Agenda item - xBrighton & Hove Education Partnership proposals

Report of the Executive Director Families, Children & Learning (copy attached).

RESOLVED: That the Committee

(1)  Noted the feedback from the engagement phase on developing the Brighton and Hove Education Partnership

(2)  Approved the proposed approach and timeline for development of the partnership

81.1    The Committee considered the report of the Executive Director Families, Children & Learning on Brighton & Hove Education Partnership Proposal. The report outlined the proposal for the next stage in the development of the Brighton & Hove Education Partnership. The report was introduced by the Senior Adviser, Education Partnerships.

81.2    Councillor Brown felt that for the proposals to work all schools should be involved, and she was therefore concerned that it appeared that not all Head Teachers and Governors were convinced of the value of the Partnership, with only 22 Head Teachers and 18 Governors responding to the consultation. The Senior Adviser, Education Partnerships agreed the response to the consultation had been disappointing

81.3    Councillor Phillips asked if there were any cost implications in developing the partnership, and was advised there weren’t with any costs being met within current budgets.

81.4    Councillor Miller asked at what stage, and under what delegation were we giving, for a legal entity to be set up.  The Executive Director Families, Children & Learning confirmed that at this stage the Partnership would not be a formal body or have a legal entity; if that changed any proposals would come back to the Committee.

81.4    Mr Jones suggested that if the Partnership was not expected to have a legal entity it should be stated in the recommendations. The Legal Officer referred to recommendation 2.2 and said it was clear that the Committee were not being asked to approve a legal entity.

81.5    Mr Jones asked how often it was expected the Partnership would meet. The Senior Adviser, Education Partnership said that would depend on what issues were being discussed, as not all partnerships would discuss the same thing.

81.6    Mr Glazebrook said that there were a range of areas where schools were working with the community and voluntary sector, and he wanted to ensure that that contribution was not lost going forward.

81.7    Councillor Mac Cafferty was concerned that such a partnership could be a backdoor for developing multi-agency trusts. The Senior Adviser, Education Partnerships assured the Councillor that the proposals were not a development for multi-agency trusts, but was intended as a point to share good practice amongst the schools.

81.8    RESOLVED: That the Committee

(1)  Noted the feedback from the engagement phase on developing the Brighton and Hove Education Partnership

(2)  Approved the proposed approach and timeline for development of the partnership