioned to do work with or on behalf of MOPAC are fully compliant with the policy and understand their GDPR responsibilities

8. Equality Comments

8.1. MOPAC is required to comply with the public sector equality duty set out in section 149(1) of the Equality Act 2010. This requires MOPAC to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations by reference to people with protected characteristics. The protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

8.2. In 2017/18 the rate of permanent exclusions represented just under one-fifth of one percent of the total of London secondary school pupils. While fixed-period exclusions are more common, less than five percent of pupils received such an exclusion in 2017/18. But it is worth noting that rates of both permanent and fixed-term exclusions in London are lower than the national average.

8.3. The VRU also know that certain groups are disproportionately excluded from school. In terms of the rates of pupils with one or more fixed-period exclusion, the rates were highest among Black pupils and lowest among Asian pupils. Pupils eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) make up 33.5% of permanent exclusions despite only being 15.9% of the student population.

8.4. Off-rolling to removal of pupils illegally or inappropriately is also a growing concern. A lack of public data means that there are no accurate figures on off-rolling or managed moves.

8.5. Croydon’s Vulnerable Adolescent Review found that exclusion from school was a common factor in the most vulnerable young people in the borough. All of those excluded from primary school went on to be involved in the criminal justice system. Exclusion from school is one of several adverse childhood experiences which can increase the likelihood of being involved in or affected by violence in later life.

8.6. The evidence increasingly shows that the most vulnerable children in society are more likely to be either permanently excluded or not attending school. Truancy and exclusion are accepted risk factors in serious violence. Early intervention and support for vulnerable young people both in and out of school is needed. The Government’s Serious Violence Strategy (2018) identified truancy and exclusion as one of the risk factors for serious violence . The 2019 APPG on Knife Crime’s report Back To School? highlighted the link between school exclusion and serious violence, as did the Timpson Review of School Exclusions and Croydon’s Vulnerable Adolescent Review.

8.7. Initial screening for equality impact has taken place and it was established that a full EQIA was not required.

9. Background/supporting papers

NA.