As we have discussed, Clause 6 places a statutory duty on all local authorities in England to promote the educational achievement of children with a social worker living in their area. It also places a statutory duty on all local authorities in England to promote the educational achievement of children who are subject to formal kinship orders in their area, regardless of whether they have spent time in local authority care.

Children with a social worker, as hon. Members have recognised, often face significant barriers to achieving their potential in education due to experiences of instability, abuse and neglect, or indeed bereavement, as the hon. Member for North Herefordshire mentioned. Similarly, while children in kinship care benefit from familial care, they can encounter challenges stemming from trauma, disrupted school or limited access to educational resources, which can impact their educational outcomes. Placing a statutory duty on local authorities to promote the educational achievement of these children acknowledges their specific vulnerabilities and barriers to attainment, and ensures that resources and support are available to meet their educational needs.

Clause 6 places a duty on local authorities to appoint an officer to ensure that these duties are properly discharged. In practice, the officer is known as a virtual school head and currently discharges these duties on a non-statutory basis. Virtual school heads will be the lead officers responsible for overseeing the educational progress of children in care and previously in care, and it includes children who have left care because they were made the subject of a special guardianship or a child arrangement order. Extending the remit of virtual school heads on a statutory basis to include children with a social worker and those in kinship care will give them the same legal footing as looked-after and previously looked-after children.

This clause places a duty on local authorities to take appropriate steps to support the educational achievement of these children, which could include: raising awareness of the barriers and challenges that they face in their education; taking steps to improve their educational attendance and engagement; and providing support for schools to help them overcome these challenges. Clause 6 also extends the definition of a “relevant child” to include children under special guardianship orders and child arrangement orders. I appreciate the question asked by the hon. Member for Twickenham on the extent of that definition. It is specific to the legal guardianship orders and child arrangement orders, and I appreciate the issue that she has raised.

I will come on to a number of questions that have been asked, and I appreciate that Members have raised points of consideration on clause 6 to ensure we maximise the opportunity it presents. The ongoing evaluation of non-statutory extension of the virtual school head has shown that these extended duties do have positive impacts for children with a social worker. Virtual school heads have reported improved school attendance and decreases in suspensions and permanent exclusions. We expect the extension of this role, now put on a statutory footing, to improve outcomes for some of the most vulnerable children.

We know that virtual school heads have already been carrying out these duties, but we are fully committed to ensuring that they have sufficient resources to meet their statutory duties. We have provided £7.6 million of funding this year to ensure they are resourced to meet their statutory duties towards previously looked-after children, but we will continue to review resourcing alongside the impacts of the extended role to make sure that virtual school heads have the resources to meet their duties and serve the children they are there to support.

We will issue updated statutory guidance to give local authorities a framework to support the outcomes of all children they have a duty towards. Local authorities will be held to account for the discharge of these duties through Ofsted inspections of local authority children’s services. That answers the question from the right hon. Member for East Hampshire. I will answer the question from the hon. Member for Twickenham shortly.

In response to the question from the hon. Member for North Herefordshire about bereavement, she is absolutely right to identify that many children in kinship care arrangements may well be there as a result of a family bereavement. Indeed, I have had constituents come to me in that situation, so I appreciate the challenge. We could have a very long debate on the best way of supporting children who have experienced bereavement, and I absolutely take on board her concerns. There is a whole range of work undergoing, from the relationships, health and sex education national curriculum to resources for mental health support in school, which we hope will bring supportive benefit to all children within the school system.

I will take away the specific request she made as we undertake an independent review of the curriculum to ensure that it not only provides a broad and solid foundation to children, but equips them through the RHSE and personal, social, health and economic education curriculums to process challenges, and ensures we have support in the right place. It may be that it could be provided through a school setting, or it may be that it should be provided elsewhere.