Agenda item

(Note: Proceedings resumed at 18:18)

Councillor Calum Watt, Chair of the Community Leadership Scrutiny Committee, introduced the topic of discussion which was Education and the Cost of Living.

(Note: In the interests of transparency, Councillor Rachel Storer wished it be noted that she volunteered for Night Light Cafes)

The Committee received a collaborative presentation from guest speakers, Matthew Clayton (Head of Education Support, Children’s Services, Lincolnshire County Council), Sian Wade, (Active Faith Lead, Transform Lincoln) and Amy Colley, (Relationships Manager, Acts Trust).

Matthew Clayton - Head of Education Support, Children’s Services, Lincolnshire County Council

• Free School Meals eligibility checking was within the remit of Head of Education Support. In addition, the remit covered support with the household support fund and vouchers issued to schools
• The core function of a school was to be an education provider within a safe and warm environment however schools went above and beyond every day
• It was important to differentiate between universal free school meals of which all Reception to Year 2 pupils were eligible and income based free school meals
• Phase 6 of the Household Support Fund had been rolled out recently and it was hoped that details would be received in the coming weeks. Vouchers for families to spend in supermarkets would be continued
• Lincolnshire County Council (LCC) administered many central Government initiatives. LCC did not have its own funding streams to support the cost of living through schools. Schools had very limited funding
• Schools worked with families to signpost to foodbanks and assisted with the completion of documentation to apply for services. Where possible, there was the holiday food programme and schools worked with third parties
• Other central Government initiatives included the proposed provision of a free breakfast club and wrap around care in order that parents could have their child in school from 08:00-18:00. It was hoped that the initiative enabled parents to work longer hours if they wished. LCC worked within the sector and attempted to administer initiatives
• LCC operatedworked across a fragmented education system however worked well in Lincolnshire to ensure families were supported.

Sian Wade - Active Faith Lead, Transform Lincoln

• FiSH (Food in School Holidays) was launched with CoLC in 2016
• The vision was to upscale the project of which the CoLC almost underwrote. Up until the Covid-19 pandemic, it was a great opportunity for eligible children to be issued vouchers to ensure food could be purchased in supermarkets. When the pandemic began, within 2 days the scheme was offered across the city
• It was recognised that there was a gap with JAM families, those ‘just about managing’. It was possible that school holidays would just about push them into debt
• In the summer of 2024, 6 different projects were ran across Lincoln City and some of the villages. The generosity of the CoLC enabled the scheme to be opened up across the whole city. FiSH worked closely with Co-Op and Tesco
• Issues had been experienced with communicating the scheme with schools. Not everyone who received a pack of vouchers used them
• It appeared the case that when people were managing, they did not use supermarket vouchers. Similarly, foodbank numbers reduced when the Household Support Fund was available
• Schools advised that the scheme was incredibly helpful for families who were ‘just about managing’. North Kesteven District Council funded part of the project
• Lincoln Against Poverty group sent questions to 20+ primary schools of which 7 had responded. The issues that emerged centralised around food, housing, childcare, mental health (both adult and child) and strained resources
• There was a sense that families had struggled, which had been recognised by schools
• There were other aid projects available to families and included Baby Basket and the Christmas Sack project. All schemes were very helpful but it was important that the real issue was identified
• Lincoln Against Poverty was exciting as strategic thinking was positive

Amy Colley - Relationships Manager, Acts Trust

• Acts Trust was a local Lincoln based charity whose mission was for people to be empowered and to end poverty. Consideration was given to the full person
• A number of projects were facilitated by Acts Trust and included:
  • Night Light Cafés - a place which was open every day of the week with a support network
  • Lincoln Foodbank - 3-day emergency food parcels were issued and the Community Grocery; an alternative for food to be secured at significantly reduced prices which empowered individuals
  • Restore Programme - courses included: Job Club, Life Ready Course, Money Management Course and Wellbeing Course, designed to help people holistically
  • Engagement with young people took place through ‘Energise’ - a project that mentored students at school, provided youth clubs at some estates in Lincoln and ran the Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) programme during school holidays
• Acts Trust had considered existing external partnerships and how they could be connected
• Individuals arrived at Lincoln Foodbank in need of food but often there was much more support needed. Acts Trust aimed to make the foodbank a place where support could be received in one place. Foodbanks were great places of community and places that friendships and relationships could be built
• Restore courses were ran alongside foodbank sessions. A citizen’s advisor also visited foodbanks as it was important to meet people and for individuals to be considered holistically
• ‘No Wrong Door’ was a UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) funded project which attempted to strategically consider the root cause of problems
• Upon referral to Lincoln Foodbank, individuals were issued a triage questionnaire that asked further questions, and a personalised support plan would be created
• Any strategies considered needed to be collaborative and empower individuals.
• Greater Lincolnshire Food Partnership Strategy was an effective and comprehensive service. It was important that gaps and the demographics of missed individuals were considered
• Work with young people within estates in the city had been positive and it was important that young people were invested into

The Chair thanked guest speakers for the informative presentations and welcomed comments and questions from Members of the Committee. As a result of discussions between Members and speakers, the following points were made: -

Comment: Communication was important and ensured that overlaps were effectively identified.

Question: Referred to a visit during summer holidays to 2 HAF projects of which both been well attended and the children very happy. Had funding been secured for the next term?

Response: There had always been a question as to what happened in the future. HAF was a well-established scheme right across Lincolnshire which had been well embedded within communities. It would be a great shame if it was ended however there had been no information received that suggested it might be.

Comment: Thanks were offered for the incredible work carried out. The enthusiasm was incredible.

Question: There was a significant number of vouchers issues to families of St. Giles Academy. Further to this, was there anything of focus in light of that?

Response: Schools were asked to send JAM figures. The figure received from St. Giles Academy appeared high in comparison to other schools. It was important to ensure that the percentage uptake wasn’t for other reasons. Language translation issues with service users had been experienced and improvements were continually sought.

Question: Was there any policy in terms of the kind of food schools offered? Obesity rates in Lincoln were terrible. Was there anything that could be done at a County Council level?

Response: The DfE ran and administered school food standards, and the expectation was that all schools adhered however it was not policed and there was no implication for not adhering. It was difficult to balance what a child wanted to eat and the preference for children to eat nutritious food. LCC had a food education team and attempted to educate schools. Lincolnshire as a whole had a very fragmentated food offer as a lot of schools did not have a kitchen so it became necessary for food to brought in and all for approximately £2.60 per day.

Question: Referred to the higher redemption rate in areas perceived as more affluent. Was there any data or theory in lieu of that?

Response: An area may be perceived as affluent however there was often considerable poverty that was not seen. If redeemed, it would be assumed that the need was present. The NHS commissioned a number of community connectors, and the considerable amount of poverty discovered was surprising.

Question: Was there a better way to engage with schools?

Response: Lincolnshire County covered a large area. There were over 360 schools, and all worked in different ways based on geographical locations. They often already had their own established networks.

Question: Thanks were given for all the work on the FiSH project. What issues prevented uptake of the vouchers?

Response:  Some schools in more affluent areas within the city were not able to advise of their JAM families. Money within pastoral support appeared higher in more disadvantaged areas. Communication with parents whereby there were informed of the support available would be positive. In terms of families that had not used the vouchers, it may be for personal or pride reasons. Communications had taken place about struggles in an attempt that issues be broken down.

Comment: Schools that experienced the higher levels of poverty were least likely to respond as they may be busy dealing with the poverty. It may be the case that the poverty in Lincoln ran so deep that it was unseen. It was possible that after a decade of neglect, the depth of poverty was immense, and systems may not have measured it.

Comment: There were pockets within geographical areas that were masked as things were looked at over a bigger area. Indices of poverty were an average and the figures of the very small areas were not seen.

Response: Decisions were taken based on data. Analysis of data was carried out by LORIC.

Comment: Thanks were given for all the hard work. As a collective, it may be possible that individuals who struggled to feed themselves were unaware how to look after their homes. As a housing provider, there was a piece of work to be considered. It could be the case that a family spent money heating their homes because of damp which resulted in them being unable to feed themselves sufficiently.

Response: There was a Good Homes Alliance due to be launched which included a team of housing advisor professionals for this exact issue to be dealt with. It was hoped that The Good Homes Alliance would narrow the gaps.

Comment: Old houses that had not been heated, such as those in Monks Road and Sincil Bank, resulted in excessive growing mould and deterioration in health.

Response: Public health and poverty were intrinsically linked.

Question: It was noted that there was anonymity in voucher uptake. Was the voucher obvious when used at a till?

Response: Vouchers had a brightly coloured fish on it so it was obvious that it was a voucher however work had been carried out in order that the stigma be reduced. There were lots of other vouchers within the system that the Government had issued.

Question: Had any schools applied to be included in the trial of the universal breakfast club roll out?

Response: It was too early to say. LCC had not received contact from schools in relation to Government proposals. Generally, breakfast club was a chargeable service. It was the ambition of the Government to offer free breakfast club in all primary schools. It was hoped that more information would be made available after October half term, prior to Christmas.

RESOLVED that the content of all presentations be noted with thanks.