ITEM CH3CHILDRENS SERVICES SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 27 SEPTEMBER 2005Minutes of the Meeting commencing at 10.00 am and finishing at 4.00 pm. Present: Voting
Members: Councillor
Tony Crabbe (in place of Councillor Steve Hayward) Other
Members in Attendance: By
Invitation: Officers: Whole of meeting: D. Mitchell (Chief Executive’s Office).
Part of meeting: M. Lloyd (Chief Executive’s Office); Director for Learning & Culture, C. Abolins, S. Bingham, S. Breton, R. Capstick, D. Hallam, R. Harmes and G. Tee; Director for Social & Health Care; J. Hayes (County Facilities Management).
The Scrutiny Committee considered the matters, reports and recommendations contained or referred to in the agenda for the meeting and agreed as set out below. Copies of the agenda and reports are attached to the signed Minutes.
41/05. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS
Apologies for absence and temporary appointments were received as follows:
42/05. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Deborah Glass Woodin declared a personal interest at Agenda Item 7 as a non LEA Governor at Grandpont Nursery School.
43/05. MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 July 2005 were approved and signed subject to the addition of Mrs Thomson (invitee) to the attendance list.
44/05. SPEAKING TO OR PETITIONING THE COMMITTEE
The following requests to address the meeting had been agreed:-
45/05. SCRUTINY WORK PROGRAMME 2005/06
(Agenda Item 5) During this round of meetings, each Committee was asked to undertake a fundamental review of its work programme, taking into account the key issues and drivers identified at its previous meeting. A grid containing suggested work programme options for this Committee was attached for consideration at CH5. All members had been asked to give their suggestions for the work programme by 18 August and a letter had also been sent to all stakeholders seeing their suggestions. Members were asked to agree items that would be included in the work programme for the coming year and to prioritise those items. Mr Hocken addressed the Committee on behalf of the Abingdon & District Citizens’ Advice Bureau regarding the widespread concern about the costs faced by parents when sending their children to school. He reported that the Citizens’ Advice bureau believed that every child in England had the right to a free state education. School had the potential to provide all children with opportunities to learn, make friends and participate in activities regardless of family income. At this key point intervention was possible to shield children from the effects of living in poverty – but when families were asked for money to pay for uniforms, activities, school trips and classroom materials, meeting those costs could cause hardship. All children should be able to participate fully in school life, but not having the money to buy the correct uniform, participate in extra-curricular activities or go on school trips could leave them unable to fulfil their full potential, mark them out as being ‘poor’, and lead to them becoming isolated within school. He added that as a result of concerns raised about the financial burden faced by families in sending their children to school, by the Citizens’ Advice Bureau and other organisations such as the Child Poverty Action Group and the Family Welfare Association, the Department for Education and Skills had commissioned research to investigate the range and amount of costs, what burden they placed on families, and what happened if they were unable to pay and whether inability to pay affected social inclusion in schools.
The findings had showed that the average cost of sending a child to secondary school was £948.11 and £563.15 for primary school. A comparison of those costs with the annual amount of child benefit received by families had shown that even if families spent all their child benefit on their child’s school costs, it would not be enough to meet the costs of sending a child to secondary school and the cost of sending a child to primary school would take up almost all of the pupil’s child benefit. Almost a quarter (22%) of all families interviewed said that they found it difficult to meet the costs expected of them; worryingly this figure rose to 55% of families in the bottom two income brackets - those with incomes below £15,000. The survey of young people also found that a small minority, particularly those from low-income families did not pass on all requests for financial contributions to their parents because they feared their parents couldn’t afford the costs. He further reported that the school costs campaign coalition was calling on the government to introduce a statutory duty on local education authorities to provide uniform grants, and to make funding available to enable them to do this. Other recommendations included:
Mr Hocken further reported that the Bureau had asked Learning & Culture to investigate this issue, but that the request had been refused on the grounds of inadequate resource. He urged the Committee to carry out an investigation to:
Following debate the Committee AGREED to:
High
High/Medium
Medium
Low
46/05. CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE’S PLAN
(Agenda Item 6) The Committee had before them a revised draft of the Children & Young People’s Plan prior to its approval by Cabinet for wider circulation. Ms Gillian Tee, Head of Children’s Services attended to give a brief presentation on the Plan and to answer any questions which the Committee might wish to ask. She reported that there was a new statutory requirement to produce a single, strategic Children and Young People’s Plan (CYPP) for all local services for children and young people. This included services provided by the local authority and all relevant partners. The duty to prepare the CYPP was given to the County Council, alongside its duty to secure co-operation among partners to improve the wellbeing of children and young people. The local authority was expected to prepare the Plan jointly with partners. The first plan must be in place by 1 April 2006. The Plan should support local authorities and their partners to agree clear targets and priorities for all their services to children and young people, to identify the action needed to achieve them and to ensure delivery. The Scrutiny Committee then considered the Plan and forwarded to the Cabinet the following comments:
47/05. CHILDREN’S CENTRE STRATEGY
(Agenda Item 7) Members of the Committee had requested the opportunity to comment on the report on the Children’s Centre Strategy (CH7) prior to consideration by the Cabinet. On 18 October 2005, the Cabinet would be recommended, subject to the consideration of any comments on the part of this Committee, to approve a revised Children’s Centre Strategy, including areas to be covered, services to be provided as core and principles followed. Mr Harmes gave a brief presentation which outlined progress in developing Children’s Centres in Oxfordshire thus far, including the number of new Children’s Centres to be developed over the next 3 years; the total amount of children the new centres would cover (about 60% of the County’s under 5’s) and the associated costs and funding. He reported that by 2010 every "community" should have a centre, including rural areas. Ms Abolins then circulated a revised consultation document for the Committee’s consideration, a copy of which is attached to the signed minutes. The Scrutiny Committee considered the Strategy and forwarded to the Cabinet the following comments:
48/05. YOUTH GREEN PAPER, "YOUTH MATTERS"
(Agenda Item 8) Members of this Committee had requested the opportunity to comment on the Youth Green Paper (CH8) prior to consideration by the Cabinet. On 2 November 2005, the Cabinet would be recommended, subject to the consideration of any comments on the part of this Committee, to approve a response to the government’s consultation document "Youth Matters". Mr Rick Harmes, Head of Community Learning, attended the meeting in order to give background information on the Youth Green Paper and to answer any questions which the Committee might wish to ask. The Committee made a number of observations (listed below) which Mr Harmes undertook to take into account when finalising the County Council’s response to be considered at the Cabinet on 2 November 2005.
49/05. COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT - BEST VALUE REVIEW
(Agenda Item 9) The Scrutiny Co-ordinating Group on 25 May had agreed that the Children’s Services Scrutiny Committee would be responsible for completing the outstanding Best Value Review of the cleaning and catering services provided by County Facilities Management (CFM) which had commenced under the former Best Value & Audit Committee. The study had arisen from growing concerns over the financial viability of the services. The Best Value & Audit Committee in April had approved further research on identified options for the future of CFM to be brought back to the Committee for further consideration; and on the role of the County Council in service provision/delivery in the context of the Government’s statement ‘Healthy Food in Schools – Transforming School Meals’. The Committee had particularly asked that the Review Team "look at Best Value in the round, including education and healthy eating and the advantages of healthy food for children as learners". The Committee now had before them a report (CH9) which set out the results of the further research to date. The report concluded that more work was required to provide definitive information on some of the options, but that this would, to an extent depend on what actions the Council considered desirable to pursue. Decisions on such action would be for the Cabinet, in the light of the recommendations of this Committee in the light of the Best Value Review work. Mr Robert Capstick (Head of Resources, Learning & Culture) and Ms Jackie Hayes (General Manager, County Facilities Management) attended the meeting in order to answer any questions from member of the Committee. Ms Thomson stressed the importance of consulting with secondary schools on the proposals. The Committee referred the report to the Cabinet as the outcome of the Best Value Review, drawing the Cabinet’s attention to:
50/05. TRACKING SCRUTINY ITEMS
(Agenda Item 10)
The Committee received an update (CH10) on the Scrutiny Review report on The County Music Service Budget. The Committee welcomed the progress made thus far in improving the financial management systems and practices with regard to the Music Service and the sharper focus of the remit of the Music Service House Committee and AGREED to review the position in six months time. Members congratulated officers on the recent concert held at the Town Hall and generally on the high quality of service provided.
51/05. REALIGNMENT OF DIRECTORATES
(Agenda Item 11) (This item was considered jointly with all members of the Health & Community Services Scrutiny Committee). On 18 October 2005, the Cabinet would consider a report on proposals to enable the implementation of its decision to re-designate the Directors for Learning & Culture and Social & Health Care as Director of Children’s Services and of Adult Social Services respectively. The Committees had before them a report (CH11) which set out a structure for the realignment of directorates, which were proposed to be titled "Children, Young People & Families" and "Social & Community Services", and outlined funding, risks and transitional issues. The report contained specific proposals for:
The report further outlined proposals for a Change Management Board to oversee the realignment. The Cabinet Members for Children & Young People and Health & Community Service, the Chief Executive, and the Director for Social & Health Care and the Director for Learning & Culture had been invited to attend for this item. Ms Stiles spoke as Chair of the Oxfordshire County Council Adult Learning Branch of NATFHE on behalf of employees and members of the public to plead for the protection of the Adult Learning Service. She stated that in their view, it would be a grave mistake to separate the Adult Learning Service from other learning services on the basis that the Adult Learning Service worked closely with the Learning Support Unit and schools. She added that the Adult Learning Service was also based at schools. She emphasised the recent stress put upon employees, as the Service had just gone through a restructuring process and a full inspection and had a new Head of Service. The Service was also facing redundancies due to a shortfall in budget and the new LSC funding arrangements. She urged the Committee to reconsider the proposal to move the Service. The Chief Executive emphasised that approval of the structures and procedures set out in the report would enable officers to expedite the realignment of functions. She stated that, this would be the real starting point for the County Council’s ambitious plans for integrating service planning, improving partnership working and developing new preventative strategies to reduce the demands on acute services by strengthening services in their community leadership role, and particularly in developing provision around schools in their central task of raising attainment. She added that she intended to maintain and improve the performance of our services. She hoped that the proposals would also drive out efficiencies and maximise the use of resources through the revised commissioning arrangements and strategic frameworks. In relation to the address by Ms Stiles, she reported that responses to the discussion paper had highlighted some concerns that adult learning was linked closely to local strategies for supporting vulnerable and needy families and to strategies to raise attainment in hard-to-reach groups in the 16+ age range. Some of the respondents had suggested that Adult Learning should be located within the Children, Young People & Families Directorate. She emphasised that she was in strong agreement with the need for all Council services to liaise effectively in the interests of the communities the County Council serve. However, she believed that the links between socially excluded adults and the service would be further strengthened within the proposed configuration of services. The links with other services supported by the County Council would be maintained so that the work with vulnerable families and hard to reach groups in the 16+ age range would continue. She acknowledged that the service itself was undergoing considerable change as a result of restructuring and in the light of major changes in LSC funding. It was recognised that this would pose considerable challenges to staff and managers. It was proposed to bring the Adult Learning Service under the responsibility of the Head of Cultural and Adult Learning Services, as this was a model that a number of other councils had adopted and it fitted well with current arrangements. She further reported that any need for budget redistribution for the HR/Finance support staff would depend on the final proposals adopted. Some further work would be needed to ensure that the staff supporting areas within the directorates were charged to the relevant area. However, if the shared service model was progressed this could be through a central recharge rather than through re-alignment of the Resources and Business Support Areas of the current directorates. The most contentious area of financial assessment would be the level to which budgets within the current directorates were adequate to support the levels of service being delivered. There had been a degree of internal virement within Social & Health Care, and this had supported Children and Families from an underspend in a specific grant. However, there was an action plan in place to bring this into balance by the end of 2006/07, although this would require further monitoring. In addition, other pressures shown in the latest financial monitoring reports within Learning Disabilities showed that the underspend in the Older People budget was supporting in part an overspend in this area. If there was an unmet overspend in Children and Families in 2005/06 then the Council would need to be clear about who would be responsible for managing the carry forward pressure. She reassured Ms Stiles that the County Council intended to maintain an adequate Adult Learning Service. The Committee then made the following points:
Following debate, the Committee AGREED to endorse the proposals set out in the report CH11, subject to:
The Committee further expressed concern over the unknown costs of the realignment in relation particularly to ICT.
52/05. BEST VALUE REVIEW OF SERVICES FOR VULNERABLE CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE: IMPLEMENTATION
(Agenda Item 12) The Executive, on 19 April 2005, received a report from the Best Value & Audit Committee on its wide-ranging review of services for vulnerable children and young people. The Best Value Review had made a wide range of recommendations. A number of these had been, or were being, implemented through the realignment of the Directorates. All of the remaining recommended actions in the Best Value Review of Children’s Services had been incorporated in the new Children and Young People’s Plan. The Committee now had before it a report (CH12) which focuseed in detail on proposals for implementing the Best Value Review in relation to two key developments: - the Children and Young People’s Commissioning Trust - Integrated Support Services and Locality Teams. Ms Tee, highlighted the report’s conclusions that the County Council should move forward to develop a Children and Young People’s Strategic Board for Oxfordshire, to effect significant changes in the co-ordination, organisation and delivery of children’s services across the County. The Strategic Board would fulfil the requirements of a Children’s Trust approach for Oxfordshire. It was therefore recommended that proposals for the development of a Children and Young People’s Strategic Board should be approved for wide consultation and that officers undertake further detailed work on the proposals including terms of reference. The Best Value Review had also proposed the establishment of multi-disciplinary locality teams to ensure responsive and well co-ordinated services for vulnerable children and young people in localities throughout the County. The report included proposals for these, which it was recommended should be for wide consultation. Ms Sarah Breton and Ms Sandra Bingham attended to speak to the proposals for the Children and Young People’s Commissioning Trust and Integrated Support Services and Locality Teams. The Committee AGREED to refer the report to Cabinet, with a recommendation that the Cabinet approve in principle to the draft model for the Children & Young People’s Strategic Board, subject to further detailed proposals on how it was going to work being brought back to the Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet in January.
53/05. FORWARD PLAN
(Agenda Item 13) This item had been included in the Agenda to enable the Committee to suggest items from the current Forward on which it might have wished to have the opportunity to offer to the Cabinet before any decision was taken. No items were identified.
in the Chair Date
of signing 2005
|
||||||||||||||||