Transport and changes

I have been suprised at how the Taxi firms contract with the education teams is set up
The contracts require a weeks notice to be changed
So therefore when a child leaves a provision a taxi is sent each day until that week has ended.
So the other kids that are in the taxi have to sit there at any stop for the ten minutes that the taxi is required to wait before moving on.
It is easy to see the frustration on the kids faces as well as the Taxi Drivers face.
Whilst the number of children attending such provisions may be few. This remains a challenge.

ONS stats

Graphic by Office for National Statistics (ONS)

See the statistics in your area simply by clicking on the map of your area
Compare it to the other areas

A fresh term

For many of those Youth its is a new Term
Local Authorities have set rules regarding smoking with Youth on sites. Searches have started on the Youth for Cigarettes and knives.
From my own experience however on the first day my child was expelled. He had argued with a Teacher who had felt threatened. Result the first day exclusion led to 3 days
Hang on this is a school that is trying to encourage kids to attend. Which comes first Exclusion or education?

#wecan

Tweets by @WEcan

Youth Allowance and IAP- Intensive Activity Programme

If you're 18 to 21 and want to claim Jobseekers' Allowance, you'll have to do a series of courses to get benefits. The government is calling it a "boot camp".
 It is unlikely though that this 71-hour programme at your local job centre will involve crawling through tyres or polishing boots.
Instead young people who want to claim JSA will have to attend classes to be given tips for interview techniques and help searching for vacancies.

These courses will be compulsory and if you want to claim £57.90 a week - the maximum 18-24 year-olds searching for work are entitled to - you'll need to complete these courses in the first three weeks of unemployment.
It's being called the Intensive Activity Programme (IAP) and was tried out in job centres in North East Yorkshire, Humber and West Yorkshire in March.
Politician Matt Hancock, who heads a government team called "Earn or Learn" which is rolling out these measures to end youth unemployment, told Newsbeat it will be "tough but fair".
This new programme, which will be classroom-based, will condense all the training into one block at the beginning of unemployment instead of having a more "piecemeal" approach, he says.
Although acknowledging that 71 hours was a long time, he added: "If you are young and unemployed what else should you be doing with your time? "You should be spending your time trying to get a job. The only alternative to that is living on the state."

What we know 71 hour programme over three weeks Called the Intensive Activity Programme (IAP), it's part of measures being rolled out by an Earn or Learn taskforce If you don't take part you'll lose your benefits: up to £57.90 a week Will be mainly classroom based Will help you with interview techniques and writing CVs as well as helping you search for jobs Comes into force everywhere in April 2017, but is already being trialled in parts of Yorkshire and Humber Mr Hancock told the BBC: "We are penalising nobody because nobody who does the right thing and plays by the rules will lose their benefits. "This is about giving young people more support. "It's about having a dedicated work coach that can give one-on-one support to young people so that they can get a job or apprenticeship. "After six months they are required to get a job or an apprenticeship or go into a work programme."

The plans are being criticised by the University and College Union as well as the Green Party and Labour. UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, describes the plans as another "attack on young people" and says they "fundamentally fail to deal with the reasons that so many of them are unable to find work or are not in education and training. " She also says they are just a "short-term gimmick".

Meanwhile Stephen Timms MP, Labour's Acting Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary says the government needed to make sure that there were jobs or apprenticeships at the end of the "bootcamp".
Young people aged 16-24 are nearly three times more likely to be unemployed than the rest of the population. Amelia Womack, the Deputy leader of the Green Party says: "The measures announced today are a damaging short-termist attempt to bring down unemployment figures by forcing young people into some kind of work or work programme as quickly as possible, rather than recognising the diversity of career paths and the importance of ensuring that young people choose one that is right for them. " The idea of having to complete training to get unemployment benefits is nothing new.

You can already lose your benefits for a period of time if you turn down a job or training course or take part in any employment schemes.

The Conservatives have also promised to scrap Jobseekers' Allowance for 18 to 21-year-olds and replace it with a "youth allowance", requiring young people to do some form of community work if they are out of a job for more than six months.
These changes to youth benefits will come into force in April 2017. BBC Newsnight article

truancy facts-and figures

School Truancy
School Truancy remains an issue within the U.K
However the issue of child compliance issue isnt featured. Where a child fails to undertake the required attendance and follows his peers there seems little intervention

{The number of parents taken to court in England because of children skipping school rose sharply last year, official figures show.

In 2014 16,430 people were prosecuted for failing to ensure their children went to school, an increase of more than 3,000 - or 25% - on 2013.

Ministry of Justice figures, obtained by the Press Association, revealed more than three-quarters were found guilty.

Head teachers' leaders said good attendance was "absolutely critical".

Crackdown breakdown

The rise follows a crackdown on children missing school, including new rules on term time holidays which were introduced two years ago.

The 2014 figures, gathered in a freedom of information request to the Ministry of Justice, show:

• 12,479 people found guilty of truancy offences - up 22%
• 9,214 fines, averaging £172, issued by courts - up 30%
• 18 jail sentences in 2014 - compared with seven in 2013
• Ten of those jailed and more than half (58%) of those fined for a child missing school were women

Parents can be issued with on-the-spot penalty notices of £60 per child by schools, rising to £120 if unpaid after three weeks, if their child has an unauthorised absence.

Failure to pay, or incurring two or more fines, can lead to parents being referred to the local authority's education welfare service, which has the power to take them to court.

Courts can issue maximum fines of £2,500 or jail sentences of up to three months.

"Good attendance is absolutely critical to the education and future prospects of young people," according to Malcolm Trobe, deputy general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders.

"Schools have rightly responded to this overwhelming evidence by taking a strong line in identifying when children are absent without a valid reason, particularly where there is persistent truancy."

'Complicated issue'

But David Simmonds, of the Local Government Association, said the increase in fines reflected "tighter enforcement by schools that are under pressure from Ofsted to meet attendance targets", as well as a rising school population.

He called for more flexibility in the rules to allow heads to take account of family circumstances where absence was unavoidable.

They "should be trusted to make decisions about a child's absence from school without being forced to issue fines and start prosecutions in situations where they believe the absence is reasonable", he said.

Rachel Burrows, of the parenting website Netmums, said a fine or threat of jail could be enough to make parents understand the seriousness of their child missing school.

However, she warned: "Long-term truancy is a complicated issue and there is no one-size-fits-all solution.

"In many cases, the family may be in crisis or face issues such as a parent with mental health problems or addictions. In these cases, fines or jail won't help, as the mum or dad needs professional support to turn their lives around and be a better parent."

Mr Trobe advised parents struggling to stop their children playing truant "to talk to their school to work out a solution".

Russell Hobby, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, which has produced guidance on truancy, said fines and sanctions should be a last resort.}
BBC

Guidance

Guidance on authorised absence in schools There is some debate about what ‘exceptional circumstances’ means when deciding whether to grant absence for students during term time. We believe it is valuable to have some guiding principles to back schools in their decisions and provide consistency. This guidance has no statutory authority and is not imposed upon schools.

 1. The decision to authorise absence is at the head teacher’s discretion based on their assessment of the situation. Circumstances vary from school to school and so there can be no absolute rules on this subject. 

2. Term times are for education. This is the priority. Children and families have 175 days off school to spend time together, including weekends and school holidays. Heads will rightly prioritise attendance. The default school policy should be that absences will not be granted during term time and will only be authorised in exceptional circumstances. 

3. If an event can reasonably be scheduled outside of term time then it would not be normal to authorise absence. 

4. Absence during term time for holidays/vacations is therefore not considered an exceptional circumstance. 

5. Absences to visit family members are also not normally granted during term time if they could be scheduled for holiday periods or outside school hours. Children may however need time to visit seriously ill relatives. 

6. Absence for a bereavement of a close family member is usually considered an exceptional circumstance but for the funeral service only, not extended leave.

 7. Absences for important religious observances are often taken into account but only for the ceremony and travelling time, not extended leave. This is intended for one off situations rather than regular or recurring events. 

8. Schools may wish to take the needs of the families of service personnel into account if they are returning from long operational tours that prevent contact during scheduled holiday time. 

9. Schools have a duty to make reasonable adjustments for students with special educational needs or disabilities.

 10. Families may need time together to recover from trauma or crisis.

NEET support

NEET support unemploed welfare benefit

Support online

A key aspect of support is responding to those in need when they need it and that often means outside of the conventional 9-5 routine

We all dislike the call centre solution that doesnt meet our needs but meets the name of the charity or business.

Reality is that out teenagers are expecting and demanding support when they need it not when our offices happen to open

Solutions come accross as fairly simple

The option to chat is probably the key because that is what the user prefers

This gives the option to send links is possible. Chats are the way that most teenagers communicate.

NEET welfare issues

Youth & our Responsibility

The Youth of today have real issues
They are looking for support that they can access today
Our responsibility is to provide that in a way that they can access and relate to and in a way that they have the confidence to communicate in.
This may not mean the traditional call centre and a 5 mins queue due to the lines being busy.
Chat and messages are more relatable allowing for a delay many still have more confidence.
We provide support and can incluse links to the information that is sought. We also accept appointments on Benefits2work

Budget 2015-Youth allowance -Universal Credit & Apprenticeships

Apprenticeships-parents guide

Below are extracts of the Apprenticeships guide for parents. Apprenticeships were mentioned in the Budget this month so I felt adding the information to the Blog made sense
Introduction
As a parent you want your child to get
the best possible start in their career.
There are many options available to
young people after they leave school,
and in this guide we outline information
and benefits about Apprenticeships as a
key route into a successful career.
What is an
Apprenticeship
An Apprenticeship is a real job with
training which would allow your
daughter or son to earn while they learn,
whilst gaining a nationally recognised
qualification. Apprenticeships take
between one and five years to complete
and cover 1500 job roles in a wide
range of industries, from engineering
to accountancy, public relations to
veterinary nursing.

Entry requirements
Apprenticeships are available to anyone
over the age of 16, living in England.
There are different entry requirements
depending on the sector and job.

Apprenticeship levels
There are three levels of Apprenticeship
your son or daughter could apply for
depending on their current skills and
qualifications:
– Intermediate Apprenticeship (level 2);
– Advanced Apprenticeship (level 3);
– Higher Apprenticeship (level 4 or
above).
The core components for Intermediate
and Advanced Apprenticeships are:
– A nationally recognised vocational
qualification;
– Functional skills (e.g. literacy,
numeracy and ICT);
– A technical certificate such as a BTEC
or City & Guilds (relevant to the
specific Apprenticeship);
– Other professional qualifications
or requirements as specified by the
particular job.
The core components for Higher
Apprenticeships are as above but exclude
the functional skills element.

If you want more information-
Parents guide

NEET ABSENSE

Your child has decided that they are not coming home the night before school.

There is a Taxi waiting in the morning. They have turned their mobile off. Is this normal for them or unusual. Is it a regular challenge? Teenagers or our youth can be a challenge with their routines and mates.

The school will advise that you need to phone the police when this happens. Failure could potentially be deemed as neglect. Catch 22 if you are forever calling the police does it help or not?

What if your teenager has a poor relationship with the police? Is there a risk that the police may ignore the situation if your calls are regular?

neet routine

Last week one of the greatest challenges was the morning alarm clock.
My child set his alarm on his phone and failed to surface for the alarm.so dad then has the responsibility of waking child up
Waking him up whilst not causing offence. Not allowed reality wise to should as if I shot then he will fail to get up at all and go on strike. Have to allow enough time so that he surfaces with enough time to wash and dress.
The timing seemed to be the key. In his case it as 1hour before. All teenagers vary. My target was to wake him and see him surface. It's at this point I have to express my sympathy for those parents who are not able to do this due to shift patterns. There must be a concern if you work away and have to rely on others to encourage your child out of bed.
The routine has to be the key. In June/ July the children have the warmer days and the social media may be highlighting the plans for holidays that may be days away. This becomes a tougher time to keep the discipline going. If your child has been out of education for a period and isn't finding it particularly motivational now the challenge increases. So our Teenage meet needs to be motivated by the provider. The challenge may also be that peers and social media contact can have an effect on teenagers.

I  see each day as a challenge the lack of motivation and feedback seems to be limited in positive excitement. I have been annoyed that returning to home on time doesn't oçcur. That's simply frustrating and I am not staying up each night.

Neet truancy and the Law

Neet Truancy issue and the law

Truancy of a child may well lead to fines. Sadly a child can lead to a parent obtaining a fine. It is worth working with schools or training providers to keep this situation away from the door so to speak
To highlight the issue and the position I have added some articles from the Grimsby area as well as material from reports on the Gov .uk web site
You will see articles from 2010-12
you will see the

Tackling truancy by targeting parents

Tuesday, 23 March 2010 16:00

What happens to parents who don’t send their children to school? John-Paul Swoboda looks at the options available to local authorities. Section 444 of the Education Act 1996 created two offences for ‘failing to secure regular attendance at school of a registered pupil’. Section 444(1) creates the simple offence, so that if a child of compulsory school age, typically from 5 to 16, who is a registered pupil at a school fails to attend regularly at the school, his parents, meaning anyone with parental responsibility or who has care of the child, is guilty of an offence. Section 444(1A) creates the aggravated offence; if a parent knows the child is failing to attend regularly at school and fails to cause him to do so. It also worth remembering that s. 444 covers, one, children who are educated at a place other than a school when such provision is organised by the local authority, and two, children excluded but still registered at a school, who are required by the school or local authority to attend somewhere other than a school for the provision of education, instruction or training. Steps prior to court proceedings It has been my experience when prosecuting s444 offences that local authorities and local educational authorities have set procedures which they carry out prior to issuing section 444 proceedings against parents. Typically a school will intervene if a child, let’s call him Charlie, is regularly failing to attend school by contacting and meeting with the parents. If this fails to improve Charlie’s attendance the school refers the matter to a local authority education officer who attempts to arrange meetings with Charlie’s family to identify why there have been absences. If the above measures fail to bring about improvement, the different agencies will come together to decide on a plan of action. The agencies could include the school’s staff, usually the head teacher and the head of year, the local authority education officer who has been dealing with the case, a Special Educational Needs coordinator, a school governor, representatives of Social Care, members from the Youth Offending Team and members of other relevant agencies. It is important for all options to be considered at this stage, not least as section 447 of the Education Act 1996 requires consideration to be given to an application for an Education Supervision Order under section 36 and part III of the Children Act 1989. Section 444A gives the local authority the power to issue a parent with a penalty notice if it believes an offence has been committed under section 444. Interestingly failure to comply with an Education Supervision Order by a parent is also a criminal offence under Part III of the Children Act 1989 as is failure to comply with a school attendance order under section 443 of the 1996 Education Act. Let’s assume that all the agencies have got together and it has been decided by the local authority that Charlie’s parents or parent should be prosecuted under s. 444. Choosing between section 444(1) or 444(1A) The difference between s. 444(1) and s. 444(1A) is the parent(s) knowledge of Charlie’s absence from school. In other words a successful prosecution under s. 444(1) only requires that Charlie was absent from school regularly whereas a successful prosecution under s. 444(1A) would require that Charlie was absent from school regularly and that the parent knew that this was the case. The extra step for a successful prosecution under s. 444(1A), proving that Charlie’s parents knew he was regularly absent from school, can be evidentially tricky. How does one prove that Charlie’s parents knew he was absent? If Charlie was with his parents at times when he should have been at school, and this can be proved by evidence, perhaps by the local authority education officer’s evidence or by the parents’ evidence, then it should be possible to bring a successful prosecution under s. 444(1A). However, if the evidence suggests that the parent(s) took the child to the school’s gate, it will be harder to prove they knew that Charlie was regularly not attending. One other factor to take into consideration is that on a trial of an offence under s 444(1A) Education Act 1996 the court can find the parents guilty of s 444(1) if they consider the offence under s 444(1A) not to be made out. Preparing the case The most important document in a prosecution under s 444 is the headmaster’s certificate providing particulars of Charlie’s absence. This signed certificate will be treated, without further proof, as the document which it purports to be and as having been signed by the headmaster unless the contrary is proved. In other words, the headmaster’s certificate reverses the burden of proof, as it is taken as proving that Charlie was absent for the days stated on the certificate. Apart from the headmaster’s certificate the local authority’s education officer should write a witness statement setting out the absences, giving the background history of support offered to the parent and exhibit all documents needed to prove the offence. I would also recommend that the delegated powers under which the local authority’s education officer is authorised to operate, is evidenced by way of witness statement and exhibits. Otherwise a procedural point, arguing that there is no evidence that the prosecution is brought by a proper authority, may unnecessarily draw out proceedings. How regular is regular? This is a matter for the justices to decide in their discretion taking into account all the circumstances as the Act does not state a cut off point beyond which Charlie would automatically be considered to have failed to attend regularly. There is no case law on the point either. Given this area of ambiguity, I would not advise prosecutions where the issue of regularity of attendance is on the borderline. Absence because of religious observance is not taken as an absence for the purposes of determining whether there has been regular absence. The Defences It is for the parent to prove their defence on the balance of probabilities, not for the local authority to disprove it. In practice that means if the parents raise a defence they will need to evidence it by way of oral and documentary evidence. Sickness: if the parents prove that Charlie was absent by reason of sickness (a doctor’s note is usually required), they will be acquitted of the offence. Unavoidable Cause: if the parents prove that Charlie was absent due to ‘unavoidable cause’ they will be acquitted of the offence. Unavoidable cause is not to be equated with reasonable cause (Jarman v Mid Glamorgan Education Authority [1985] LS Gaz R 1249). For example chronic illness of a parent is not an unavoidable cause (Jenkins v Howell [1949] 2 KB 218). The test is a difficult one for parents to meet. Transport: the local authority is also under a duty to provide suitable transport if the school is beyond walking distance – 3.218km for children under eight and 4.828km for children over eight – and if no transport has been provided this will provide a good defence. Sentences Upon conviction of Charlie’s parents of the s 444 (1) offence they are liable to a fine of up to £1,000 (a level 3 fine) each and of the s 444 (1A) offence they are liable to a fine of £2,500 (a level 4 fine) each or up to three months’ imprisonment. On top of which an application for the LA’s costs can also be made. Such costs should be set out in a schedule if possible.

Grimsby is an area with a noted  Truancy problem from a report 1 year problem

N THE last academic year, 270 penalty notices were issued to parents who failed to send their children to school regularly enough.

North East Lincolnshire Council said 244 of those were for unauthorised holidays and 26 for low attendance.

Seventy-seven of those cases have been prosecuted already.

Another 22 are waiting to be heard.

 

RELATED CONTENT

• Truant turned life around after mum told to 'wake up and get a grip'

• Term-time holidays warning as parents fined for taking children out of North East Lincolnshire schools

The following parents are the latest to be dealt with.

Donna Hanks, 32, of Edge Avenue, Grimsby, admitted failing to send Kitana Hanks to school regularly enough between January 3 and July 24.

Eve Richardson-Smith, prosecuting for North East Lincolnshire Council, said Kitana, 15, failed to attend Tollbar Academy on 42 occasions out of 246 that the school was open – an attendance rate of only 83 per cent.

Her attendance had since improved to 91 per cent since September.

Mother-of-three Hanks told the court: "I do my best. I understand and appreciate how serious education is because I want them to have a good education."

She added that her daughter was a "15-year-old with an attitude" and that she had tried her hardest with her.

"Over the last three months, she has changed," said Hanks.

"I really have knuckled down with her.

"She is doing her best as well now. It has been difficult. There is only so far you can go to get her in school.

"I have punished her."

Hanks was given an absolute discharge, which is a conviction without penalty.

Other parents dealt with in their absence were:

Helen Brown, 41, of College Street, Cleethorpes – admitted failing to send Lauren Brown to school regularly enough between December 17 and July 24.

Lauren, 14, failed to attend Cleethorpes Academy on 88 occasions out of 256 – an attendance rate of only 66 per cent.

Brown told the court by letter she had been suffering from depression and, most of the time, she found it hard to get even herself out of bed.

She accepted it was her responsibility to get her daughter to school.

Brown was fined £55 and was ordered to pay £75 costs and a Government-imposed £15 victims' surcharge.

Rachel Hambling, 35, of Spring Bank, Grimsby, admitted failing to send Jak Melin to school regularly enough between January 28 and May 24.

Jak, 15, failed to attend John Whitgift Academy on 54 occasions out of 132 – an attendance rate of only 59 per cent.

Hambling, previously known as Rachael Melin, claimed in a letter that she had done everything she could to get her son to school after he refused to go there. She had been in "constant contact" with the academy and had always fully co-operated.

Her son had since been removed from the academy and was being "home-schooled" until he could go to college. Mother-of-two Hambling was fined £145 and was ordered to pay £75 costs and a £20 victims' surcharge.

Vicki Smith, 27, of Brereton Avenue, Cleethorpes, failed to send Jessica Roche to school regularly enough between February 25 and June 21.

The case was found proved in her absence.

Jessica, 6, failed to attend Lisle Marsden Primary Academy, Grimsby, on 21 occasions out of 134 – an attendance rate of only 84 per cent.

Jessica's attendance had since improved to 100 per cent, the court heard.

Smith was given a six-month conditional discharge and was ordered to pay £75 costs and a £15 victims' surcharge.

Emma Gladding, 42, and Kevin Gladding, 48, of Station Road, North Thoresby, failed to send Hannah Gladding to school between May 20 and 24.

The cases were found proved in their absence.

They took Hannah, 15, out of Tollbar Academy for a holiday when permission had not been authorised. They did not pay a penalty notice.

They were each fined £120 and were both ordered to pay £30 costs and a £20 victims' surcharge.

Parental sanctions
Recommendation 11: That the system of fines is changed to make it simpler for schools
and local authorities to use and for parents to understand. Parents who allow their child
to miss too much school should receive a fine of £60. If they fail to pay within 28 days
then the fine should double to £120 and the money should be recovered directly through
their child benefit. Where parents who do not receive child benefit fail to pay fines they
would be recovered through the county court. In addition, the local authority should
continue to have the right to take persistent offenders to court, but magistrates will be
aware that a fine will have been paid for previous offences and therefore their response
needs to be firm. Recommendation 12: Persistent failure to send children to school is a clear sign of
neglect and children’s social care services should work with schools to address
underlying difficulties.
Recommendation 13: That Academy chains, sponsors and individual schools are
allowed to prosecute their pupils’ parents for poor attendance

Government recommendations 2012

Aspects of parental responsibility convered here-

Parental sanctions

19. Parents have the legal responsibility to ensure their children attend school from
age 5 to 16 where they are registered. There are many reasons why parents fail to send
a child to school regularly. The best schools work with their parents to improve
attendance and they offer a wide range of support to help them get their children to
school. Fining parents or taking them to court is a last resort that schools and EWOs use
only very reluctantly when all else has failed. However, when they do so the system must
be efficient and effective.

20. When attendance falls schools can use the legal system to punish parents who fail
in this duty, but this process is protracted and inconsistent. For most schools and LAs
legal intervention is the end of a process that has seen the parent and child offered a
range of support. Schools or local authorities may impose a fixed penalty notice (FPN) on
parents whose child is not attending regularly. The parent has 28 days to pay a fine of
£50; if they fail then it is doubled. After 42 days if the parent has not paid then the school
or LA has to withdraw the penalty notice and the parent is then prosecuted under section
444 of the Education Act 1996. Currently 50-60 per cent of FPNs are paid.

21. The process of taking a parent to court is cumbersome and expensive. During my
review, when I met magistrates, schools and education welfare officers, they frequently
expressed frustration with a system that takes up to six months to get a parent to court
.
22. One magistrate explained how parents could exploit the system by first pleading
not guilty, then failing to attend court when they were summoned and finally not paying
any fine imposed by the magistrate. These attendance cases compete for limited court
time with a wide range of other offences.
23. Only a council can prosecute a parent under section 444 and, if the borough
solicitor does not prioritise these cases, then they can take months to come to court.
When parents are found guilty under section 444 the punishment imposed by the court
varies hugely. One education welfare officer told me that whenever she sees one of the
two local district judges presiding she knows the parent will only receive a conditional
discharge, regardless of the circumstances of the case. Another said a magistrate had
imposed one day’s court detention for a mother of a Year 9 child who had not been at
school for over a year. When after forty-five minutes she said she had to pick up another
of her children the magistrate let her go.

24. In 2010, out of 9,147 parents taken to court and found guilty only 6,591 received a
fine or a more serious sanction. The average fine imposed by the court was £165. In the
review EWOs commented that within certain groups of parents the word has spread that
prosecution for bad attendance is a muddled process in which there is a good chance of
getting off without sanction
Parental sanctions
Recommendation 11: That the system of fines is changed to make it simpler for schools
and local authorities to use and for parents to understand. Parents who allow their child
to miss too much school should receive a fine of £60. If they fail to pay within 28 days
then the fine should double to £120 and the money should be recovered directly through
their child benefit. Where parents who do not receive child benefit fail to pay fines they
would be recovered through the county court. In addition, the local authority should
continue to have the right to take persistent offenders to court, but magistrates will be
aware that a fine will have been paid for previous offences and therefore their response
needs to be firm. Recommendation 12: Persistent failure to send children to school is a clear sign of
neglect and children’s social care services should work with schools to address
underlying difficulties.
Recommendation 13: That Academy chains, sponsors and individual schools are
allowed to prosecute their pupils’ parents for poor attendance

Parental sanctions- or fine

Recommendation 11: That the system of fines is changed to make it simpler for schools
and local authorities to use and for parents to understand. Parents who allow their child
to miss too much school should receive a fine of £60. If they fail to pay within 28 days
then the fine should double to £120 and the money should be recovered directly through
their child benefit. Where parents who do not receive child benefit fail to pay fines they
would be recovered through the county court. In addition, the local authority should
continue to have the right to take persistent offenders to court, but magistrates will be
aware that a fine will have been paid for previous offences and therefore their response
needs to be firm.
 Recommendation 12: Persistent failure to send children to school is a clear sign of
neglect and children’s social care services should work with schools to address
underlying difficulties.
Recommendation 13: That Academy chains, sponsors and individual schools are
allowed to prosecute their pupils’ parents for poor attendance

The History of JSA claims -NEET

The History of JSA

History

You can see the history of the claim demand at the bottom of the page. However, this doesn't show the picture so clearly when you take into consideration the introduction of Universal Credit.

This started in the North West of the area and in all my Blog's
 I have shown in recent years the Roll out of Universal Credit.

The Government has made it clear that they intend to reduce access to Housing Benefit the 18-24 age group 
What does the future 

Conservative Manifesto

From the Youth perspective the change proposed for the 18-24 is that instead of claiming JSA they will claim Youth Allowance which they will only be able to claim for 6mnths. There will be a requirement to be on Apprenticeship, Community work or Training.

and is followed by

NEET morning challenge

When your Neet teenager faces the day. You have woken them up and you get the rejection. They don't want to be disturbed.
You have to get to work yourself. Your manager may be less than understanding but your teenager or NEET hasn't mastered the concept of getting out of bed.
Having faced this challenge I immediately asked myself what was the solution.
Is your job the priority or is your child's need to get off their ... the priority.What can you do.?

The taxi arrived and I asked the driver. It turned out they had a 10 mins window. Imagine how it feels as the first child having already got into the taxi waiting for someone else for 10 mins.

Yes your teenager is up in terms of being awake but they haven't washed their hair or sorted their all important clothes or accessories out. THEY HAVEN'T GOT TIME.

I rang the office of the provider and advised them of the update.
I worry that teenagers don't take notice of the advice that they are given. The reality is that obtaining education and getting qualifications is the key to their future.
Once it has happened once the teenager may feel that they can get away with it without the consequences. After all they have been excluded and it is almost a way of life

Finances

A key aspect here is that all those around the NEET teenager have to not fall for the No CASH game.

The Teenager's boundary may include cash flow.

So if a caring member of the family decides to over ride the issue that no attendance and performance no cash flow a new issue develops. There has to be a united front

Having found this situation occuring a new challenge emerges.

It may be worth talking to family members about this and point out the issue

Neet or not NEET?

Waking up your child on their first day is always a challenge. However if they have had a break from Education and Training and have lost their way then there is a new challenge for the parent.
How will the first day go?
Will the Taxi arrive?
Waking your child up on his first day may attract resistance. Will there be an outright refusal or an acceptance?
I was fortunate. Yes there was a delay but not pushing the situation seemed to work. The initial response was key ..There was life.
Allowing for time and regular calm announcements seem to work. Agreed, it doesn't always work.
It may be a challenge subject to the relationship you have with your child. Are they angry with you for sending them. Fed up not doing anything or want to get back to their mates.
I would argue that if friends are all doing something its easier. If they are not then the temptation to not even get started is a big one
I have to admit to cheering to myself...Why?
Because 15 mins before we were sat downstairs waiting.  Relief, relief that there had been no anger , no shouting and little in the way of a major bust up.

So throughout our working day we wonder how it has gone. I watched from my  car  as the taxi pulled up..it waited a few seconds and tooted and then I saw the departure.

A child going to a new provider means a new phase. The rules are different to conventional school.
As I stated in an earlier post. There is a need for earlier assessments
It's not just the adults assessing the child. But, it's the child assessing the new team.

When they return you may be fortunate and they come and share. They may not. Either way its all in their own time. Every Youth is different

NEEt to training

With 3 days to go a child can face it challenging the idea of returning to Education or training.
In Lincolnshire Taxis are provided to get the child to the Training provider.These Taxis are shared with other childen. The funding of the Education of a teenager and the complexity of funding.
The child may make many decisions based on who is at the establishment rather than the Quality of the training or type of training. there is a drop our rateof the youngsters as in the past the children had a less than effective engagement. Recent changes include a ban on smoking which is to make it more relateable to the work place.
Many of these youngsters may know each other at these establishments. This may come as something of a shock to parents but the world is small.
The structure by nature of the establishment is different due the situation that the teenager is coming from. Exclusion. In many cases the child will have been excluded from school or will have had some form of challenge with the school environment. The school has limitations in the way they can deal with such issues and as I found out intervention is not always an option within some policies.

Initial Questions

My child's discussion with the Deputy Head of the provider didnt provide an insight. An understanding of options wasn't there.
I reflected on the career's advice I had had at his age..Mine was in the 1980's

The options then were different to the intial questioning that my child had


Are you interested in Engineering?
Answer-Dont know

Are you interested in computers?
Answer suppose

Reality from a NEET teenager is that they are not likely to be sure of their capabilities or abilities. Why would they.The lack of experience through lack of attending school has left them missing out. The uphill climb of engagement, motivation and direction starts next week

Apprenticeships another view

A recent BBC article stated

"The majority of apprenticeships are being used to train older people, and those who are already employed at their company, instead of taking on young people out of work."

In a statement on Sunday, Labour MP Liam Byrne said the government needed to do more to boost the apprenticeship "brand".

"The Tory-led coalition's five years allowed the devaluing of the once proud apprenticeship brand.

"They focused on re-badging in-work training for older workers as apprenticeships rather than helping create proper apprenticeship places for young people.

"Apprenticeships should be a qualification of at least level three and last two years," he said.

I read this and wondered if this was the reason why Young NEET youngsters were struggling to find new opportunities

Youth Unemployed who are not in Employment Education or Training need Appretniceships 

The traditional view of the Apprentice was a the 18-25 year old. Possibly a builder, plumber or Joiner. However now the world of the Apprentice has changed. 

This has led to the challenge for the Younger Job seeker in obtaining the training opportunities that they may have been offered in the past.

Add this to the issues connected with Welfare Support including Universal Credit and Housing Benefit that is expected to change in this term of Government there is a challenge for the future.

Careers Advice

When you make contact with the Careers service this is what you can expect.

A map of possibilities.

  Careers service map
 For the 13-16 age group
The Map has individual links for the catergories
Links that lead to more information on each category that you can follow and look at the options.
This may be a key web site at this time of the year for many.
Both parents and students can see whats available.

Is it time to chat to an advisor?

You can undertake an online chat here with the National Careers service
This isn't available with all gov.uk web sites

NEET advice and funding

"Further council funding cuts will put thousands of youngsters' "promising futures" at risk, say town hall bosses.

A Local Government Association survey of councils in England, says 90% have cut services for teenagers not in education, employment and training.

Local authorities have seen funding cuts of 40% since 2010, and their responsibility for careers advice and further education has been removed.

The government said the teenage Neet rate was now 64,000 lower than in 2010.

And it highlighted that it is investing £7bn "to fund a place for every 16- to 18-year-old in England who wants one".

Since 2012, local councils in England have no longer had control over careers advice, which has switched to schools.

Local authority-run Connexions services were one of the first areas to be cut under the previous coalition government.

Councils have also lost control of post-16 education and schemes to tackle young people's disengagement.

But the LGA points out that local authorities still have a duty to encourage 16- to 18-year-olds to remain in education, employment or training and ensure there are enough opportunities available locally.

It says local councils are best-placed to oversee support for 14- to 21-year-old Neets because they know what is needed on the ground.

And it warns the advances that it has made could be lost with further cuts ahead.

David Simmonds, chairman of the LGA's Children and Young People Board, said: "The message from local government is clear.

"Cuts without reform risk undoing all of our collective good work, putting thousands of promising futures at risk.

"Councils are uniquely well placed to help young people access the opportunities created by the local employers increasingly frustrated by remote national institutions.

"It is important that we have the powers, levers and funding to fulfil our legal duties to young people.

"The new government has a real opportunity to build on recent successes and meet its ambition of full employment by enabling local partnerships of councils, schools, colleges, jobcentres and employers to locally coordinate a single youth offer.

"It will ensure every young person is either in work or learning."

A survey of 87 local authorities for the LGA also suggests the vast majority (97%) believe services for young people will be put at risk unless councils regain powers over them and general council cuts are avoided.

The Department for Education said: "Thanks to our essential reforms, there are 64,000 fewer 16- to 18-year-olds Neets than there were in 2010.

"We have ended the historic and unfair funding difference between schools and colleges from the 16-19 funding formula, and are maintaining funding rates for 2015-16 so they can plan their future offers for students.

"We are also reforming academic qualifications and vocational education to ensure young people get the knowledge and skills that they need to move into a job, apprenticeship or to continue their education."

The rate of 16- to 18-year-olds who are Neet has tended to fluctuated between 8% and 10% over the past decade, but has been following a downward trend since 2008."
BBC article

The Challenge

The challenge to cut support for this age group is extremely concerning. 

Reality is that there is a huge need within this sector to engage. The Jobcentre plus under DWP has failed for years to engage with effect and trying to work on a National basis is very unlikely to be that effective.

DWP will be tasked to stop the Housing Benefit along with the council's soon as stated by the Conservative Party's manifesto.

If you have been excluded from school or college or the plan's set out for your future don't work out well you are going to struggle. NEET have been a political issue for some years and unlike the older age groups they are less likely to have work experience or the skill base for modern business.

Mentoring, advice,Guidance and support is essential. Cutting spending in this area and yet ring fencing overseas aid doesn't sit well with many