Learn Sheffield Leaders Briefing Autumn Term 1 Thursday 28 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Learn Sheffield Leaders’ Briefing

Autumn Term 1

Thursday 28 September 2017, 8.30-11.00am St Mary’s Conferencing Centre, Bramall Lane

Briefing Agenda – Thursday 28 September 2017

• Introduction / Welcome
• Sheffield Safeguarding Hub
• Education Development Trust – A Collaborative Model
• Sheffield Parents’ & ECM Survey Feedback
• Ofsted Update – Helen Lane

Sheffield Safeguarding Hub

Sheffield Safeguarding Hub (SSH) September 2017

What is it?

• The Sheffield Safeguarding Hub (SSH) has been in place since April 2017
• A citywide multi-agency co-located team based in Moorfoot.
• Single point of access to screen safeguarding concerns from

professionals and members of the public.

Why the change?

• Develop the way concerns about the welfare and safeguarding of

children are considered and responded to.

• Improve compliance with existing regulation and inspection.
• Safeguarding concerns can be dealt with in a prompt and timely manner
• Have access to a wide range of information about the context within

which concerns have been raised.

Overarching principles

• Evidence based - It should be future proofed and compliant with

regulation and inspection requirements.

• Improve the quality of decision making by ensuring screening decisions

are based on a broader understanding of initial concerns

• The design should encompass an improved journey for the child with

greater emphasis on earlier identification and better informed services at the right time.

• Closer partnership working, with clearer

accountability and less duplication of effort, supporting the ability of Information being shared in a timely and appropriate manner.

• Be linked to wider system redesigns in Sheffield

being developed by Adults, Health and Police services as well as early help in children and young people services.

• Support a cultural change in the approach to

integrated working

SSH Structure

As part of the initial phase of development the following staff have been co-located:

• 22 (full time equivalent) Screening Social Workers from SCC.
• 1 Homeless & Prevention Social Worker from SCC.
• 2 Police Sergeants and 7 Police Disclosure/ Research officers from South Yorkshire Police.
• 1 IDVA officer from Domestic Abuse Service.
• 2 (part time) CSE Social Worker’s from SCC.
• 3 Prevention and Intervention Social Worker’s (SWPIs) from MAST.
• 1 Nurse Specialist from Sheffield Children’s NHS Foundation Trust
• 8 Business Support from SCC.
• 5 (full time equivalent) Senior Fieldwork Managers from SCC
• 1 Service Manager from SCC

Current Referral pathway

Outcome of a Contact

• Level 1 - Universal - No Unmet Needs - Children, Young People and Families who

have the capacity to support themselves, or whose needs are being met, or can be met by engagement with Universal Services.

• Level 2 - Universal Plus - Own Agency Provision - Children, Young People and

Families with an additional need that may be met by a single agency, providing additional advice, guidance or support, or signposting to an additional service.

• Level 3 - Partnership Plus - Early Help Multi-Agency Provision -Children, Young

People and Families that would benefit from a co-ordinated package of support from more than one agency.

Concerns verified

• If concerns have been verified at the contact stage of being a higher

level which includes Level 4 - Targeted Complex or Level 5 - Acute/Specialist - These concerns are screened on a multi-agency basis and a Referral record completed.

• Complete a further screen using the systems, and agencies represented

in the SSH

• Consideration given to all previous contacts, referrals, assessments and

Social Care history.

Outcome of a referral

• The outcome of the referral into screening needs to be determined within 24 hrs.
• Level 4 Targeted Complex – Multi Agency Intense Co-ordinated Support. These

cases will be referred to the Multi Agency Complex Case Panel where the case will be ‘stepped down’ with the appropriate level of support and intervention allocated.

• Level 5 Acute /Specialist – At this level it indicates that the child or young person

is at risk of significant harm and an immediate response will normally be required to ensure their safety. Children with this level of need will also require services and a multi-agency intervention. This maybe a Social Work intervention,

• r a specialist service.

Expectations of professionals contacting the SSH

• Expectation that professionals identifying concerns will know who they

are concerned about, what they are concerned about and why?

• Should refer to the Thresholds of Need Guidance to support their

judgement about the level of concern they are raising and consider if their concern meets a level 4 or 5. (If they need more information in relation to this they should contact the Information Line on 0114 273 4450).

• Requirement to complete MACCFS for concerns which aren’t immediate

and to follow up immediate concern with a MACCF.

Consent

• In order for Social Workers to become involved with a child or a

family at any level below the significant harm threshold (the child has suffered or is likely to suffer significant harm) it is necessary to have informed consent. When contact is made by other professionals seeking help on behalf of children and families in these cases, it is their responsibility to obtain consent.

• On the MACF form for the Safeguarding Hub you will need to state

whether you have sought consent to refer, and if not, why not.

Contacting the SSH

• Telephone contact can be made to the Hub through Children’s Social Care

Area Team numbers or by the single number which will eventually become the single point of contact number for the Hub on 0114 2734855.

• Professionals should send an email to

C&FScreeningTeam@sheffield.gcsx.gov.uk as this is secure.

• Core operating times for SSH are 8:45 – 5:15 Monday-Thursday, 08.45 -

4:45 on Friday.

• The Emergency Duty Service is the Out of Hours service and operates

between the hours of 5.15 pm to 9.15 am weekdays and 24 hours during weekends & public holidays.

• Whenever possible, service users and other agencies are expected to

contact the SSH during office hours, when a full service is available.

Questions

Early Help Framework & Locality Working

Nicola Shearstone September 2017

Background & Context

• Locality MAST/Schools Pilot that ran from Sept 2015-March
• 2016. Schools in a range of pilots working together through

‘locality meetings’

• Need to focus the provision of early help services across the

city

• Development of the Sheffield Safeguarding Hub

What is it

• The Early Help Framework has been in place since April 2017
• The Framework brings together organisations across the city

who deliver services to families at an early stage

• It is has a single point of access for requesting support and is

linked to the Sheffield Safeguarding Hub

• It consist of 2 levels of meetings where professionals refer

families in to request support be provided

Why the Change?

• Demand on services in the city continues to increase
• Multi-agencies working collaboratively together

achieves better outcomes for children and families

• Preventative support reduces demand on specialist

services i.e. social care

• Creates a shared collective governance arrangement

and makes everyone responsible for achieving positive outcomes for families in the city

Overarching Principles of Framework Meetings

• Practitioners working with families who have an unmet (or new need)

identified can refer into the Early Help Meetings for a discussion to access relevant support for the family.

• The meetings provides a locality-based, multi-agency forum and decision-

making body for the discussion of children, young people and families that may benefit from a co-ordinated package of support from more than one service

• The Early Help Gateway Meetings provide support to families across the

City at Partnership Plus (Level 3 on the Threshold of Need).

• The Multi-Agency Complex Case Panel provides co-ordinated support to

families across the City at Targeted Complex (Level 4 on the Threshold of Need) - this Panel has a dual purpose:

– To serve as a complex case panel for children, young people and families in localities. – To serve as an accountable manager layer in the governance structure of locality working.

Thresholds and the 5 Levels of Need

• The new Citywide Threshold Guidance has 5 levels of

need to clearly indicate where early help sits within the continuum:

1- Universal – No Unmet Needs 2- Universal Plus – Own Agency Provision 3- Partnership Plus – Early Help Multi-Agency Provision 4- Targeted Complex – Multi-Agency Intense Co-ordinated Provision 5- Acute/Specialist - Children in Need of Protection and Support. Referral to Sheffield Safeguarding Hub

• The 5 Levels will support professionals to effectively identify the

needs of children, young people and families and provide clarity on how to access support.

Referrals into Early Help

• Professionals who want to refer a family into Early

Help should

• Refer to the thresholds of need guidance to

understand the level of support they are requesting

• Complete an Early Help Form part 1 (for accessing

services at level 3) or a Family Common Assessment Framework (for accessing services at level 4)

• Call locality based Social Workers for Prevention and

Intervention (SWPI) for advice if you are unsure

• Send to your local Multi Agency Support Team

Education Development Trust – A Collaborative Model

Summary of the EEF funded SPP project.

To build a sustainable, self-improving, school-led system where schools are jointly responsible for the improvement of themselves and others.

SPP vision

• A sector-led, cluster-based

approach to school improvement that has worked with over 800 schools and larger local systems to date

• The model develops the

capacity and culture needed for impactful cluster working through a continuous cycle

• f school self-review, peer

review and school-to-school support and improvement

About SPP

Sector-led approach to school improvement: SPP is co-developed and led by schools, for schools. Sustainability and system ownership: SPP builds the capacity and capability of clusters to lead their own improvement. Impact-focused collaboration: SPP strengthens the degree of challenge and support within and between schools, with a relentless focus on change in practice and improvement. Ambitious and enquiry-focused framework: This provides a coherent and consistent approach to peer review that helps drive continuous improvement. For all staff: Our 3-phase maturity model builds capacity in peer review of all staff in your school and cluster, so that improvement can be led at all levels. For all schools: Wherever you are in your improvement journey and whatever your context, SPP can make a difference to outcomes for your pupils.

What is SPP?

• Creates a focused sense of urgency: SPP peer review

culminates in the agreement of an improvement priority that is collectively addressed in a follow up improvement workshop.

• Effective partnerships and peers: SPP builds a

culture of collective challenge and support.

• Transparency of data: Schools involved in SPP have

a data sharing agreement.

• Non-punitive accountability: SPP is underpinned by a

coaching culture focused on learning and growth not judgment, and on improving not proving.

• Irresistible synergy: SPP is designed to be the engine that

drives improvement within and between schools, that is not additional work but THE work of school improvement and the building of leader and teacher capacity at all levels.

Why SPP?

‘If you want to change the group, use the group to change the group.’

• Michael Fullan

Our impact

• The first cohort of SPP schools improved against their

baseline Ofsted grades at better than the national rate of improvement

• SPP schools are significantly more likely to improve by one
• r more grades in inspection than the national average

Our emerging evidence base suggests the model is making a difference in SPP schools. Initial analysis of Ofsted data shows the following:

Southwark Teaching Schools Alliance

Liz Robinson Head teacher at Surrey Square Primary School

Southwark Teaching Schools Alliance

Kate Chhatwal Director at Southwark Teaching School Alliance

Phase & Focus:

Capacity of system Technical skills in peer review Continuous improvement EdDevTrust leads Senior leaders Between senior teams EdDevTrust co- leads with Partnership All levels Between all levels Partnership-led / Local hubs Fully integrated into school & Partnership SI planning EdDevTrust monitors quality and impact Sustainable system led partnership working and improvement As required e.g. new schools / colleagues

1 2 3

Develop senior leaders Embed at all levels Sustain system lead

SPP Maturity Model

Key roles

Cluster Lead  Link contact for the cluster and EdDevTrust.  Ensures the cluster’s peer review schedule is on track. Peer reviewers / review team

• Senior leaders.
• Peer reviews take place annually (as a minimum requirement) for each school

within the cluster .

• Over one-two days and, depending on the size of the school, involves between

two-three reviewers. Improvement Champions

• Excellent and inspirational practitioners who can take a lead on aspects of

school and cluster improvement

• Facilitates the post-review workshop and supports development of the school

action plan.

• Works with the Cluster Lead to monitor ongoing impact.

Overview of the EEF project

Based on our significant reach and emerging impact evidence to date, EEF will be evaluating and significantly subsidising an evaluation of SPP from early 2018 (finishing in 2020). The evaluation will look at both change in leadership and teaching practice and national test outcomes at age 11. As such, clusters must be made up

• f all or a vast majority of primary schools.
• Primary schools involved will only have to make a small contribution of 1

primary pupil premium payment (£1300 – this is compared to at least £2,600 for the national model) for the whole 3-year project. This can be paid in full or across two financial years.

• In return for the significant reduction, schools will agree to work with

Education Development Trust and the independent evaluators from UCL Institute of Education to deliver the programme faithfully, and provide information needed for the evaluation (interviews, surveys, school data etc.).

Activity Days How many places Phase / When? Baseline & Peer Review training for senior leaders 1.5 2 places per school – for heads and deputies Feb / March 2018 Improvement Champion training 2 3 per cluster Day 1 – Feb / March 2018 (as part of initial training) Day 2 – Autumn 2018 Impact workshops to establish and monitor impact over the project 3 workshops per year With each cluster 2018/19 2019/20 Peer review training for middle leaders 1 2 places per school Autumn 2019 Collaborative leadership training for senior leaders 1 2 places per school Autumn 2019 Access to peer review framework and tools

• Ongoing

Throughout the project

EEF Training and support programme 2018 – 2020.

Overview of the evaluation

An independent evaluation of the project will be conducted by a team from UCL Institute of Education. This will have two major strands:

• An impact evaluation, which will look at the schools’ outcomes in national

Key Stage 2 tests in numeracy and literacy compared to a statistically “matched” set of comparison groups and how their test scores have changed during the same period.

• An implementation and process evaluation, which will try to understand

the “hows” and “whys” of the way the programme works. This will involve surveys, interviews etc. with cluster leadership, school leadership, and improvement champions among others. As noted before, it is a condition of being part of the project that you engage fully with the evaluation. This includes cluster leadership, school leadership and improvement champions being happy to engage with the evaluation team on interviews, survey etc.

Next steps

Before you sign up, ask yourselves as cluster the following questions: Are we clear about the purpose of peer review and the value of this particular model for our cluster? Are all schools in our cluster equally committed – both to the principles of the model and the time resource needed? To what extent to you think peer review can embedded as part of your cluster ways of workings e.g. regular cluster meetings.

Following this session, if your cluster is interested please confirm to EdDevTrust in person at this session or via email to partnerships@educationdevelopmenttrust.com then: 1) ASAP – complete the ‘partnerships agreement’ agreement as a cluster to confirm participation on the project (first come first served). 2) END OF NOVEMBER - complete (as a cluster) the

• nline survey to provide contextual information about

your cluster that will help us tailor your training and

• support. The survey link be sent to you once we have

received your agreement. 3) EDT will also confirm all details relating to the project including initial training dates (taking place in Feb / March 18).

Signing up to the programme

“What’s great about the SPP is that you can put together a bespoke peer review that is right for you and driven by your school improvement needs, rather than Ofsted’s.”

Simon Spry Executive Headteacher, Prince Rock Primary School

“Peer review for me has created a deeper sense of harmony, in that we are all working together for one aim – outcomes for children in all the settings we’re partnered with.”

Marie-Claire Bretherton Executive Headteacher, NLE and Leader of Kyra TSA

“At my own school…peer review led to a rise in standardised spelling scores from 62.2%, with a standardised score above 100, to 90.4% by the end of the year”

Ian Tyas Headteacher, Ingham Primary School

What our schools say about SPP

please contact

partnerships@educationdevelopmenttrust.com 0118 902 1661 www.eddevtrustspp.com Follow us on Twitter: @EdDevTrust_SPP

To confirm your participation in the trial

Sheffield Parents’ & ECM Survey Feedback

Every Child Matters (ECM) Survey 2016/17

Consultation & Engagement Team People Portfolio

ecm@sheffield.gov.uk @SheffECM

About the ECM Survey

• A ‘lifestyle’ survey for children and young people
• Has taken place regularly since 2006
• Question topics are contributed by many Council

services and partners. Schools also have the opportunity to comment on the questions

• Topics are wide ranging: diet, exercise, dental health,

emotional health & wellbeing, body image, views on school, road safety, fire safety, online safety, experiences

• f young carers, spare-time activities and more
• Findings are used by services to influence policy, service

& commissioning decisions and by schools in their development work

Participation in 2016/17

• Schools are invited to take part but involvement is
• ptional
• The response from schools is always excellent - 79
• pted to take part in 2016/17 (65 primary schools, 12

secondary schools and 2 alternative provider settings), reflecting the value of the survey to schools

• Around 8500 children and young people completed

the survey in 2016/17 giving a very robust data sample

• Schools receive a free, confidential report of their results

which they can compare to the overall city findings if they wish

• The year groups that participate are:

– Y2 & Y5 in primary school – Y7 & Y10 in secondary school

What do schools say about it?

Participation in the ECM survey has provided a valuable tool for our school to collect the views, feelings and experiences of our children in a wide range of important areas. It has helped us in planning our safeguarding focus through the year and has provided excellent evidence to share with families, governors and Ofsted. Our thanks go to the team for enabling us to be included in this excellent initiative – Headteacher, Waterthorpe NI School The survey provides us with an insight into the children's opinions and experiences. It enables us to create bespoke sessions to address issues raised...long may it continue! – Headteacher, Emmanuel Junior Academy The ECM Survey is quick and easy to use. Over the past 5 years, the summary data (collated by the LA) has provided a very useful insight into pupils' views about the various aspects of school, home and the local area. The analysis is not only very useful evidence for supporting SEF judgements but also informs future school improvement priorities - Headteacher, Coit and Ecclesfield

The Questions

• Topics are reviewed before each survey to make sure

they continue to be relevant and produce information that can be worked with

• New questions are added when we want to explore a

particular issue in more depth, e.g. additional questions about sleep in 2016/17

• Feedback from schools is taken on board, e.g. some

primary school teachers felt that the results concerning bullying at school were not reliable so we removed the bullying-related questions and replaced them with questions about friendships (online bullying is still included)

• Questions are tailored for each of the age groups – the

Y10 questionnaire is therefore the longest and most in- depth

• Services must be able to evidence how they will use the

results in order for their questions to be included.

Questions about respondents – “demographics”

• Although the survey is anonymous, we ask respondents

some questions about themselves so that we can look at how results compare between different groups

• Primary school children are only asked their gender as many

would not know if they were eligible for free school meals (FSM) or had a special educational need or disability (SEND)

• Secondary school students are asked a range of questions

about themselves: gender, FSM, ethnic / cultural background, SEND and whether English is the main language spoken at

• home. Y10s are also asked their sexuality

A flavour of the results

• The survey provides us with a wealth of information about

what it’s like to be a child or young person growing up in Sheffield

• Here is just a snapshot of what they told us…

Diet

• A third of primary school children said that they have vegetables every day
• In general, girls were more likely than boys to say that they have a healthy diet
• Many children and young people said they have sugary or fizzy drinks every day or most
• days. The percentage was highest for Y10s (Y2: 30%, Y5: 24%, Y7: 38%, Y10: 46%)
• As sugary drinks are a main cause of tooth decay and obesity in children, a Public

Health campaign aimed at teenagers is to be launched in the new year

• Certain categories of respondent were more likely to say that they have sugary drinks

every day or most days:

– Eligible for free school meals (52% vs. 44%)* – Young carers (50% vs. 45%)* – SEND (55% vs. 42%)*

*figures taken from the Y10 survey results

Body Image

• 65% of Y5s, 59% of Y7s and 45% of Y10s said that they

were happy with their appearance most of the time

• There was a significant difference in responses from boys and girls. This has also

been the trend in previous surveys (e.g. Y10 boys: 57% vs. Y10 girls: 30%)

• Respondents who were happy with their appearance were more than twice as likely

to say that they enjoyed school than those who were unhappy with their appearance (56% vs. 21%)

• Respondents who were happy with their appearance also answered more positively

to most other questions in the survey

• There was a correlation between happiness with appearance and bullying / online

bullying: 55% of those who said they were unhappy with their appearance said that they had been bullied at school compared with 20% of those who were happy with their appearance

Road Safety

• Only 60% of Y2s said that they always sit in a booster seat in the car (this is a legal

requirement for children of this age)

• 13% of Y2s, 10% of Y5s & 10% of Y7s said that they do not always wear a seatbelt
• Y10s were asked more specifically about seatbelt wearing in the front and rear seat
• f a car: 12% said that they do not always wear one in the front and 17% do not

always wear one in the back

• 38% of Y5s said that something had stopped them from concentrating when

crossing the road. The main distraction was friends (20%). 13% said they had been distracted by their phone

• A higher percentage of Y5 boys than girls said that they had been distracted when

crossing the road (43% vs. 33%)

• Department for Transport statistics for 2011-2015 show that a higher number of

boys than girls were pedestrian casualties on South Yorkshire’s roads in this period

Sleep

• Only 53% of Y2s and 56% of Y5s think they get

enough sleep on school nights so that they are not tired at school

• The NHS recommended sleep guideline for teenagers is 9 hours or more
• Only 49% of Y7s and 19% of Y10s say that they get this amount of sleep
• The majority of Y10s get between 6 & 8 hours’ sleep on a school night…

–

10% - under 6 hours – 12% - 6 hours – 25% - 7 hours – 35% - 8 hours

• The three main reasons for not getting enough sleep are: use of technology

(62%), finding it hard to fall asleep / worrying about things (54%) and going to bed too late (49%)

• A higher percentage of young people with SEND and eligible for FSM said

that they did not get enough sleep

School & Learning

• 45% of Y2s and 50% of Y5s walk to school. 43% (of both age

groups) go to school by car

• 78% of Y2s and 70% of Y5s like school most of the time or always
• 74% of Y2s and 72% of Y5s would always feel confident to talk to their

teacher or another grown-up at school if they were worried about something

• 46% of Y7s and 59% of Y10s said they enjoyed school most of the

time

• 44% of Y10s either agreed or strongly agreed that their school dealt

with bullying if it happened

• 80% of Y10s felt that good attendance at school was important

Transition to secondary school

• Y7s are asked about their experience of transition and what their primary &

secondary school did well to prepare them / what they could have done better

• 50% of Y7s thought that their school(s) had prepared them ‘very well’ for

moving up to secondary school. 39% felt they had been prepared ‘quite well’ and 11% ‘not very well’

• Students were asked to comment on what their school(s) had done well and

make suggestions if they felt something could have been done better

• Over 1500 comments and suggestions were received
• The majority of comments were positive, i.e. about what had been most

helpful

• General themes:

– Transition & induction days, tours, meeting teachers – Help to reach secondary level of learning – Practical advice, i.e. which bus to catch, stationery that would be needed – Being treated as though they were already in Year 7 Many said that they would like to have been better prepared for the increase in homework.

Things that helped to prepare Y7s for their transition to secondary school in their own words…

They started to treat us like we were in Y7. They introduced the behaviour systems and lesson designs. This helped me know what to expect at secondary school. They gave me and my class booklets about what it’s like in secondary school. They had us doing lessons in different classrooms and moving between them independently. Walking us up to school and showing us videos about people’s opinions. They had a day when we all went up and attended lessons as a student. They said don’t worry, it’s fine and you will have fun out in this big world. If we didn’t bring our homework in, we would have to stay in for 5 minutes at dinner time. Talked about what would happen and who to tell if something was the matter.

Views on how schools manage behaviour

• Previous ECM Surveys have highlighted that many young people find the

disruptive behaviour of classmates to be a barrier to their own learning

• Y10s were asked how well they felt their school managed bad behaviour

and if there was anything they thought their school could do better

• 17% of Y10s felt that their school managed bad behaviour very well and

44% felt that they managed it quite well

• Changes that young people would like to see included:

– Harsher and more consistent punishments “Punish people who misbehave in a way to make them actually care instead of doing the same thing over and over which obviously isn't working” “Do more about disruptive students” – More rewards / incentives for good behaviour “Appreciate the people who are consistently doing well in school.” – Being more understanding of why someone might behave badly “Talk about consequences and help them to be better rather than giving a behaviour report or excluding them.”

Online Safety / Cyberbullying

• 15% of Y2s and 17% of Y5s said that they had been bullied online
• 53% of Y2s and 43% of Y5s said that their parents always checked what

they were doing when they were online at home

• 56% of Y2s and 60% of Y5s said they had computer rules at home
• 17% of Y7s and 22% of Y10s said that they had been bullied online
• A higher percentage of girls than boys said that they had experienced online

bullying:

– Y7: 20% females vs. 14% males – Y10: 29% females vs. 16% males

• A significantly higher percentage of young people in the following groups

said that they had been bullied online:

– SEND – Young carers

Young Carers

• Nationally, it is estimated that 1 in 12 young people take on

mid to high level care for an ill or disabled family member*

• 28% of Y7s and 22% of Y10s said that they helped to look after someone in

their family

• 24% of Y7 carers and 23% of Y10 carers said their school was aware that

they had caring responsibilities

• A higher percentage of young carers than non-carers said they felt negative

emotions most of the time, e.g. depression (19% vs. 9%), stress (31% vs. 20%), loneliness (15% vs. 7%)

• A higher percentage of young carers were from BAME backgrounds (this

also reflects national statistics)

• A significantly higher percentage were eligible for free school meals or had

a special educational need or disability:

• Example from Y10 results:

– FSM: 35% vs. Not FSM: 19% – SEND: 34% vs. Not SEND: 19%

*BBC 2010

Reading

• 88% of Y2s and 88% of Y5s said that they read at home
• Around two thirds read at home at least most days
• Common reasons for not reading were:

– I don’t like reading – I can’t find books that I’m interested in – I would rather watch TV than read

• The survey results suggest that reading for pleasure becomes less popular

as children get older: – Y2 – 88% – Y5 – 88% – Y7 – 75% – Y10 – 46%

• There was a positive relationship between reading and some other

measures, e.g. sleep, diet, enjoyment of school

Impact

We know that the findings are widely used to inform

• decisions. A few examples are:
• South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue are running a

campaign about the importance of escape plans

• Public Health are developing a campaign to educate

children about the health effects of fizzy drinks and to encourage them to choose healthier options

• Sheffield Young Carers Project are using the school

results to target their training to schools.

• If your school took part in the survey, please let us

know what you are doing with the findings. We would like to share this on our website:

– Email: ecm@sheffield.gov.uk

The Report

• The report of the 2016/17 findings will be published on our

website shortly: www.sheffield.gov.uk/ecm

• A copy will be sent to all schools
• It contains the statistics but also some examples of more in-

depth analysis such as relationships between results, e.g. do children who read regularly feel more positive about other aspects of their lives and school in general?

• It highlights where results are more or less positive for certain

groups, e.g. results are often less positive for children and young people in these categories:

– Free school meals (FSM) – Special educational need or disability (SEND) – English not first language – Young carers

Ofsted Update – Helen Lane