Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Date: Thursday 8 November 2012
Time: 2pm
Venue: Edwards Room, County Hall, Norwich
Persons attending the meeting are requested to turn off mobile phones.
Membership
Mrs J Chamberlin (Chairman)
Mr R Bearman Mrs J Leggett Dr A Boswell Mr J Mooney Mr J Carswell Mr P Morse Mr B Collins Mr W Nunn Mr S Dorrington Mr M Scutter Mr R Hanton Miss J Virgo Mrs S Hutson Mr P Wells Mr M Kiddle-Morris Ms S Whitaker
Parent Governor Representatives
Mr P East Dr L Poliakoff
Church Representatives
Mrs J O’Connor Mr A Mash
Non-Voting Schools Forum Representative
Dr B Carrington
Non-Voting Cabinet Member
Mrs A Thomas
Non-Voting Deputy Cabinet Member
Mr T Garrod Vulnerable Children Mr P Hardy Education Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel 8 November 2012
Non-Voting Co-opted Advisors
Mr S Adamson Norfolk Governors Network Ms T Humber Special Needs Education Mrs S Cooke Primary Education Vacancy Post-16 Education Ms C Smith Secondary Education
For further details and general enquiries about this Agenda please contact the Committee Officer: Catherine Wilkinson on 01603 223230 or email [email protected] A g e n d a
1. To receive apologies and details of any substitute members attending
2. Minutes (Page 1)
To receive the minutes of the meeting of the Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel held on 20 September 2012.
3. Members to Declare any Interests
If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in a matter to be considered at the meeting and that interest is on your Register of Interests you must not speak or vote on the matter. It is recommended that you declare that interest but it is not a legal requirement.
If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in a matter to be considered at the meeting and that interest is not on your Register of Interests you must declare that interest at the meeting and not speak or vote on the matter.
In either case you may remain in the room where the meeting is taking place. If you consider that it would be inappropriate in the circumstances to remain in the room, you may leave the room while the matter is dealt with.
If you do not have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest you may nevertheless have an Other Interest in a matter to be discussed if it affects
• your well being or financial position • that of your family or close friends • that of a club or society in which you have a management role • that of another public body of which you are a member to a greater extent than others in your ward.
If that is the case then you must declare an interest but can speak and vote on the matter.
4. To receive any items of business which the Chairman decides should be considered as a matter of urgency
5. Public Question Time
Fifteen minutes for questions from members of the public of which due notice has been given.
Please note that all questions must be received by the Committee Team ([email protected] or 01603 223230) by 5pm on Monday 5 November 2012. For guidance on submitting public questions, please view the Council Constitution, Appendix 10.
6. Local Member Issues/Member Questions Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel 8 November 2012
Fifteen minutes for local members to raise issues of concern of which due notice has been given. Please note that all questions must be received by the Committee Team ([email protected] or 01603 223230) by 5pm on Monday 5 November 2012.
7. Cabinet Member Feedback
8. Forward Work Programme: Scrutiny (Page 13) Report by the Director of Children’s Services
9. Children’s Services Integrated Performance and Finance Monitoring (Page 19) Report for 2012-2013 Report by the Director of Children’s Services
10. Service and Budget Planning 2013/15 for Children’s Services Report (Page 39) by the Director of Children’s Services
11. Free School Meals Update (Page 51) Report by the Director of Children’s Services
12. Developing Free Early Education Places for Two Year Olds (Page 55) Report by the Director of Children’s Services
13. Special Educational Needs (SEN) Strategy Update: An update on (Page 63) SEN provision development within Norfolk and direction of travel within the governments new SEN legislative framework Report by the Director of Children’s Services
14. Looked After Children Capital Project – Update on progress Report (Page 91) by the Director of Children’s Services
Group Meetings
Conservative 1:00 pm Colman Room Liberal Democrats 1:00 pm Room 504
Chris Walton Head of Democratic Services County Hall Martineau Lane Norwich NR1 2DH
Date Agenda Published: 31 October 2012 If you need this document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Catherine Wilkinson on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel Minutes of the Meeting Held on Thursday 20 September 2012
Present:
Mrs J Chamberlin (Chairman)
Mr R Bearman Mr P Morse Dr A Boswell Mr W Nunn Mr J Carswell Mr M Scutter M Chenery of Horsbrugh Mr B Spratt Mr S Dorrington Miss J Virgo Mr S Hutson Mr P Wells Mr M Kiddle-Morris Ms S Whitaker Mrs J Leggett
Parent Governor Representative: Mr P East Dr L Poliakoff
Non-voting Schools Forum Representative:
Dr B Carrington
Non-Voting Cabinet Member:
Mrs A Thomas Children’s Services
Non-Voting Deputy Cabinet Members:
Mr P Hardy Education
Non-Voting Co-Opted Advisors:
Mrs S Cooke Primary Education Ms C Smith Secondary Education
Other Members in attendance:
Dr M Strong Local Member for Wells
1. Apologies and substitutions
1.1 Apologies were received from Mr B Collins (M Chenery of Horsbrugh attending), Mr R Hanton, Mr J Mooney (Mr B Spratt substituting), Mr A Mash and Mr T Garrod.
2. Minutes
2.1 The minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2012 were considered. It was noted that a question had been asked around exclusion rates to which a written response had not been given. It was agreed that this response would be added to the minutes as an additional question. With this amendment the minutes were agreed by the Panel and signed as an accurate record of the meeting. Later in the meeting it was confirmed that this information would be included in the November Performance and Finance Monitoring Report, when updated datasets would be available.
3. Declarations of Interests
3.1 There were no declarations of interest.
4. Items of Urgent Business
4.1 There were no items of urgent business.
5. Public Question Time
5.1 There were no public questions.
6. Local Member Issues/Member Questions
6.1 The Local Member for Wells commented on item 14 of the agenda, saying that the funding formula was an urban formula which was being applied to a rural county. This was especially having an impact on rural high schools. It was important to manage public perception of these changes.
7. Exclusion of the Public
7.1 The Panel was advised that, with regard to item 8: ‘Young People in Norfolk – views of Norfolk today’, the Panel would need to consider whether to exclude the public for the duration of the DVD.
7.2 The Director of Children’s Services presented the public interest test, as required by the 2006 Access to Information Regulations for the consideration of the Panel as follows:
7.3 “Video evidence of fifty young people from across Norfolk who identify as black, Asian or minority ethnic, disabled, Muslim or who are questioning their sexual or gender identity, talking about what life is like in Norfolk today for young people from these groups.
This information is considered to be exempt under Paragraphs 1 and 2 of part 1 of Schedule 12 A to Local Government Act 1972 (‘Information relating to any individual’ and ‘Information that is likely to reveal the identity of an individual’).
It is considered that the public interest in disclosing this information is outweighed by the public interest in non-disclosure, including recognition of the need for privacy for the individuals who are shown in the film, and who agreed to talk about their identity for the purposes of staff training.”
7.4 RESOLVED that the public be excluded whilst the DVD was shown.
8. Young People in Norfolk – views of Norfolk today
8.1 The Panel viewed a DVD which highlighted the perception of Norfolk by young people in minority groups.
9. Cabinet Member Feedback
9.1 The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services reported that a new apprenticeship programme had been launched in September, with many training providers and businesses present. The number of young people who attended had been encouraging and it was hope that this would be the start of a successful project.
9.2 GCSE and A level results had improved again. The Cabinet Member noted that work had taken place to identify pupils that had been disadvantaged by the situation, and confirmed that 475 had been identified in Norfolk. A letter had been written to the government minister and copied to Norfolk MP’s highlighting the issues. Colleges had taken predicted grades into consideration and were encouraging students to resit the exam. It was confirmed that all members would be supportive of this lobbying, and that as Corporate Parents they should be informed if any Looked After Children had been disadvantaged. The Cabinet Member agreed to confirm the situation with LAC.
9.3 The impact of the fair funding formula on rural schools would be highlighted in a letter to the government. The Cabinet Member hoped to attend the Local Government Association Children and Young People Board to highlight the issues.
10. Forward Work Programme: Scrutiny
10.1 The annexed report (10) by the Director of Children’s Services was received. The report asked Members to review and develop the programme for scrutiny. It was confirmed that the item ‘Children Who Go Missing’ referred to looked after children who ran away.
10.2 During the discussion the following points were noted:
Priority should be given to the issue of looked after children who run away or are at risk of being abducted. It was agreed to appoint a scrutiny working group comprising of Cllrs Hutson, Boswell and Scutter. The Deputy Cabinet Member, Cllr Hardy, would also attend meetings of the working group.
It was suggested that future Royal Norfolk Show events could record data relating to visits by young people and families. It was confirmed that one of the Royal Norfolk Show days coincided with a school closure day.
A question was raised as to how the local authority ensured that school governing bodies were fit for purpose. It was also suggested that it would
be useful to look at the role of the local authority in working with and supporting governing bodies. It was agreed that the scrutiny planning group would consider this issue and recommend whether a scrutiny review should be undertaken.
RESOLVED:
10.3 To agree that the Panel had considered the Outline Programme at Appendix A of the report and the scrutiny topics and reporting dates and to approve the recommendations made by the Scrutiny Planning Group.
11. Children’s Services Integrated Performance and Finance Monitoring Report for 2012-2013
11.1 The annexed report (11) by the Director of Children’s Services was received. The report set out how Children’s Services was performing against the top-level activities set out in the Service Plan and provided up to date integrated performance and finance monitoring information. It was confirmed that the information regarding exclusions would be included in the November report, once the full datasets were available.
11.2 During the discussion the following points were noted:
It was confirmed that the extra £5M Looked After Children funding was new money allocated by Cabinet.
The reduction in the number of first time entrants to the youth justice system was commended. The scope of the restorative justice approach had shown an impact and was working well within schools.
The key basis of changes to adoptions as a result of the adoption summit was to speed up the process of identifying adopters and matching children with adopters. A quick, effective system was required, while ensuring that the valuable critical eye was not lost. The main change was that children’s plans were no longer heard at Adoption Panel meetings which had reduced the workload of the Panel. The aim was that adoptions would take six months to complete, and that adoption plans would be agreed by officers.
Concern was expressed that 30% of inspections of schools were in the lower categories. The local authority was working hard with schools to improve inspection outcomes, and wanted to help schools avoid being placed into special measures. The proposed scrutiny of governor services could assist intervention approaches, and could include peer school support with ‘outstanding’ schools.
The disparity between primary and secondary school inspection ratings was highlighted and it was confirmed that the numbers were too small to draw a picture from, as it only reflected those inspected during one academic year. It was agreed the further information giving an overall picture would be supplied.
The excellent work that the Children’s Services department had carried out to provide more apprenticeship opportunities for young people was
highlighted. It was confirmed that 52 of the Norse places had now been taken up.
Work would take place with schools to develop the Olympic and Paralympic legacy and Inspiremark. This would provide an opportunity to promote the medallists who were educated in Norfolk.
No comparison data was available in relation to the experience of users of the child protection service because this had not been previously captured. A new way of working which involved more routine should assist with capturing this feedback.
Concern was expressed that the 44 schools assessed as ‘satisfactory’ could potentially slip into special measures at the next inspection. It was noted that the category had been redesignated and that two satisfactory inspections would result in movement into a ‘concern’ category. 7 schools had come out of special measures.
Latest figures showed that the number of children and young people killed on Norfolk’s roads was decreasing. The council was engaged with various driver education schemes, together with educating children in road safety.
It was agreed that the youth offending figures, including whether there had been a reduction in the number of first time offenders, would be circulated.
An increase in the number of 17 and 19 year olds with a firm offer of employment, education or training had been seen. However it was inevitable that a number of these would drop out of their placement.
It was confirmed that consortium led by the Ormiston Children and Families Trust also contained the Mancroft Advice Project and the Mental Health Care Trust.
RESOLVED:
11.3 To note the report.
12. Consultation on School Funding Reform: Next steps towards a fairer system
12.1 The annexed report (12) by the Director of Children’s Services was received. The report provided details of the consultation being undertaken with Norfolk’s schools following the Department for Education’s paper on School Funding Reform. It was noted that the consultation was being held earlier due to the significant changes and the reduction of factors in allocating funds. The consultation with schools was underway. The Schools Forum was thanked for their contribution to the process, and officers were thanked for their briefing session prior to the main Panel meeting.
12.2 During the discussion the following points were noted:
It was noted that the proposed funding model was designed for urban areas and that government ministers were not aware of the distances travelled by young people to schools in rural areas. It was suggested that the new
simplified model had taken away most flexibility.
The targeted use of the pupil premium could result in some challenging questions being raised with school leadership teams. A range of approaches were required to narrow the gap in achievement.
The provision for swimming facilities was a symptom of the reduction in the number of formula factors available. The money was being put into the ‘per pupil entitlement’ and gave greater freedom and choice for schools. A charging mechanism had been suggested to bring the money back into provider schools, by creation of school-to-school services. The importance of member engagement in communicating this and similar issues to schools was highlighted.
It was confirmed that discussions had taken place with peer councils to establish whether the same issue was being experienced and whether joint lobbying would be effective.
The Primary Education representative noted frustration in the limitations of the budget proposals, stating that small schools would be adversely impacted and that lobbying on that matter was required. It was suggested that the MP for South West Norfolk, who held a position within the Department for Education, could be lobbied.
RESOLVED:
12.3 To note and comment on the proposed approach to schools funding.
13. Ofsted Improvement Action Plan
13.1 The annexed report (13) by the Working Group was received. The report presented the findings and recommendations of the Working Group. Cllr Bearman thanked members for their support with the scrutiny and highlighted the significant improvement in the speed of initial assessments. Concern was expressed regarding timeliness of health assessments prior to out of county placements being initiated, and it was suggested that this should be applied to all placements.
13.2 During the discussion the following points were noted:
The use of bed and breakfast placements had decreased, and checks were in place where this was used. The use of Police and Crime Evidence (PACE) beds was minimal and those spaces could be used for other emergency care.
It was noted that the upgrade of CareFirst was subject to the corporate prioritisation process and was planned to take place in November.
RESOLVED:
13.3 To endorse the implementation of the Working Group’s findings.
14. Pupil Place Planning – the organisational implications of housing growth
14.1 The annexed report (14) by the Director of Children’s Services was received. The report identified a number of potential medium-term strategic implications for the County Council in specific areas of the County. The Chairman read out comments from the Local Member for Fakenham, who welcomed the suggestion of a single school site for Fakenham, and suggested that a new primary school would be appropriate.
14.2 During the discussion the following points were noted:
The minimum and maximum numbers for a new primary school was discussed, with 210 given as a minimum on a major housing development, and around 420 as a maximum. However there were larger primary schools with over 600 pupils such as Robert Kett in Wymondham. A maximum number of pupils would not be set if a school was viable and could demonstrate an efficiency of scale.
There was a statutory process to be followed when proposing amendments to catchment areas. This gave a long lead in time before an admission policy was agreed.
The demography of different areas was monitored to ensure suitable provision of school places. It was noted that the increase in births in recent years would place pressure on primary school places, and that secondary school places would have a decrease in pressure for places. It was confirmed that officers consulted local housing plans when considering school place provision. The increased demand for 2-year-old placements as a result of the rising birth rate was acknowledged.
It was suggested that under-populated schools could engage with partner organisations to provide facilities such as police offices. This would result in the school being able to utilise the space in future when another peak in pupil numbers occurred, rather than returning to a use of mobile classrooms. It was noted that the ownership of buildings transferred when academies were set up.
It was noted that many secondary schools were built broadly along main roads and had the capacity to expand.
It was confirmed that a housing development of around 1,000 homes would result in the consideration of a new school. However this depended on the provision of existing places and whether a school could expand on its current site. Finance from developers was always welcomed.
The list of areas of population growth was not definitive and there were other areas experiencing considerable growth. Provision was being reviewed as housing numbers became available.
It was noted that in the case of Fakenham High School and College, the issues were around the number of students and the condition of the buildings. Work was underway to establish whether there could be any compensatory adjustment for the loss of the playing fields at the college.
RESOLVED:
14.3 To note the possible strategic interventions which may be necessary in specific areas of the County and endorse the collaborative approach the planning.
The meeting closed at 4.05pm. CHAIRMAN
If you need this document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Catherine Wilkinson on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and
we will do our best to help.
Appendix 1
Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel Action Log
Agenda Item Report Title Action Number 9 Cabinet Member Confirm whether any looked after children had Feedback been disadvantaged by the GCSE English situation
Response:
Of the 76 reported Children in Care taking GCSE in 2012 (based on Children in Care results reported by schools in August - this will not necessarily match the list the DfE will be reporting on where the students must fit the criteria for Children Looked After (CLA) as at 31st March 2012, i.e. continued CLA status for 6 months, Pupil Premium, or 12 months, reporting figures) - 28 achieved the Gold Standard, 48 did not. Within the results of the 48 who did not achieve Gold Standard, two missed it because of D's in English where they were predicted C's and could have achieved the Gold Standard if the grade boundaries had not been changed. In addition to this one student would not have achieved the Gold Standard, but would have achieved 5+A*-C if their predicted English C's had not come out as D's after the grade boundaries changed.
Agenda Item Report Title Action Number 11 Children’s Services Supply further information to give an overall Integrated Performance picture of the differences between primary and and Finance Monitoring secondary school inspection outcomes. Report for 2012-2013
Response:
Analysing Ofsted data for the academic year 2011-12 and extracting trends is a difficult exercise and one that needs to be broken down into a term by term analysis. The reason for this is that it was a most unusual year owing to the fact that there were two new inspection frameworks and a new Her Majesty’s Chief Inspectorate (HMCI). Not only was there a change in framework in January 2012 but the criteria were significantly different and this led nationally to a seven per cent drop in schools being judged as “outstanding” and a three per cent rise in “inadequate” judgments. As there is a differential approach to the inspection of schools in relation to the timings of inspections, with: all schools deemed good being inspected on average every five years outstanding schools mainly being exempt from inspection satisfactory schools (under the pre September 2012 regulations) being inspected between two and three years inadequate schools subject to regular termly monitoring visits
this also ‘skews’ the data downwards. Another difficulty is the difference between secondary and primary school outcomes. This is because the small number of secondary inspections conducted over the year (11 schools) makes it difficult to reach a reliable statistical judgment. Each secondary school is equivalent to just less than 10% whilst a primary school is round about 1%. Taking these points into consideration the differences between secondary and primary data is not great. There is little real difference at good and outstanding and at inadequate / satisfactory the difference revolves on one or two schools. Again these figures need to be taken in context. The period when the secondary phase had the most inadequate inspections (2), the spring term, coincided with the start of Sir Michael Wilshaw’s regime as chief inspector and his stated intention of raising the bar. National figures for that period show that between January and March, only 17 secondary schools managed to gain the outstanding judgment – five per cent of the 316 inspected. However, between January and March, 19 per cent of the secondary’s inspected were judged inadequate. For this period, the statistical release from Ofsted stated: “Since the introduction of the new framework the profile of inspection judgments has shifted, with a lower proportion of schools being judged good and outstanding and a higher proportion being judged satisfactory or inadequate.”
For the 2011-2012 academic year for those Norfolk schools inspected the outcomes were as follows (show % of all Norfolk inspections) and [show a % of the phase]: Phase Number Outstanding Good Satisfactory Notice to Special Inspected Improve Measures All Through 1 0 0 0 0 1 (0.9%) [100%] Primary 98 7 (6.1%) 40 (35%) 44 (38.6%) 3 (2.6%) 4 (3.5%) [7.2%] [41%] [44.9%] [3.1%] [4.1%] Secondary 11 1 (0.9%) 4 (3.5%) 3 (2.6%) 1 (0.9%) 2 (1.7%) [9.1%] [36.4%] [27.3%] [9.1%] [18.2%] Special 4 1 (0.9%) 3 (2.6%) 0 0 0 [25%] [75%]
During this academic year 7 schools were removed from categories.
Norfolk School Inspection data for 2011 Academic year – By Term Schools Inspected 17/09/2011 – 16/12/2011 Number Notice to Special Inspected Outstanding Good Satisfactory Imp Measures Primary 39 3 12 19 21 Secondary 3 02 0 00 Special 3 12 0 00 All through 0 00 0 00 42 4 16 19 21
Schools inspected 04/01/2012 -30/03/2012 number Notice to Special Inspected Outstanding Good Satisfactory Imp Measures Primary 30 1 13 13 11 Secondary 3 00 1 11 Special 1 10 0 00 All through 1 00 0 01
34 2 13 14 23
Schools inspected 16/04/2012- 20/07/2012 number Notice to Special Inspected Outstanding Good Satisfactory Imp Measures Primary 33 1 13 15 03 Secondary 5 02 2 01 Special 1 01 0 00 All through 0 00 0 00 38 1 16 17 04
Agenda Item Report Title Action Number 11 Children’s Services Youth Offending Team figures including any Integrated Performance reductions in first time offenders. and Finance Monitoring Report for 2012-2013
Response:
First-time Entrants: First time entrants’ data from the Police National Computer (PNC) covers the period April 2011 to March 2012 and is over 5 months after the period to allow for known delays in populating data onto PNC (a national issue). However, for this period and compared to the same period during 2010/11 first time entrants have fallen by 28.4% based on a measure that is expressed as a per 100,000 population (10 to 17 yr olds) rate. The Norfolk rate of 731 per 100,000 population is now only a little higher than any comparator rate (eastern region on 715, Nationally 712), but it must be remembered that this is in spite of 66.6% decreases since 2007 (better than all comparators) when it was at a historic high, where it was approximately 10% higher than all comparators, following Norfolk Constabulary’s success in offences brought to justice targets. This current year rate of reduction is much better than the national average (19.5%), much better than our family of other YOTs (10.1%) and better than the regional average (25.7%)
YOT data for the 12 month period from July 2011 to June 2012 shows a 29.62% reduction in first time entrants compared to the same period in 2010/11, but this is provisional and needs to be confirmed in November following a routine resubmission of data to the Youth Justice Board at the end of October.
Reoffending rates: The data released covers the period October 2009 to September 2010 and shows an increase of 1.6% since October 2008 to September 2009. However it should be noted that our performance is very similar to the regional average (1.2%) and better than the family of YOTs and the national averages (3.6% and 2.3% respectively).
Use of Custody: For July 11 to June 12 the rate was 0.45 per 1000 (10 to 17 yr old) population, exactly the same as the equivalent period in 2010/11. This is significantly below the National comparator rate (0.79) and the same as the regional rate (0.45).
Education, Training and Employment: Performance has improved dramatically during the first quarter this year compared to 2011/12 (77.3% compared to 64.7%).
Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel 8 November 2012 Item No.
Forward Work Programme: Scrutiny
Report by the Director of Children’s Services
Summary This report asks Members to review and develop the programme for scrutiny
1. The Programme
1.1. The Outline Programme for Scrutiny has been updated to show progress since the 20 September 2012 Overview and Scrutiny Panel.
1.2 Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel can add new topics to the scrutiny programme in line with the criteria below: -
(i) High profile – as identified by: Members (through constituents, surgeries, etc) Public (through surveys, Citizen’s Panel, etc) Media External inspection (Audit Commission, Ombudsman, Internal Audit, Inspection Bodies)
(ii) Impact – this might be significant because of: The scale of the issue The budget that it has The impact that it has on members of the public (this could be either a small issue that affects a large number of people or a big issue that affects a small number of people)
(iii) Quality – for instance, is it: Significantly under performing An example of good practice Overspending
(iv) It is a Corporate Priority
1.3 All Overview & Scrutiny Panel members may put forward considered proposals for a future scrutiny review. Such proposals will need to include supporting information and an outline of the objectives that may be achieved. The Scrutiny Planning Group will consider all proposals in the light of the guidance contained in paragraph 1.2 above and seek further information where necessary. The Group will then report back to the Panel recommending approval to add items to the scrutiny forward programme on the basis of their relative priorities.
Originated by Mick Sabec 2012-10-11 version: final
2 Section 17 – Crime and Disorder Act
2.1 The crime and disorder implications of the various scrutiny topics will be considered when the scrutiny takes place.
3 Equality Impact Assessment
3.1 This report is not directly relevant to equality, in that it is not making proposals that will have a direct impact on equality of access or outcomes for diverse groups.
4 Any Other implications
4.1 Officers have considered all the implications which members should be aware of. Apart from those listed in the report (above), there are no other implications to take into account.
Action Required
(1) To consider the attached Outline Programme and agree the scrutiny topics listed and reporting dates.
(2) The Overview and Scrutiny Panel is invited to consider whether there are any further new topics for inclusion on the scrutiny programme in line with the criteria at para 1.2.
(3) To approve the terms of reference (appendix 1) of the scrutiny review of safeguarding looked after children missing or at risk of missing from care
Officer Contact
If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with:
Name Telephone Number Email address
Mick Sabec 01603 223499 [email protected]
If you need this report in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Yvonne Bickers on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
2
Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel
ACTION REQUIRED Members are asked to consider the current forward work programme (table 1) and agree:- whether there are topics to be added or deleted, postponed or brought forward; the briefings, scrutiny topics and dates below.
Table 1: Current Forward Work Programme Item 1a Looked After Children: being healthy Outline To ensure that the issues identified in the OFSTED inspections are Objective addressed and improvements are made. Requested by Overview & Scrutiny Panel September 2011 Update Working with colleagues from Health, significant progress has been made in addressing the key issues identified in the OFSTED inspection relating to health care for Looked after Children. A paper was considered by the Panel at its meeting on 5 July where it was agreed that the assessment of the need for any further scrutiny be referred to the Scrutiny Planning Group
Item 1b The take up of school meals & free school meals Outline Highlight the reasons why young people are not taking school meals. Objective Identify any key factors where improvements will result in a significant increase in the number of meals taken. Requested by Overview & Scrutiny Panel March 2010 Update A report was made to the Panel at its meeting on 7 October 2010 on work completed by a cross departmental project examining all aspects of school catering. Changes in legislation scheduled for October 2013 will have an impact on the eligibility for free school meals. A further report on current eligibility and take up will be presented to the Panel at today’s meeting.
Table 2: Current reviews being undertaken by working groups of Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel Item 2a Safeguarding looked after children missing or at risk of missing from care
Objective To examine the current situation relating to Norfolk children who are in care and consider whether any improvements to current safeguards, processes and procedures are required Membership Shelagh Hutson, Judy Leggett, Judith Virgo, Andrew Boswell, Mervyn Scutter, Observers Tom Garrod, Phil Hardy Update The first meeting of the scrutiny working group took place on 24 October. At that meeting the scope of the review and the programme of work were agreed. The working group also drafted terms of reference for the review (appendix 1) and recommends that these are approved by the Panel. The next meeting of the working group has been arranged for 27 November.
3
Appendix 1 Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel Overview & Scrutiny Working Group Terms of Reference
Safeguarding Looked after Children missing or at risk of missing from care
Membership of the working group Cllr. Shelagh Hutson (Chairman) Cllr. Judy Leggett Cllr. Judith Virgo Cllr. Andrew Boswell Cllr. Mervyn Scutter Observers Cllr. Phil Hardy Cllr.Tom Garrod Officer Support Mick Sabec Peter Ronan Lee Napper Reasons for establishing the working group 1. In the light of recent high profile cases, to examine the effectiveness of the safeguards that are in place for Norfolk Looked after Children missing from care. 2. To determine whether existing safeguards and risk management are effective and adequate and whether they require strengthening. Purpose and objectives of the working group 1. To clearly establish the scale and the level of risk of the issue in relation to Norfolk Looked after Children missing from care. 2. To identify any areas where there is a need tighten and improve safeguards for Looked after Children placed in Norfolk and out of county. Issues and questions to be addressed: 1. What is the scale of the issue for Norfolk Looked after Children both in terms of numbers and level of risk? 2. How effective are current processes relating to children in care who run away or are abducted? 3. What measures are in place to safeguard Looked after Children at risk of being missing from care? 4. How do we safeguard and protect Looked after Children from sexual grooming or exploitation? 5. What steps are taken to manage and mitigate the risks to a child who runs away and is missing from care? 6. What lessons can Norfolk learn from recent cases involving other local authorities? 4
Outcomes: 1. The identification of any recommended improvements to Norfolk safeguards for Looked after Children missing or at risk of missing from care. 2. The implementation of any necessary changes in processes and procedures to improve safeguards for Looked after Children missing or at risk of missing from care.
Deadlines and timetable: 1. Working group meetings of up two hours to commence from November 2012. 2. Report back to Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel by March 2013
Terms of Reference agreed by Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel: Date:
5
Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel 8 November 2012 Item no
Children’s Services Integrated Performance and Finance Monitoring Report for 2012-2013
Report by Director of Children’s Services
Summary This report sets out how Children’s Services is performing against the top-level activities set out in the Service Plan and provides up to date integrated performance and finance monitoring information based upon available information for Quarter1 2012/13.
The report uses the dashboard approach, presenting information on managing change, managing our resources, service performance, and delivering improved outcomes. The report also sets out the variations between the approved budget for 2012/13 and the actual spending during the year. The paper comments on the Children’s Services Revenue Budget, Capital Budget, School Balances and Children’s Services Reserves and Provisions.
Overall we are in most areas sustaining performance whilst implementing extensive transformational change. Key performance areas to highlight are: Since April over 3,500 initial assessments have been completed in Children’s Services and over 72% of these were completed within ten working-days Over 1,100 core assessments have been completed over the first half of this year 80% of our looked after children are placed in Norfolk with the average cost of placements averaging £46,850 per year, a reduction of, on average, around £850 per year since April 2012.
The main financial points within the paper are: The Children’s Services revenue budget shows a £0.000 million or 0.0% projected underspend for the year. The Schools Budget variations are contained within the approved contingency fund. The Children’s Services capital budget shows a £0.004 million or 0.0% projected underspend for the year. The level of projected school balances at 31 March 2013 is £30.460 million. The level of projected balances and provisions at 31 March 2013 is £15.931 million
Recommendation Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel is asked to note and comment on the information contained in this report. 1 Background
1.1 Children’s Services has an overall budget of £153.792m. The paper sets out the variations between the approved budget for 2012/13 and the actual spending during the year and comments on the Children’s Services Revenue Budget, Capital Budget, School Balances and Children’s Services Reserves and Provisions. It also provides monitoring information against Norfolk County Council’s performance framework, reporting progress for 2012/13.
1.2 The Children’s Services Performance dashboard is attached as Appendix 1 and gives a high level view of the departments’ performance. This dashboard reflects the performance information from three additional service dashboards which focus on Safeguarding; Corporate Parenting; Educational Achievement, Improvement and Additional Needs which are reviewed at monthly management discussions. A cross section of the information from the departmental dashboards informs discussion at Chief Officer Group of the Council-wide dashboard.
2 Delivering the transformation and improvement programme
2.1 The Children's Services Transformation Programme consists of a number of projects delivering key organisational change within the service to deliver the savings of £17.426m required from the 2011 Big Conversation proposals. The transformation Programme also includes the capital schools programme.
2.2 The Children’s Services transformation programme continues its radical reshaping of services throughout 2012/13. These changes will result in staff reductions and other staff transferring to the new providers of children’s centres. The capacity and capability of teams delivering this transformational work is being assessed to ensure that the right skills are in place to sustain this level of change. The 2012/13 programme will look to realise efficiency savings of £10.173m.
2.3 During the second quarter of 2012/13 the following progress has been made: 11 Lots of Children’s Centres were transferred to new providers as planned on 1st July 2012, and the remaining 15 Lots were implemented by 1st October. New Bure Valley School, Aylsham held opening on 29 June. Denominational School Transport – fully implemented from end of July 2012 and the new post 16 school transport policy has been implemented. A further phase of the triage working (NCC, Police and Health), multi-agency safeguarding hub (MASH), went live as planned on 30 July. This also includes a collaborative partnership with the NCC CareConnect team. This phase gives a childcare safeguarding focus and will provide a seamless service for external stakeholders, children and their families. The Additional Children’s Home at The Lodge, Harvey Lane received Ofsted approval and opened on 6 August. Contract awarded to consortium led by Ormiston Children & Families Trust for commencement of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) on 1 October. Special Educational Needs devolved funding to schools has been completed. An upgraded booking and resource management system for the Integrated Education Advisory Service went live in August and live to schools in September. 2.4 The Overall assessment of the programme is currently amber due mainly to resource issues and some uncertainty of achievement of benefits savings for two projects.
3 Managing our Resources
3.1 Revenue – Local Authority Budget The original 2012/13 Children’s Services revenue budget was £149.265 million. This has been increased to £153.792 million as a result of £5.000 million additional Looked After Children funding, offset by a reduction of £0.473 million of unused 1% pay inflation. There is no Local Authority funding of schools as they are funded completely by the Dedicated Schools Grant.
This year end monitoring report shows a projected £0.000 million or 0.0% revenue budget underspend for the year.
3.1.1 The following summary table shows by type of budget, the actual spend for the year. The table shows the variance from the approved budget both in terms of a cash sum and as a percentage of the approved budget.
Revenue – Local Authority Budget Division of service Approved Forecast Forecast Forecast +Over/ Variance in budget Outturn +Over/- Underspend as % forecast £m £m Underspend of budget since last £m report £m Spending Increases Southwark 0.000 0.150 +0.150 n/a Judgement - Homelessness Looked After 24.001 24.757 +0.756 +3 Children - Agency Residential /Kinship 1.474 1.784 +0.310 +21 payments LAC Service Level 4.828 5.028 +0.200 +4 Agreements
Spending Reductions School Pension 4.484 4.098 -0.386 -8 /Redundancy costs Looked After 0.855 0.705 -0.150 -18 Children Transport Legal costs 4.187 4.037 -0.150 -4 Clinical 0.400 0.270 -0.130 -33 Commissioning Team School Crossing 0.401 0.351 -0.050 -12 Patrols Early Years 22.272 21.722 -0.550 -2 Services
Total 0.000 3.2 Revenue – Schools Budget
3.2.1 The Dedicated Schools Grant funds the Schools Budget. The Schools Budget has two main elements, the amounts delegated to schools and the amounts held centrally for pupil related spending. The amount delegated to schools includes a contingency which was allocated to schools for specific purposes.
The Dedicated Schools Grant can only be used for specified purposes and must be accounted for separately to the other Children’s Services spending and funding.
3.2.2 Variations on Dedicated Schools Grant Funded Budgets The variations are presented in the same way variations within the budget for Local Authority services are being reported. The following summary table therefore shows budgets with in year variances, the actual spend for the year. The table shows the variance from the approved budget both in terms of a cash sum and as a percentage of the approved budget. The table also shows movements in the variations since the last report.
Revenue – Schools Budget Division of Approved Forecast Forecast Forecast Variance in service budget Outturn +Over/- +Over/ forecast £m £m Underspend Underspend since last £m as % of report budget £m
School 1.773 1.373 -0.400 -23 Maternity School staff 0.176 0.336 +0.160 +91 redeployme nt 3 and 4 year 16.152 16.545 +0.393 +2 old Early Years places Dedicated -452.561 -453.310 +[0.749] -0 Schools Grant School 1.032 1.628 +0.596 +58 Contingency Fund
Total 0.000
3.3 Capital Programme
2012/13 Future Years £m £m Approved Budget 80.696 52.455 Forecast Outturn 80.692 52.455 Variation from Approved Budget -0.004 0.000
The 2012/13 approved capital budget contained £55.600 million of estimated payments in 2012/13. Since approval the approved budget has increased by £25.096 million to 80.696 million. This is due to additional funding of £36.369, including funding for Thetford and King’s Lynn Academies and slippage of £15.778 from prior years. The projected 2012/13 outturn based on the latest monitoring information is £80.692 million.
This year end monitoring report shows a projected £0.004 million or 0.0% capital budget underspend for the year.
All funding has been committed to individual schemes and programmes of work. The reasons for the variance is analysed in the following table.
Capital Programme – Variances Scheme or Approved Forecast Slippage Reasons programme of work 2012-13 2012-13 since the capital capital previous budget outturn report £m £m Wymondham 0.000 0.006 0.006 Overspend to be Primaries – funded by developer Developer contributions Contributions Norwich Free 0.015 0.005 -0.010 Savings on project School costs
Total -0.004
3.4 School Balances 3.4.1 The Scheme for Financing Schools in Norfolk sets out the local framework within which delegated financial management is undertaken. In respect of budget plans the expectation is that schools submit budget plans: at the end of the Summer term, taking account in particular the actual level of balances held at the end of the previous financial year; at the end of the Autumn term, taking account in particular of staff and pupil on roll changes; and if necessary, during the Spring term.
3.4.2 Based on budget information provided by schools the original projection of balances is as follows: School Balances as at 31 March 2013 Title/description Original forecast balance at 31-03-13 £m
Nursery schools 0.111 Primary schools 15.931 Secondary schools 9.214 Special schools 1.368 School Clusters 3.836
Total 30.460
3.5 Children’s Services Reserves and Provisions A number of Reserves and Provisions exist within Children’s Services. The following table sets out the balances on the reserve and provision in the Children’s Services accounts at 1 April 2012 and the balances at 31 March 2013.
The table has been divided between those reserves and provisions relating to Schools and those that are General Children’s Services reserves and provisions.
Children’s Services Reserves and Provisions
Title/description Balance at Forecast Variance Reason for variance 01-04-12 balance at £m £m 31-03-13 £m Schools Transport Days 0.332 0.690 +0.358 Reduced number of Equalisation Fund home to school/college transport days in the 2012/13 financial year as a result of the timing of Easter. Schools Contingency 5.9 Additional contributions Fund 18 6.51 +0.5 to fund 4 96 Schools Non-Teaching 0.147 0.082 -0.065 School becoming an Activities Academy Building Maintenance 0.000 0.000 0.000 Partnership Pool School Sickness 1.559 0.000 Insurance Scheme 1.55 9 School Playing surface 0.442 0.472 Additional annual sinking fund +0.03 school contributions to 0 the reserve
Education Provision 0.022 0.022 0.000 for Holiday Pay Non BMPP Building 1.564 1.564 0.000 Maintenance Fund Norfolk PFI Sinking 1.766 1.447 -0.319 Sinking fund Fund
Schools total 11.750 12.350 +0.600
Title/description Balance at Forecast Variance Reason for variance 31-03-12 balance at £m £m 31-03-13 £m Children’s Services IT Earmarked 0.478 0.378 -0.100 Use of the reserve to Reserves support IT projects within Children’s Services Repairs and Renewals 0.302 0.25 - Use of fund to replace Fund 2 0.050 assets Grants and 3.451 2.95 - Use of reserves Contributions 1 0.500
Children’s Services 4.231 3.58 - total 1 0.650
Total 15.981 15.931 -0.050
4 Organisational Productivity Overall, organisational productivity remains stable, despite continuing significant pressures on our workforce as the challenges of major service transformation are managed alongside uninterrupted frontline delivery. Sickness levels appear to be on the decline although we are just heading into the winter period when historically we see a rise.
We have undertaken a successful national recruitment campaign and following interviews have made a number of job offers which if accepted by the candidates will reduce our dependency on agency staff in our frontline teams.
5 Reducing our energy consumption
5.1 Figures for last year (2011/12) show that Norfolk County Council has achieved a 17% reduction in energy use from the baseline figure and school buildings have achieved a 14.6% reduction so far. Children’s Services is currently assessed as on track to achieve its Carbon Reduction Commitment.
5.2 An Action Brief with key milestones to achieve through to September 2013 has been discussed with key project leads – these include annual building efficiency visits to schools by Norfolk Property Services, setting up data league tables via the e-sight system, school cluster training and the development of a school communication plan linked to future work priorities.
5.3 A school-specific external website has been created which sits alongside the corporate external site ‘Low Carbon Norfolk’. The carbon reduction team are working with ICT services to ensure that the Carbon Reduction Commitment is recognised within the ICT Solutions Strategy and establish school guidance for ICT energy use.
6 Risk Management
6.1 The departmental risk register is reviewed quarterly by Children’s Services Leadership Team to ensure it reflects those key business risks that need to be managed at a departmental level and which if not managed appropriately, could result in the department failing to achieve one or more of its key objectives and/or suffer a financial loss or reputational damage.
6.2 Currently there are ten risks on the Children’s Services register, five are assessed to be amber with a risk score of 12 or more and these are shown on both the Children’s Services Dashboard and the Corporate Risk Register. Mitigating actions are in place to manage the risks for these.
7 Quality and Performance of Services
In this section a summary of the latest information on service performance and quality for Children’s Services is provided based on the objectives of the service plan and the performance dashboard which is attached as Appendix 1.
7.1 Supporting Parents and Early Years
7.1.1 The majority of early year’s settings continue to be judged good or outstanding. Of the 327 private, voluntary and independent early years providers in Norfolk inspected as at 1 September, 2012 (excluding children’s centres), 275 (83.6%) day care nurseries and pre-schools are rated by Ofsted as outstanding or good with the remainder rated satisfactory and none inadequate. Of the 580 child minders inspected, 434 (75.2%) have Ofsted gradings of outstanding or good, 146 are satisfactory and the remaining 164 have yet to be inspected. Only 20 of the 54 children’s centres have been inspected to date with 4 judged outstanding, 11 good and 5 satisfactory.
7.1.2 The emerging theme from the inspections of the five satisfactory children’s centres is to improve targeting provision and support to those groups and families most in need of intervention and support in their geographical catchment areas.
7.1.3 A common theme that has been identified through our monitoring processes is that the early years settings do not always have contingency plans in place for when the designated safeguarding person or manager is away from the setting. To address this a guidance folder called Safeguarding in Early Years and Childcare’ has been produced with partners including the Norfolk Children Safeguarding Board and distributed to all early years and childcare settings in the county. A more comprehensive training programme is also being delivered to support settings to meet the enhanced safeguarding requirements.
7.1.4 Overall the number of young children achieving a good level of development at the end of reception year in Norfolk has continued to improve from 48% of pupils achieving a good level of development in 2009 to 56.8% in 2012. The gap between the lowest-achieving 20% of pupils and the rest of the cohort is smaller (better) than that seen nationally at 30.5% compared to 31.1% for England and exactly in line with the statistical neighbour average. 7.1.5 Average spend per pupil in the Early Years Foundation Stage in Norfolk at £2349 per pupil is very slightly below the average for both England (£2606 per pupil) and among statistical neighbours (£2572 per pupil). The proportion of the Dedicated Schools Grant allocated to early education in Norfolk (4.7%) is also lower than both the England (5.6%) and statistical neighbour averages (4.9%) although there is no correlation that can be seen between average spend and performance achieved.
7.1.6 The take-up of the 3 and 4 year-old entitlement for early education places is in-line with the English average (96%) and is improving in Norfolk. Good progress is also being made towards achieving the targets set for the provision of 2 year-old places by September 2013 and 2014 which is reported in a separate paper to this panel.
7.1.7 As well as early year’s settings, Ofsted also looks at the quality and provision in schools. Ofsted inspection judgements for Early Year Foundation Stage (EYFS) in Norfolk show that the quality of Early Years provision is better than that seen nationally. In 2009, 215 schools out of 317 had judgements of good or outstanding for EYFS (68%). In 2012, 244 schools had good or outstanding judgements (77%).The following table summarises progress in relation to the Early Years Foundation Stage in schools:
Number of schools where Number of schools where % of children making a % of children making a good level of development good level of development has increased since last has stayed the same since Year year last year 2012 168 21 2011 178 10 2010 162 14 2009 146 8
7.2 Supporting good educational outcomes
7.2.1 Outcomes at Key Stage 1 remain broadly in line with the national averages. This year in every aspect Norfolk schools have reported an average of a 1% rise. The best improvement has been seen in boys and in other priority areas including children in receipt of free school meals.
7.2.2 Provisional, un-validated data for Key Stage 2 assessments were reported to the September panel and since then provisional national results have been published which enable Norfolk’s figures to be set in context. Our un-validated data shows that in 2011 the percentage of pupils achieving the expected level of performance for English and Maths has improved, from 2011 results of 77% in English and 76% in Maths to 82.1% in English and 80.6% in Maths in 2012. It is important to note that these are provisional results and are therefore subject to change.
7.2.3 Support for schools of concern by Children’s Services has focused on holding schools to account for narrowing the gaps across a range of vulnerable groups. School advisers indicate that better provision mapping for interventions for children with Special Educational Needs is leading to better outcomes at Key Stage 2. We have yet to see the impact at KS4. 7.2.4 For several years, GCSE results in Norfolk have shown a steady increase in the percentage of young people achieving the ‘gold standard’ which is where a student has to pass five or more exams at a grade C or above including English and Maths. Provisional 2012 GCSE results released by the Department for Education show a slight fall in Norfolk with 54.6% of young people in Year 11 achieving the gold standard compared to 55.4% in 2011, although based on local information this figures this should be closer to 55% at the next statistical release once the data has been updated to reflect and re-takes or grade revisions.
7.2.5 Despite this the proportion of young people gaining five A* to C in any subject has risen by nearly 2 percentage points this year from 71.2% in 2011 to 73.1% in 2012. This is good news as it means that more people in Norfolk are leaving this stage in their education with a higher level of qualification. The overall fall in GCSE gold standard is unfortunately a reflection of the degree of impact that mid-year changes to the grade boundaries in English had upon the grades that pupils achieved. It is estimated that the overall impact of this change may have affected around 518 pupils in Norfolk resulting in an overall figure for the gold standard in Norfolk being 5.5 percentage points lower than it might have been.
7.2.6 As reported at the last meeting, provisional A-level results from Norfolk's maintained schools and academies have remained steady this year with the provisional average total point score per student at 762, compared to an average point score of 755 of last year. The provisional figures do not include results for Norfolk's further education and sixth form colleges.
7.2.7 By using a measure of high attainment (achievement of an A*-B grade at A-level) to compare performance in Norfolk with the previous academic year it can be seen that the percentage of pupils achieving 3 or more A*to B grades has increased fractionally from 26.2% to 26.3%. Early indications suggest that the achievement at A*-B may have fallen nationally. The same is true for the percentage of pupils achieving 2 or more higher grades or one such grade in any of their subjects.
7.2.8 There is a huge diversity in the sizes of schools and in their intakes. In the training and briefings delivered by the local authority we discuss with schools and settings the need to analyse their progress data regarding vulnerable groups which are children who access free school meals, children for whom English is an additional language, Gypsy Roma Traveller children and children with special educational needs and disabilities, as well as the need for schools to look at the outcomes for boys or girls, and for ages within the year.
7.2.9 The number of schools below the floor standard has reduced significantly following an intensive programme of target intervention by the Local Authority. Every school below the floor standard, except those with cohorts of fewer than 11 pupils, has received intervention through an adviser. Eighty per cent of the schools below the floor in 2011 have also had the additional intervention support of a Local leader of Education (a successful Norfolk head teacher). This support has focused on successful strategies to raise standards. All of the below floor target schools have been able to access high level support for improving their tracking of pupil progress through the Educational Achievement, Improvement, Leadership and Governance team, and this has led to higher expectations and better outcomes for children and young people. 7.2.10 Norfolk has for a number of years been considered by the Department of Education as a low excluding authority, we have though a changeable trend from 2007. Provisional data for the academic year 2011/12 shows there were a total of 3925 exclusion incidents (fixed and permanent) which related to 2002 pupils.
7.2.11 Provisionally, there have been 176 permanent exclusions which include 2 at all through schools, 32 at primary phase, 87 at secondary phase, 53 at Academies (including the Free School) and 2 at special schools. The data shows that the reason most pupils are excluded is for verbal abuse/threatening behaviour against an adult, with the next most common reason being persistent disruptive behaviour.
7.3 Safeguarding the vulnerable
7.3.1 There are a number of transformation projects that are redesigning and refocusing the services that protect children from harm. Safeguarding also remains an area of focus for our continuous improvement.
7.3.2 There is a particular focus on early intervention to address an issue which we have identified which has seen the number of Common Assessment Frameworks (CAFs) being initiated in Norfolk reducing. Only 286 CAFs were initiated in the six months to the end of September 2012, compared with 380 in the same period the previous year. We know though that interventions are happening at an earlier age as the average age 1 of those who are the subjects of CAFs has fallen, from 7 /2 years old in 2011 to just over 7 in 2012. The reduction in the numbers of CAFs has implications relating to our Early Help offer and the reasons surrounding the decrease are being looked into by the NSCB steering group and will continue to be a focus of the Early Intervention Transformation Board.
7.3.3 In the six months to September 2012, Children’s Services undertook over 3,500 initial assessments. Over 72% of these (2,650) were completed within the 10 working-day timescales which represents a significant improvement in performance compared to the 2011/12 outturn figure of around 46.1%. Over 1,100 Core Assessments have been taken place over the first half of 2012/13, however only just over 50% (559) of these have been completed within the 35 working-day timescale.
7.3.4 The Norfolk Safeguarding Children Board Annual Report was presented to Cabinet on 5 November www.norfolk.gov.uk/Council_and_democracy/Committees. The annual reports sets out the accomplishments of the Board during the year and includes other relevant information about the NSCB such as the agency profile, summary of outputs including the findings from its review of agencies’ compliance with Section 11 of the Children Act 2004, significant achievements, manpower and financial resources. It identifies areas in which multi agency safeguarding arrangements are working well, those in which further work is needed and the actions planned to improve performance.
7.4 Supporting disabled children, children with additional needs and young carers
7.4.1 Young carers are children and young people who take on a significant caring role, usually to support family members with a long-term illness or disability. Often levels or types of caring can become inappropriate and the physical and emotional burdens frequently have an adverse effect on the young carer's own outcomes. Research evidence shows that young carers are less likely to do well at school, get a job or to experience a varied social life when growing up. 7.4.2 Our Norfolk's "Disabled Parents Protocol" seeks to ensure that parents with long-term illness or disability receive support in their own right which reduces the need for children and young people to provide significant levels of caring, and for young carers to be identified and supported where appropriate.
7.4.3 It is challenging to quantify the exact numbers of young carers both in Norfolk and nationally since many do not readily identify themselves as young carers. The 2001 census recorded that there were 1,927 Young Carers aged below 18 in Norfolk and national research by the University of Nottingham (2010) suggested that there could be as many as 10,000 Young Carers in Norfolk. The Norfolk Disabled Parents Alliance report, “Access all schools”, has suggested there is likely to be at least 1 Young Carer in every class (Ward 2011). The number of carers recorded in the 2011 census will be available shortly.
7.4.4 A range of individual and group work services exist to support young carers in Norfolk. These are mainly either commissioned by the council from the voluntary and social enterprise sector and there are also additional services provided and funded independently by the voluntary. On average Norfolk's specialist young carers services are working with 450 carers under the age of 18 years.
7.4.5 As reported to panel previously the consortium of Ormiston Children & Families Trust in partnership with the Mancroft Advice Project (MAP), and Norfolk and Suffolk Foundation Trust (NSFT) are now providing the targeted (Tier2) Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) in Norfolk. The service is called ‘Point1’ and supports children and young people aged 0-18years.
7.4.6 Partner agencies were invited to a launch event in October which set out further information in relation to this service. A single point of contact free telephone number has is in place which is available Monday to Saturday.
7.4.7 A report setting out further information to the progress and development of the specialist provision for Special Educational Needs in Norfolk is a separate report to this panel.
7.5 Being a good and prudent parent to the children in our care
7.5.1 There are a number of transformation projects which are redesigning the delivery and procurement of services for children in our formal care to ensure value for money for the council and to achieve a sufficient supply of places for looked after children within the County.
7.5.2 The number of looked after children now stands at 1038, an increase of 8 since July. The majority of these children (80%) are placed in Norfolk with the average cost of placements averaging £46,850 per year, a reduction of, on average, around £850 per year since April 2012.
7.5.3 We continue to strengthen local fostering capacity, the Norfolk Fostering Service is currently planning a second “Hope” recruitment campaign to run later in the year, following the success of the May campaign. The service currently supports around 380 carers who provide placements to approximately 430 children & young people, including around 40 placed with friends and family carers. A further 320 children and young people are currently placed with agency foster carers. 7.5.4 Between January and September 2012, fifty new foster carers were recruited to the Norfolk Fostering Service during the same period, a net increase of 26 additional potential placements. The newly-recruited foster carers are, in the main, approved to provide care for the children of family & friends and long-term care for children and young people, while the majority of those who have left offered short-term (respite) care.
7.5.5 The service is currently conducting its first foster carer satisfaction survey, directly asking carers how the service is doing from their perspective and what more it could do to support them further. The consultation runs until late October and the findings will be reported to a future meeting.
7.5.6 The Adoption Action Transformation project is focusing on ensuring Norfolk is well- placed to deliver against the Government’s revised procedures for adoption. Whilst the finalised guidance is awaited from government progress has been made in defining our new business processes for Norfolk Adoption Service in-line with the recruitment and assessment of potential adopters and scoping a new management information system for providing to adoption managers accurate data to enable them to track progress in this key area.
7.5.7 The Quarter 2 Adoption Scorecard from the Department of Education will be published nationally in the autumn. Our provisional analysis of adoptions in 2011/12 shows that there were a small number of children adopted who had been looked-after for between 2 and 3 years. The Adoption Service have recently secured permanence for these children although we are aware that the length of time between them entering care and being placed will affect the timescale shown in the scorecard for the time the adoption process is taking.
7.5.8 Five of Norfolk’s Residential units have been inspected since April and the overall breakdown of the current inspection outcomes for Norfolk’s residential units is: Date & Outcomes Overall Leadership Type of for Children Quality of Safeguardin Unit / Home Inspection and Last and Young Care g Findings Management Inspection People 12/06/2012 Foxwood Good Good Good Good Good Full 20/06/2012 Outstandin Outstandin Marshfields Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Full g g Waterworks 28/03/2012 Good Good Good Outstanding Good Road Interim 09/05/2012 Outstandin Outstandin Frettenham Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Full g g 04/07/2012 Blofield Adequate Good Good Good Adequate Full 28/02/2012 Outstandin Garfield House Good Good Good Good Interim g 24/05/2012 Outstandin Easthills Good Good Good Good Full g The Lodge Awaiting
Inspection 7.6 Developing capacity in communities
7.6.1 In July we updated the panel on the progress Norfolk County Council is making as the lead partner in a multi-agency partnership which aims to establish Norfolk as a restorative county by 2015. There has been significant progress since 2010 and the benefits of restorative approaches have been shown in a number of local arenas including criminal justice, children’s residential units, schools, communities, training and development. Restorative approaches are about challenging behaviour in a way that puts repairing harm done to relationships and people over and above the need to assign blame and punish. In Norfolk we believe that restorative approaches work by building relationships, maintaining relationships and repairing relationships when harm has been caused.
7.6.2 As part of the Member Learning and Development programme, a briefing was provided to members in August, titled 'Natural Justice – no holds barred: supporting the local member role'. An outcome of this session is that we will be looking to increase the amount of communication around restorative approaches and provide access to evidence that support its use. Training in restorative approaches for all NCC staff and members is now available as e-learning via the Learning Hub
7.6.3 Bespoke restorative approaches training has been commissioned for our fostering teams to ensure all staff are trained with the aim that this will form part of the core training requirements for foster carers. We have also commissioned bespoke workshops for professionals who work with people with learning difficulties and disabilities.
7.6.4 Work continues to establish community volunteers linked to Police and District Council Operational Partnership Teams which the County Council will actively support as a means of providing extra resource to support communities to identify and tackle problems using restorative approaches, and reduce demands placed upon agencies. Furthermore, restorative approaches will be a 'golden thread' through all of the Troubled Families agenda. This provides us with the opportunity to develop our work further with communities, families and schools
7.6.5 In the July panel paper we explained how the Norfolk Members of Youth Parliament (MYPs) were planning the Make Your Mark campaign for Norfolk. The campaign will identify the top issues facing young people, with the most popular 5 issues being debated by Members of the Youth Parliament in the House of Commons. This will result in a single issue being adopted as the sole campaigning issue for the UK Youth Parliament in 2013. Norfolk MYPs have carried out a range of engagement activities to ensure that the voice of young people in Norfolk is clearly heard. The MYPs began their campaign with an awareness raising event at the Forum in Norwich, followed by a range of activities in Norfolk secondary schools. The campaign closes in mid October.
7.6.6 Members of the Norfolk In Care Council (NICC) recently spoke to Full Council about the work they have been doing over the past 12 months. This includes providing young people's panels for commissioning and recruitment, supporting research projects, developing and delivering training for teachers and social workers and auditing and identifying improvements for looked after children’s pathway planning. 7.6.7 Care professionals who work for or on behalf of Norfolk County Council were recognised for their work by the children and young people they look after at the Inspirational Adults Awards at the end of August. The awards event gave 5-21 year olds the opportunity to nominate an adult who has worked with them because of the positive work they do and how they have been inspirational to that young person. Over 200 nominations from children and young people in care were received for the 4 categories; Norfolk County Council foster carers, external providers of foster/residential care, other statutory professionals such as health and education and the third sector.
7.6.8 On October 23 the Cabinet Office visited Norfolk County Council as part of a piece of work that they are doing to understand what people think about choice in public services. The council is arranging for a group of young people to talk to them about their experiences. This an opportunity for young people to share their views and influence an important piece of government research, but also to improve their communication skills and understanding of how government affects their lives everyday.
7.6.9 Over 4,500 young people are currently participating in the Duke of Edinburgh Award scheme in Norfolk which is delivered in partnership with Wymondham College, through more than 65 local award groups. Last year more than 1627 new young people enrolled on the scheme, 180 expeditions supported by volunteers took place, 769 young people gained an award, with 51 young people presented with their Gold Award.
7.6.10 Supporting young people into employment, education and training remains a key priority for Norfolk. Work has continued to focus on reducing young people who are not in employment, education or training (NEET) prior to 1 September when the next school leavers are incorporated into the calculations. The numbers of NEET throughout the County is variable (6.2% overall) as at this time we are contacting all Year 11–13 school leavers as part of the Annual Activity and the NEET survey with a view to identifying as early as possible those young people who require targeted support.
7.6.11 Planning for the future and finding work can be a daunting task, particularly in the current economy. A key priority is helping young people into appropriate education, training and employment and giving them the information they need to be able to determine what opportunities exist for them. NCC produces ‘Choices at 16’ and ‘Choices at 17/18’ to help 16 and 17 year olds and their parents/carers to make choices about the right pathway for their future. The Help You Choose website www.helpyouchoose.org has details of courses, training and employment opportunities for 16-18 year olds in Norfolk. This year a number of events have been designed to give young people the opportunity to explore their options and find the right school, college or place of further education to help them gain the qualifications they need.
7.6.12 An example of this was as part of the launch of Apprenticeships Norfolk on 20 September, an Open Day was held in the Forum in Norwich to promote apprenticeships. Eighteen employers and training providers brought stands and provided information and advice to young people and businesses at the event. Norfolk County Council Marketing and Communications team helped promote the event and over 300 young people and 30 businesses attended on the day. Young people and their parents were queuing at the door at 9am and were still arriving at 4pm. Many of these young people were NEET looking for work and training opportunities. In addition the NEET Helpline (telephone 0344 800 8022) arranges for 16-18 year olds who are not in education, employment or training to have contact and support from their local Guidance Adviser.
8 Outcomes for Norfolk People
8.1.1 Two compliments were received in August, one for the Duty Team in Breckland and West and one for the Corporate Parenting team in City and South. The overall number of complaints received during August 2012 (46 complaints received) were in line with the number received in the same month last year. Traditionally at this time of the year we receive an increase in the number of complaints concerning school transport policy, school admissions and special educational needs as parents and carers prepare for the new school year.
8.1.2 Norfolk Fire and Rescue Service is working hard with partners to prevent fires from happening and reduce the impact of fires when they do occur. In September, the 36th Crucial Crew event was held for 9 year 6 pupils from twenty one schools in Norwich. Eleven partner agencies presented scenarios that helped children learn how to recognise an unsafe situation and how to make themselves safe. The Fire and Rescue scenario focuses on the potential causes of fire in a bedroom and teaches children how to react if a fire occurs. Now in its tenth year, Crucial Crew has been attended by 30,000 children and is key to improving fire safety in homes across Norfolk.
8.1.3 Norfolk fire and rescue service has opened a new cadet unit based at Great Yarmouth Fire Safety. The main aim of the Cadet Service is to provide a disciplined environment for young people aged 13 to 18 years of age from all sectors of society to learn basic fire service skills and core values. This in turn leads many young people to continue their involvement with the Service by joining either retained or whole time service.
8.1.4 Norfolk’s Paralympic Flame Event was held on Saturday 25 August at the UEA SportsPark. The event welcomed a part of the national Paralympic Flame to Norfolk with a civic reception, have-a-go activities and showcasing Paralympic sports. Approximately 150 adults and children with physical and sensory disabilities and learning difficulties attended the event.
8.1.5 The Norfolk Sports and Cultural Foundation, a fund to support the county’s most talented young athletes and artists, closed for applications in September. Over the last four year around 40 young people aged 14-25 have received financial support from the programme of up to £5,000 per annum, and we have been able to support the fund for a further year (2013) to find the next generation of Norfolk’s talented young individuals. Funding decisions will be made in December 2012.
8.1.6 A report that will look at the legacy of the London 2012 Games of Norfolk and Norfolk's 2012 programme is being developed, and the success of Children's Services 2012 programme will form a part of this. A Survey Monkey questionnaire has been sent to all schools to tell us how they celebrated the Games and how the school engaged with London 2012's Get Set programme as a whole. The result from this work is expected in January 2013.
8.1.7 Norfolk's roads have been getting safer, with a long-term downward trend in the number of people killed or seriously injured (KSI) in road traffic accidents. Despite figures remaining under target, there was a short term increase between January and May 2012. In response to this an innovative new Norfolk road safety campaign, using targeted local advertising to urge road users to keep their mind on the road, was launched at County Hall on in September 2012.
8.1.8 Recently published national figures show teenage conceptions in Norfolk continue to decline. For the three months to June 2011, there were 103 teenage conceptions in Norfolk, a rate of 29.1 conceptions per 1,000 15-17 year-old females. The 207 teenage conceptions in Norfolk between January and June 2011 represents 39 fewer teenage conceptions when compared to the same period in 2010 and the average rate of conceptions of 31.5 per 1,000 is the lowest for Norfolk since recording began in 1998.
8.2 Other Implications
8.2.1 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) There are no specific implications. The information included in this report represents activity as agreed as part of the Council’s wider strategic agenda to address inequality over the medium to long term.
8.2.2 Impact on Children and Young People in Norfolk The performance framework reflects the increased emphasis on efficiency and value for money, and the need to balance the demanding change agenda with continuing to deliver good quality critical services as effectively and efficiently as possible. The financial changes outlined in this report are designed to minimise the impact on children and young people and maximise the allocation of resources to priority areas.
8.2.3 Any Other implications Officers have considered all the implications which members should be aware of. Apart from those listed in the report (above), there are no other implications to take into account.
Section 17 – Crime and Disorder Act There are no specific implications.
9 Risk Implications / Assessment Risks to achieving our key priorities are contained within the risk registers. These continue to be monitored and reported regularly to Chief Officer Group and to the Audit Committee. Actions to mitigate risks are frequently part of project and other performance management actions and are referred to where relevant throughout this report.
10 Action Required Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel is asked to note and comment on the information contained in this report.
11 Background Papers Children’s Services Service Plan
12 Officer Contact If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with: Owen Jenkins tel: 01603 223160 [email protected] Katherine Attwell tel:01603 638002 [email protected]
If you need this report in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Yvonne Bickers 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (Textphone) and we will do our best to help.
Children’s Services Performance Dashboard Overview and Scrutiny Appendix 1 November 2012 Managing Change – Delivering Norfolk Forward Managing Resources Overall Assessment of Transformation Programme Status – September 2012 Managing the budget Value Alert Overall assessment of programme status AMBER Revenue: projected outturn overspend/(underspend) compared to budget £0m [0%] GREEN Transformation Projects - September 2012 (Aug) Target £153,792,000 Additional Needs GREEN Capital: projected outturn overspend/(underspend) compared to budget (Aug) £-0.004m [0.0%] GREEN School Transport GREEN Projected cashable efficiency savings (2012/13) (Aug) Target: £8,693m £8,139m GREEN Eastern Region Sector Led Improvement Programme GREEN Procurement Children’s Centres AMBER LAC Unit Costs (Average placement cost per LAC per Year) (Aug) £46,856 GREEN GREEN MASH Sustainability GREEN Norfolk Children’s Social Work Reform [A] Carbon dioxide emissions (kg) from property - % change from previous GREEN GREEN Capital Schools Programme year for Children’s Services (non-school) and Buildings NIEAS – Norfolk Integrated Advisory Service (Traded Service) GREEN Organisational Productivity Looked After Children AMBER [Q] Staff Performance (reporting sickness absence actual days per FTE); Family Support Service & Safeguarding GREEN Children’s Services – non-school staff (Q2) 1.77 ICT File Structure AMBER Children’s Services - school staff (Q2) 0.71 Employment and Education Training Project GREEN Staff engagement – composite of resilience; employee advocacy; grievances AMBER CareFirst (Corporate Project) GREEN Staff resourcing – composite of recruitment activity; redeployment; AMBER 0-19 Sufficiency Project (includes 33a Capital & Pupil Place Planning) AMBER redundancy; use of temporary/agency staff; management of change; and LAC Capital GREEN culture change Journey of Child in Social Care GREEN Risk Management - Highlighting progress against actions for mitigating key risks Universal Pathways of a Child GREEN Risk of looked after children budget being overspent – risk score 16 RED Adoption Action Plan GREEN Schools performing below minimum standard fail to improve – risk score 12 AMBER AMBER School Funding Reform Project GREEN Continued failure to carry out sufficient assessments on time or to the desired Early Intervention Strategy Project WHITE quality – risk score 12 GREEN Failure to meet energy reduction targets – risk score 12 AMBER Carbon Reduction AMBER Failure to follow data protection procedures – risk score 12 Quality & Performance of Services – Service Performance Outcomes for Norfolk People Value DoT Alert People’s view on services Value DoT Alert Education Overall satisfaction with services (year to date) GREEN [A] Readiness to start school (Early Years Foundations Stage 2012) 56.8% Complaints - % resolved before formal process (year to date) 76% GREEN [A] Achievement at Primary School (Key Stage 2 Level 4 English & 75% Ombudsman complaints upheld for maladministration (received year to 0 GREEN
Maths 2012) (unvalidated) date) 54.6% Achievement at High School (5 A*-C incl. English & Maths 2012) (provisional) Services to protect young people Value DoT Alert [A] Schools below national floor standards (2012) (23 primary + 3 26 Children feel Safe Good (Inspection findings 2011)
Secondary including 2 Academies) (provisional) Children (under 16) killed or seriously injured on the roads (12months to 32 [Q] Apprenticeships (Q3) 1410 July 2012) Note definition relates to recording & does not generally seriously Child Protection reflect medical examination injured AMBER No.Initial assessments completed & [% within timescale](in-month figure)Aug 764 [68.2] AMBER 1 killed No.Core assessments completed & [% within timescale](in-month figure)Aug 174 [48.3] AMBER Aged 16-19 (July 2012) 43 Corporate Parenting Equalities Looked After Children with relevant plans (PEP, Pathway & Care Plan) AMBER Adequate consideration of culture and ethnicity in planning based Improvement identified Personal Education Plans (Aug) 54.2% on case audits Eligible Care Leavers Pathway Plans (Aug) 45% 80.2% Progress in delivery of service plan actions Care Plans (Aug) Supporting parents to help their children have positive outcomes GREEN Adoption within 12 months of best interest decisions being made (Aug) 63.6% (28/44) AMBER Providing and commissioning partners to develop high quality Early Years Services AMBER Looked After Children placed in Norfolk (Aug) 79% GREEN Creating good learning & educational outcomes for all young people GREEN Vulnerable Young People Making sure vulnerable children and young people are safe in their homes, schools and GREEN [Q] Teenage conceptions per 1,000 15-17 year old girls (Q2 2011) 29.1 GREEN communities and reducing youth involvement in crime Young People Not in Employment Education and Training (Sept) 6.2% [1526] AMBER Supporting disabled children, children with additional needs and young carers to have positive GREEN [A] Achievement of pupils who have a statement (% of L4 KS2 English & 15% outcomes Maths 2012) (unvalidated) Being a good and prudent parent to the children & young people in our care GREEN Quality of Commissioned Services Developing capacity in communities to work effectively with children and young people Children’s Residential Homes placements we place in rated outstanding or 76% GREEN GREEN good Improving organisational effectiveness and driving efficiency through service improvements Schools in Norfolk rated as good or outstanding (July) 59.7% AMBER Children’s Early Years settings in Norfolk rated as good or outstanding ( Sept) 83.2% GREEN Children’s Services Performance Dashboard Overview and Scrutiny Appendix 1 November 2012
Key
Performance DoT - Direction of travel i.e. better or worse than the previous month. Red Performance is worse than the target, action required. Performance has got worse. Amber Performance is slightly off-track. Performance has improved. Green Performance is on target, no action required. Performance has stayed the same. Blue Project Completed White Project has been approved and is in initiation stage
Reporting Most recently available data used; DoT compares to last period, or same time last year. period Unless prefixed by either a [Q] or [A] (representing Quarterly or Annually respectively) each measure is monitored monthly. Unless suffixed by a [Month] name (describing to when the data actually relates) each measures’ data represents the performance in the month immediately prior to reporting.
Year end data / Outturn data that has been reported to Panel previously in the dashboard for the financial year 2011-2012 Managing Resources [A] Carbon dioxide emissions (kg) from property - % change from previous year for Children’s Services (non school) & Buildings
Quality & Performance of Services [A] School leavers going on to higher education (2011) – reported March 2012 [A] PNC First time entrants to youth justice system aged 10-17 rate per 100,000 population
Report to O & S Panel 08 November 2012 Item No…….. Service and Budget Planning 2013/15 for Children’s Services
Report by the Director of Children’s Services
Summary
In September a contextual scene setting report marking the formal start of the Council’s service and financial planning cycle was taken to Cabinet. This set out the final year of our three year savings programme and considered the financial outlook and initial preparedness for 2014 and beyond.
This report sets out the financial and planning context for the authority and gives specific service information for Children’s Services for the next financial year.
This report sets out the demographic, socio-economic and environmental context for the Council, and highlights specific known impacts of new national policy initiatives which are likely to impact on the way the Service does its business and plans its future priorities.
In the absence of detailed information from the Government beyond the current spending review period ending in 2014-15, our prospects beyond that year are less certain but are expected to require further reductions in spending as the Government seeks to balance the public finances.
Action Required
Members are asked to consider and comment on the following;
- The revised service and financial planning context and assumptions - The revised spending pressures and savings for Children’s Services
1 Background
1.1 Following the Council’s largest ever consultation, the Big Conversation, undertaken in autumn 2010, the Council agreed in February 2011, a three year programme of work to reshape the role of the County Council and to deliver savings needed to meet the Government’s planned spending reductions. In 2011 – 12, Children’s Services delivered £25.206m of saving and in the current financial year, 2012 – 13, we are planning to deliver savings of £10.173m.
1.2 This programme of work was embedded into the existing Norfolk Forward programme of work, which covers all organisational, service transformation and efficiency projects. As part of last year’s planning cycle the forward plans were reviewed and changes were reflected in the budget plans approved in February 2012 by the County Council.
1.3 This paper marks the formal start of the Council’s service planning cycle, for the time horizon 2013-15, which will consider in detail the plan for 2013 -14 (the final year of our three year financial savings programme developed from the Big Conversation) and any known service priorities for the two years beyond. It reports the planning context for future years to enable the service to prepare and support early development of longer term work plans and reflects on the progress made so far in the agreed three year programme of work. It also reports changes affecting the context for this year’s medium term planning.
1.4 This paper brings together for Panel Members the following:
Revised financial and planning assumptions agreed by Cabinet in September to inform the Council’s budget proposals A review of the progress made to date by Children’s Services within the planned three year programme. The revised budget position for Children’s Services based on updated financial forecasts and budget proposals for emerging cost pressures, new savings and revisions to future savings currently within the three year plan A detailed list of the updated costs and pressures facing Children’s Services A detailed list of updated proposals for savings Known priorities for the department within the next service planning round 2013-15
2 Financial and planning context
2.1 The context for the County Council’s three-year planning was set out by Cabinet in its report in September 2012, when it also confirmed its commitment to the Council’s core role and strategic objectives. The themes are largely unchanged from previous years, since they reflect on-going long-term challenges and issues, however there are some national policy changes, set out below, which are likely to impact on the work of the County Council: Healthy lives, healthy people – The Public Health update which was released in July 2011 outlines the leadership role that local authorities will have to play in public health. The paper describes the services that local authorities will commission and how they will inform and advise commissioning across the public health system. Delivery of this important service will continue to present a challenge for some time, especially as the authority and health colleagues develop ways of working alongside maintaining a consistent level of service. Open Public Services White Paper –The paper sets out the vision for public services in the future. It aims to open public services up to more competition and a variety of providers, including the private sector, in order to give more choice and control to service users. At a time when budgets are reducing and the strain on services is increasing, this represents a significant challenge to the way in which services are delivered and communicated to ensure that customers are fully informed to be able to choose service delivery that is right for them. Welfare Reform Act – The Act which was passed in March 2012 makes provision for the abolition of the discretionary Social Fund, currently administered by Jobcentre Plus. As a result, Community Care Grants and Crisis Loans for general living expenses will be abolished from April 2013 and replaced by new local assistance administered by local authorities. This will be a new challenge for the authority and represents a significant shift in the welfare system. Work is currently underway to determine a system that will be both fair and sustainable, ensuring that vulnerable people are not endangered through loss of benefits at a time when it is most needed in their lives. This system will need to be carefully balanced against the need to reduce budgets and get people back in to work where possible. In addition, administration of the system will need to be carefully designed, planned and costed as we can expect several thousand more customer contacts. ‘Caring for our Future’ White Paper - The paper on social care was published, along with other key documents, on the 11 July 2012. It covers various elements of social care including a commitment to introducing a Universal Deferred Payment scheme whereby the cost of care is reclaimed from a person’s estate once they have died, ensuring that they don’t have to lose their home during their lifetime. Although the paper has not been released for long, the challenge around Norfolk’s ageing population and the popularity of the county as a place to retire are well known, therefore any change to the way in which the Council needs to support them will have a significant impact upon the authority. The introduction of a new local government funding system from 2013-14, which will replace the existing Formula grant. The proposal is for a system based on local retention of business rates, which would see increases in funding linked directly to local growth in business rates. A confirmation of the move away from centralised performance and financial monitoring, and towards the self-publication of data to facilitate local public scrutiny of how we deliver services. The Government is keen to embrace payment on results, whether services are provided by the public or private sector. This may affect the way we currently plan and monitor budgets and services 2.2 The financial context for our future planning remains the medium term financial strategy for the Council. This was developed during 2010 to address the anticipated downturn in the prospects for public sector spending and was confirmed in setting the 2012-13 budget. The key elements of the high level strategy focus the Council on: Developing the Councils finances alongside the Council’s changing role in order to ensure it is sustainable within continuing reducing resources Providing funding to manage transformation of services, including managing a reduction in staffing; Managing our capital borrowing to ensure that future financing costs are affordable and sustainable; and Managing our finances tightly and efficiently so that we spend the money we have wisely and well.
2.3 Financial Prospects 2.4 As reported to Cabinet in September 2012, our financial forecasts remain focussed around the national financial framework for 2011-15 set out in the Spending Review 2010 (SR10). In addition, a number of the Government’s policies to review Local Government funding will be implemented from 2013-14, which will impact on our financial plans. No indicative funding settlement has been announced in advance for 2013-14 and we are not expecting any further announcements until November or December this year, when a two year finance settlement for 2013-14 and 2014-15 is due to be announced. 2.5 Currently our main source of funding comes from locally raised Council Tax and Government Formula Grant. From 2013-14, we will no longer receive formula grant. In its place the Government is introducing a new local retention of business rates scheme. The aim of the scheme is to provide local financial incentives to increase business rate income, by enabling councils to keep an element of the business rates collected. However, there will be constraints on how much additional business rates can be retained and critically, the scheme is still designed to operate within the departmental expenditure limits set within the SR10 to ensure that overall local government spending is in line with the deficit reduction plan. Therefore, despite funding changes, the spending review totals set in SR10 remain our best indication of future funding. 2.6 Based on these national forecasts and after making allowance for top sliced funding, such as New Homes Bonus grant , we are forecasting reductions in retained business rates funding of 1.7% in 2013-14 and 8% in 2014-15. As reported to Cabinet in September 2012, the current projected shortfall for 2013-14 is some £36.9m and our preliminary forecast is for a future shortfall in 2014-15 of £51m. A two year settlement is expected in December 2012, providing more certainty of the future funding position for 2014-15. Once the two year settlement is received a review of future plans will be undertaken, which will be subject to future reports to Cabinet and Scrutiny Panels. 2.7 The Local Government Association (LGA) has recently undertaken a review of all future sources of council revenue, including increasing council tax and service spending demand. Their conclusion is that nationally, local government will be faced with a funding gap of £16.5 billion a year by 2019/20, or a 29% shortfall between revenue and spending pressures. The key message from the wide range of information available from the LGA and other commentators is that spending reductions are here to stay for the foreseeable future. 2.8 A review of our financial assumptions and cost pressures has been undertaken and revisions to the original financial forecast were set out in the paper to Cabinet in September. The key financial assumptions are: A 1% pay award in 2013-14 and 2014-15; 2% general inflation and 4% for social care transport costs. Revision of inflation forecasts based on the 2012-13 budget. Some revised forecasts of demographic and legislative costs, however forecasts are likely to be modified over the coming months as more information becomes available, including quantifying the impact of recent Government announcements such as the transfer of funding for central services to schools. Inclusion of known changes to core grants Some provision for uncertainty due to significant funding changes in 2013-14, including the business rates retention scheme, localisation of council tax support and council tax reforms. Continued planning for a council tax freeze in 2013-14 2.9 Overall, the savings required in 2012-13 of nearly £45m are on track to be delivered. 2.10 Since 2011-12, Government support for capital funding has been via capital grant the majority of which is not ringfenced. So far, indicative future year capital grant announcements have only been received for Transport (£25.853m in 2013-14). Capital grant announcements are also expected in December and January.
2.11 Service specific context 2.12 The following covers the main priorities for the department that will form the basis of service planning and budget proposals for 2013 -15. 2.13 Implementation of an Early Intervention Strategy will provide the most effective and financially prudent means to engage with vulnerable families, providing early support to address root causes of difficulties to avoid the need for expensive specialist resources at a later point, when entrenched patterns of behaviour are less receptive to change and harm has occurred. Our commitment to early intervention recognizes the significance of securing the best start in life for children especially in relation to their emotional development and communication and language skills; the crucial significance of good parenting in terms of the impact this has on a child’s life chances; the importance of good universal education to support high attainment; the value of taking a commissioning approach to secure effective working by focusing on what works; and the importance of evidence based performance and performance management. 2.14 The Children and Families Bill is expected to be introduced early in 2013.and will include measures to improve provision for children with special educational needs and disabilities. The intention is to overhaul the special educational needs (SEN) system and reduce delays in the family justice and adoption systems, A statement from the Department for Education (DfE) described the Children and Families Bill as 'the biggest reform in 30 years'. The proposed legislation will replace Special Educational Needs (SEN) statements and Learning Disability Assessments (for 16-25 year olds) with a single, simpler 0-25 assessment process and Education, Health and Care Plan from 2014; require local authorities and health services to jointly plan and commission services that children, young people and their families need; and will give parents or young people the right to a personal budget. 2.15 The continued implementation of safeguarding legislation arising from the Munro recommendations including the Government’s programme of reform in respect of the Family Justice Review. The aim of the review is to improve the system so it is quicker, simpler, more cost-effective and fairer whilst continuing to protect children and vulnerable adults from risk of harm. 2.16 A requirement for the County Council to fund 2,000 childcare places across Norfolk for disadvantaged two year olds will be introduced in September 2013. This will be followed with a further 2,000 places to be created by September 2014, to provide 40% of Norfolk’s two year olds with their funding entitlement. This represents a considerable challenge as a lack of capacity in areas of deprivation remains an issue, particularly in Norwich with few available places for 2 year olds to attend. Funding for this has been moved by the DfE to form part of the Dedicated School Grant and there is expected to be a deficit in funding 2.17 The continued expansion of Academies within Norfolk will have consequent impacts for the funding of local authority education and related services. 2.18 The Education and Skills Act 2008 legislated to increase the age of compulsory participation in education or training to 17 in 2013 and 18 by 2015 (Raising the Participation Age ‘RPA’). The question as to whether there are enough funded places to meet the demand for 16-19 year olds and to meet the requirements of RPA is complex. Although it has the responsibility to ensure that young people in their areas participate, the LA is not necessarily the provider of places and needs to work in strategic partnership with a number of direct providers. 2.19 A new funding mechanism for all schools, including Academies, is being introduced, from April 2013. This is an interim mechanism as the Government prepares the way for a national schools funding formula, to be introduced during the next spending review period. The consequence of the new methodology is that Local Authorities will have less discretion in setting a local funding formula. In Norfolk, this means that the benefits that certain types of schools have accrued from a locally tailored formula (e.g. for small schools or for schools with small infant classes) will disappear. The smallest high schools and medium sized primary schools will see a significant budget reduction. The DfE has also published plans for changing the funding formula for 16- 19 provision which it implemented from September 2012 for the 2013/14 academic year. It is moving from the current basis of funding schools and colleges on per qualification and per qualification passed to funding them on a per student basis. This will lead to a major redistribution of resources, so transitional protection of funding per student will be required for at least three years. Following the Government’s “School Funding Reform - Next steps towards a fairer system” document was issued Norfolk County Council has worked closely with the Department for Education to highlight the potential impact for Norfolk. This included Alison Thomas, Cabinet Member for Children's Services, writing to Education Secretary Michael Gove to express concerns and meeting with Minister of State David Laws, which involved local MPs, County Council representatives and head teachers. As a result of this the Department for Education has written to confirm that a review will be taken in early 2013 to understand the impact of the new formula arrangements to enable necessary adjustments to be made to prevent unacceptable consequences for schools. The Department for Education also confirmed that the Minimum Funding Guarantee will continue beyond 2014-15, although the rate of protection will not be confirmed until after the next spending review.
2.20 The DfE is consulting on several changes to the way that the fostering and adoption systems work. This includes a shorter two-stage approval process for adopters and a fast track procedure for approved foster carers and previous adopters.
2.21 Families have always been an area of focus for all the services we deliver. The challenge in recognising that families come in many shapes and forms can make service provision a difficult balancing act, especially when involvement can come at a very difficult time for individuals. The Troubled Families programme was introduced in response to the Prime Minister’s challenge in November 2011 to turn the lives of 120,000 troubled families around by 2015. The Department fro Communities and Local Government will pay upper tier local authorities up to £4,000 per eligible family on a pay-by-results basis if they reduce truancy, youth crime and anti-social behaviour or put parents back into work. 2.22 The new Public Health system for England will come on line on 1st April, 2013. At the same time, the Health and Well-being Board will become statutory supported by the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA). Local Healthwatch will also be going on- line at about the same time. It will be incumbent on the LA to highlight needs and promote the health and well-being of children, particularly vulnerable children, within this new structure. The new system will include the right to advocacy for vulnerable groups. 2.23 Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) will be elected for every police force area in England and Wales outside London in 2012. They will be at the vanguard of the Government’s crime and policing reforms and are part of a programme of work to decentralise control and to put the public in the driving seat. PCCs will need to work with a broad range of organisations and the local authority will be a vital partner. In addition to a focussed role in scrutinising the Commissioner through Police and Crime Panels, local authorities and elected members will need to work closely with commissioners as partners. They will share an interest in improving outcomes and services in a range of areas from community safety and youth justice to health and safeguarding. One early implication of the new arrangement is that the Home Office element of the Youth Justice Grant will be transferred to the PCC from 2013/14 meaning the Youth Offending Team (YOT) will no longer receive these funds. 2.24 The Children’s Services Service Plan will provide the ‘golden thread’ between the County Council Priorities and the priorities of Children’s Services. The plan also contains the key areas that are monitored via the Children’s Services Performance Dashboard. The measures included in the Children’s Services Performance Dashboard reflect those that are considered to be the most critical in relation to quality and performance of the service and outcomes for people. Actions in the service plan are aligned to improving performance for each of these measures. Our service objectives will continue as set out in the Children’s Services Service Plan 2012-15, as follows: Supporting parents to help their children have positive outcomes. Providing and commissioning partners to develop high quality Early Years Services. Creating good learning and educational outcomes for all young people. Making sure vulnerable children and young people are safe in their homes, schools and communities and reducing youth involvement in crime. Supporting disabled children, children with additional needs and young carers to have positive outcomes. Being a good and prudent parent to the children and young people in our care. Developing capacity in communities to work effectively with children and young people.
3 Financial and service planning for 2013-15
3.1 In evaluating the progress made so far in delivering current year savings and putting in place actions to deliver planned future savings, Cabinet agreed that the Chief Officers planning for 2013-14 should continue to implement the final year of the three year programme of work approved by the County Council in February 2011. 3.2 Cabinet also asked Chief Officers to continue to seek opportunities for new efficiencies and improved ways of working to deliver the Council’s new core role. Where Chief Officers identify additional cost pressures and/or changes to savings for 2013-14 these will need to be reported to Cabinet and to Scrutiny Panels in November together with the implications for the overall funding position. 4 Review of progress within the current three year programme and proposed changes 4.1 The progress made by Children’s Services towards delivery of savings for 2012-13 has been reported to Panel within the integrated budget and monitoring reports, and we are currently forecasting £10.173m of the savings and a £153.792m budget. 4.2 Looking ahead the service has revised forecasts of future year cost pressures as part of the overall council wide review. 4.3 Planning assumptions show continued pressure for spending on looked after children placements through a steady increase in the number of children entering the service. Changes in policy and practices are in place to deliver the savings across the two years for 2012-13 and 2013-14. The key to ensuring the future management of this cost pressure is the work being undertaken to reduce the level of looked after children within the service and entering the service. However, such intervention work takes time to embed and due to this the savings related to looked after children remain a key risk area for the service. 4.4 Changes to legislation made by the Government in March of this year reduces the time that Local Authority’s have to place a child in an adoption placement. Evidence shows that every week of delay in giving young children a stable long-term home, harms their development and means they are more likely to develop behavioural and attachment problems. To assist with this there will be legislative changes made to allow the process to be completed at a greater pace, however in order to ensure that the Local Authority meets the new Government targets investment needs to be made developing prospective adopters. It is anticipated that the increased speed of adoption will result in a reduction in placement costs. 4.5 The Early Intervention Grant (EIG) replaced a number of centrally directed grants to support services for children, young people and families. The grant is not ring-fenced, allowing greater flexibility and freedom at local level, to respond to local needs, drive reform and promote early intervention more effectively. However, DfE states the grant includes ‘sufficient money…to retain the network of Sure Start children’s centres, accessible to all but identifying and supporting families in greatest need’. DfE also indicates that the grant can be spent on free early education places for disadvantaged two year olds, short breaks for disabled children and targeted support for vulnerable young people, families with multiple problems and mental health in schools. 4.6 The Department for Communities and Local Government has recently released illustrative funding allocations for 2013/14, which sees the 2013/14 EIG amount reduce down to £23.47m from £32.186m in 2012/13. This is as a result of the increased requirement for providing two year old education and care being funded from the EIG allocation and an amount being top sliced nationally for central Government use funding early intervention and children’s services. This is the first indication that we have had of the impact of the funding arrangements for the 2013/14 EIG on Norfolk. 4.7 Whilst we wholeheartedly support the policy for two year old education we are very concerned that the amount of money being transferred and ringfenced within the Dedicated Schools Grant for this purpose is significantly greater than is currently being spent and will be at the expense of other early intervention work in Norfolk. This transfer, together with a decision to retain £150m of early intervention funding centrally, equates to a 17% cut in Early Intervention Grant. 4.8 The changes to the EIG have been consulted on by the Government as part of the proposed changes to the funding arrangements as set out in 2.5. Further planning will be undertaken as the results from the consultation are known. 4.9 Savings plans are progressing as set out in the approved plan in February 2011 with four exceptions. 4.10 Legislative changes haven’t occurred as expected meaning that processes cannot be changed for conducting child death reviews (B17). These proposed changes are being offset by driving out efficiencies in legal and transport costs for looked after children. 4.11 A number of efficiency savings have been delivered through ensuring that business support is used where appropiate. This has meant that it has not been possible to deliver all of the savings initially planned through the reduction in management support, although the planned savings from the reduction in Assistant Directors has been made (B14 & B19). The shortfall in these savings is being offset through savings from redundancy costs through a more efficient redeployment process. 4.12 The Local Authorities contribution to study support community projects have been ended as planned in 2012-13 and as such no further saving will be made in 2013-14, instead this made up as part of the efficiencies in legal and transport costs for looked after children. 4.13 To mirror the commitment to early invention, the service level agreements related youth and communities that were due to be ended (B18) are planned to continue for 2013-14 through a reprioritisation of the early intervention grant. This may have to be reviewed due to the changes highlighted in 4.5. 4.14 Revised cost pressures and savings are detailed in Appendix A.
5. Other Implications 5.1 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) There are no specific implications. The information included in this report represents activity as agreed as part of the Council’s wider strategic agenda to address inequality over the medium to long term.
5.2 Impact on Children and Young People in Norfolk The performance framework reflects the increased emphasis on efficiency and value for money, and the need to balance the demanding change agenda with continuing to deliver good quality critical services as effectively and efficiently as possible. The financial changes outlined in this report are designed to minimise the impact on children and young people and maximise the allocation of resources to priority areas.
5.3 Any Other implications Officers have considered all the implications which members should be aware of. Apart from those listed in the report (above), there are no other implications to take into account.
6. Section 17 – Crime and Disorder Act There are no specific implications.
7. Risk Implications / Assessment Risks to achieving our key priorities are contained within the risk registers. These continue to be monitored and reported regularly to Chief Officer Group and to the Audit Committee. Actions to mitigate risks are frequently part of project and other performance management actions and are referred to where relevant throughout this report.
8. Action Required
Members are asked to consider and comment on the following;
The revised service and financial planning context and assumptions The revised spending pressures and savings for Children’s Services
9. Background Papers Children’s Services Service Plan
10. Officer Contact If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with:
Owen Jenkins tel: 01603 223160 [email protected]
Katherine Attwell tel:01603 638002 [email protected].
If you need this Agenda in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Yvonne Bickers 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
Proposed budget changes for 2013/14 Appendix A
Ref Description of cost pressures or service improvement - 2013-14 shown against the key driver for the additional costs £k COST PRESSURES AND SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS Basic Inflation - Pay ( 2012-14 -1% ) 500 Basic Inflation - Prices (General 2%, School and social care passenger transport 4%) 2,691 Development of Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub 125 Sub Total Inflation 3,316 Government/Legislative requirements Recruitment of a higher number of adopters 150 150 Demand/Demographic Looked After Children - increased residential and foster care agency provision 2,081
Sub Total Demographics 2,081 Costs specific to actions to meet County Council Plan targets/service delivery strategies Cost of Capital Borrowing 1,011
Sub Total County Council Plan 1,011 TOTAL COST PRESSURES AND SERVICE IMPROVEMENT 6,558 Ref Proposed action 2013-14 Estimated Saving (£k) Efficiency savings B2 Reduction in staff as a result of a smaller capital budget for building projects 169 B19 & Full year effect of reduction in Assistant Directors and B14 support as a consequence of redesign of services. 245 No inflation allocation for existing early retirement costs 115 More efficient processes for Looked After Children leading to reduced transport and legal costs 79 Reduction on costs in Looked After Children through increased speed of adoption 150 B18 Reprioritisation of Early Intervention Grant to ensure continuation of existing Service Level Agreements 1,386 Reduced school redundancy costs through improved use of redeployment and fewer maintained schools 351 Removal of 2012-13 1% pay award 473 Sub total 2,968 Procurement efficiency savings Home to School Transport - procurement / efficiency savings 1,000 Sub total 1,000 Service reductions B1 No new borrowing to supplement government grant for capital projects in schools 1,011 B6 Re-design and re-shape special education support service, so that fewer statements of special education need are required. 340 B3 Full year effect of 2012-13 reduction to the subsidy for school and college transport for those aged 16 and over 317 B4 Full year effect of 2012/13 home to school transport savings (halt denominational transport; end funding of transport in exceptional circumstances and achieve efficiency savings) 39 B7 Full year effect of 2012/13 reduction in the scale and capacity of the attendance service 17 B8 Reduce the scale and capacity of improvement and intervention services for schools 867 B10 Reduce the Council's contribution to the funding of the schools music service and performing arts service, and outdoor education service 55 B9 Reduce the scale and capacity of the supply of schools places service. 60 B15 & Reduce the scale and capacity of services to support looked B16 after children 859 B18 Full year effect of recommissioned Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) 357 Reduction in the County Council's partnership contribution to the Youth Justice Service 152 Sub total 4,074 TOTAL SAVINGS 8,042
Net position -1,484
Report to Children’s Services O & S Panel 8 November 2012 Item No……..
Free School Meals Update
Report by the Director of Children’s Services
Summary At the last meeting of the Panel it was agreed that a paper would be provided to update members on likely timescales for changes to benefits which may affect Free School Meals Entitlement.
The Government has indicated that Universal Credits will be phased in from October 2013 and the Government has identified 12 pilot authorities in the North West which will introduce universal credit from April 2013.
The Government are still considering how free school meals will be dealt with under Universal Credit.
The paper also provides an analysis of free school meals entitlement over time by geography, type and phase to assess whether the link to Pupil Premium has increased numbers of entitled pupils.
Recommendation: The Panel is asked to consider the report and determine whether any further information is required when the new arrangements for free school meals eligibility are determined and to defer consideration of undertaking a scrutiny review until after the new arrangements for free school meals eligibility have been implemented.
1. Background
1.1 The take up of schools meals and free school meals has been an item on the scrutiny forward programme since March 2010. In October 2010 the Panel received a report on the work of a cross departmental project on all aspects of school catering. At that time it was noted that a further report would be required on the take up of free school meals after the impact of proposed changes in legislation was known. 1.2 Children are eligible to receive free school meals if their parents are in receipt of any of the following benefits:
Income Support Income-based Job Seekers' Allowance Income-related Employment and Support Allowance Support under Part VI of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 the Guaranteed element of State Pension Credit Child Tax Credit, provided they are not also entitled to Working Tax Credit and have an annual gross income of no more than £16,190, as assessed by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs.
1.3 The Government introduced pupil premium funding for schools from 2011/12 to provide additional funds for disadvantaged pupils and this is largely based on eligibility for free school meals. In 2012/13 this amounts to £600 per eligible child and from 2012/13 the funding has been extended to include children who have been eligible for free school meals at any time in the last 6 years. The Department for Education (DfE) actively encourages schools to facilitate parents registering their eligibility for free school meals to maximise access to additional resources for disadvantaged pupils. Pupil premium is also payable for Looked After Children who have been in care for at least 6 months and at a lower rate of £250 for children of armed forces families. 1.4 The Government is developing Universal Credit to replace many existing benefits and it will be a new single payment for people who are looking for work or are on a low income. 1.5 The new Universal Credit will be introduced for new claimants from October 2013 with existing claimants transferring to Universal Credit between 2013 and 2017. 1.6 The government is still considering ways to simplify access to other benefits including free school meals which are currently linked to benefits that will cease when Universal Credit comes into force.
2. Current position
2.1 The report provides comparative statistics on free school meals eligibility recorded on DfE pupil census returns for all pupils attending Norfolk schools.
2.2 Analysis of pupils who are eligible for free school meals by phase of education:
Autumn Spring Summer Autumn Spring Summer Phase 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 Primary 8,204 8,969 8,602 8,064 9,229 9,490 Secondary 5,449 5,252 5,079 5,292 5,562 5,584 Special 354 348 352 344 355 361 Total 14,007 14,569 14,033 13,700 15,146 15,435 Total on roll in all schools 108,878 109,493 109,362 108,876 109,399 109,453 FSM as % of all pupils on 12.9% 13.4% 12.9% 12.6% 13.9% 14.2% roll in all schools Primary 14.0% 15.2% 14.6% 13.6% 15.5% 15.8% Secondary 11.2% 10.7% 10.4% 10.9% 11.5% 11.6% Special 33.2% 32.4% 32.9% 32.7% 33.5% 33.9%
2.3 Analysis of pupils eligible for free school meals by type of school: The Local Authority has not had access to pupil census returns for academies since their conversion but this has recently started to be made available by the DfE. Percentages of pupils eligible for FSM have been used to provide comparisons between years as academy data is not available for earlier years.
Autumn Spring Summer Autumn Spring Summer School type 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 Maintained 10.8% 11.3% 10.9% 10.5% 11.7% 12.0% Special 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% Academy 1.9% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.9% 1.9%
2.4 Analysis of pupils eligible for free school meals by District Council area:
Autumn Spring Summer Autumn Spring Summer 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 Breckland 11.9% 12.2% 11.5% 11.4% 12.3% 12.6% Broadland 8.1% 8.2% 7.4% 7.0% 8.3% 8.6% Great Yarmouth 17.7% 19.0% 18.5% 18.5% 20.3% 20.5% King's Lynn 12.9% 13.2% 12.7% 12.3% 13.7% 14.1% North Norfolk 11.7% 12.2% 12.3% 11.5% 12.9% 13.3% Norwich 22.3% 22.9% 22.5% 22.3% 23.3% 23.5% South Norfolk 8.2% 8.3% 8.1% 8.1% 9.1% 9.3%
Given the significant differences between areas information has also been obtained showing the percentage of adults of working age claiming benefits.
Working age: % % eligible for claiming benefits (Feb- FSM Summer 12) 2012 Census Breckland 13.1% 12.6% Broadland 10.2% 8.6% Great Yarmouth 22.5% 20.5% King's Lynn And West Norfolk 16.0% 14.1% North Norfolk 14.6% 13.3% Norwich 15.8% 23.5% South Norfolk 10.5% 9.3% Norfolk 14.5% 14.2%
2.5 Analysis of take up of free school meals by school phase: Norfolk’s current school funding formula distributes funds for free school meals based on the average number of pupils receiving free school meals in the previous academic year. This will not be included as a funding factor from 2013/14 so the data will no longer be collected. The data for the latest 3 years available is shown below.
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 O/a increase 2008/09 – 2010/11 Primary Schools inc. 6,071 6,612 6,861 790 Academies Percentage increase - 8.9% 3.8% 13.0% Secondary Schools inc. 3,335 3,802 3,928 593 Academies Percentage increase - 14.0% 3.3% 17.8%
3. Conclusions
The proportion of pupils eligible for free school meals has increased over the period and it is likely that schools actively encouraging parents to confirm eligibility has had an effect. The majority of the increase relates to primary aged pupils.
The analysis by District Council area shows significantly higher levels of eligibility in the main urban areas of Norwich, King’s Lynn and Great Yarmouth. The significant differences between areas follow the pattern of benefit claimants with the exception of Norwich. There is no information in this summary data to indicate why this is the case.
The most recent take up information indicates that around 77% of eligible pupils take up their entitlement based on 2010/11 data and take-up has increased over the 3 year period. Again most of the increase has taken place in the primary phase.
4. Resource Implications
4.1 Finance:
The pupil premium is calculated as an additional schools grant and funding for free school meals is currently based on take up of free school meals from the previous year and is funded from the dedicated schools grant.
4.2 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA)
Entitlement to free school meals is a state benefit to support low income families. The recent introduction of pupil premium provides additional funds to schools based on entitlement to free school meals to give additional financial support for schools to meet the needs of the most disadvantaged.
4.3 Impact on Children and Young People in Norfolk
The provision of free school meals provides valuable support to low income families. In a recent pilot in Newham and Durham where all primary aged pupils were given free school meals pupils achieved higher educational attainment than comparator groups.
4.4 Any Other implications
Officers have considered all the implications which members should be aware of. Apart from those listed in the report (above), there are no other implications to take into account.
5. Section 17 – Crime and Disorder Act There are no specific implications.
6. Action Required
6.1 The Panel is asked to consider the report and determine whether any further information is required when the new arrangements for free school meals eligibility are determined. 6.2 The Panel is asked to defer consideration of undertaking a scrutiny review until after the new arrangements for free school meals eligibility have been implemented.
Background Papers Department of Work and Pensions guidance on Universal Credit: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare-reform/universal-credit/
Officer Contact
If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please contact:
Officer Name: Richard Snowden Tel No: 01603 223489 Email: [email protected]
If you need this report in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Yvonne Bickers on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
Report to Children’s Services O & S Panel 8th November 2012 Item No……..
Developing Free Early Education Places for Two Year Olds Report by the Director of Children’s Services
Summary The Government plans to introduce a new targeted entitlement for two year olds to access free early education. This is part of the Government’s Fairness Premium, to drive up social mobility and improve life chances. The primary focus will be on disadvantaged children, who are currently less likely to access the benefits of early education.
The new entitlement will be implemented in two phases. In September 2013 (Phase One) Norfolk has a target to provide 2,000 free early education places for disadvantaged two year olds. From 2014 (Phase Two), the entitlement will be extended to a further 2,700 two year olds.
This report outlines the progress made by the Local Authority in response to the forthcoming statutory duty. The Children’s Centre Lot areas have been used as the sub geographical areas on which to base development. These areas have been ranked in terms of priority using selected criteria so that resources can be focused on the areas of greatest need. In Phase One (2013/2014) twelve priority areas have been identified.
Recommendation: The Children’s Service Overview and Scrutiny Panel are asked:
1. To agree the twelve priority areas of development for Phase One. 2. To receive an update on progress on Free Early Education Places for Two Year Olds in January 2013, as part of a report on 0-19 Sufficiency (Local Growth & Investment Plan).
1. Background
1.1 In 2008, Norfolk County Council Children’s Services began delivering a scheme of free early learning and childcare for children who are in the 20% most economically disadvantaged families in Norfolk. The scheme was initially a pilot, however, due to the success of the scheme nationally provision of free early education places for disadvantaged two year olds is to become a statutory requirement from September 2013.
1.2 Children become eligible for a place the term after their second birthday. Children receive up to 15 hours per week free early learning and childcare. Families are eligible if: They meet the eligibility criteria also used for free school meals (annual gross household earnings of no more than £16,190 and receipt of various benefits); or Their families receive Working Tax credits and have annual gross of no more than £16,190; or The children are currently being looked after by the Local Authority, or recently adopted.
Item 12 Free Early Education Places.docPage 1 of 7
1.3 There are currently 700 children accessing a two year old place in Norfolk, but not all of these children take up the full 15 hours entitlement. Over the next twelve months we need to increase take up by a further 1,300 children to reach our target of 2,000 places by September 2013. As a local authority we will be measured on take up.
1.4 Currently the two year old places are funded through the Early Intervention Grant. In the financial year 2012/2013 revenue funding of £1.7 million has been allocated to cover the expansion.
1.5 Norfolk’s current rate of funding for providers to deliver 2-year old places is £4.85 per hour which was the standard rate specified for the pilot in 2008. This now requires review in consultation with providers. From April 2013 funding for the free early education places for two year olds will be going into the Dedicated Schools Grant.
1.6 The approved Children’s Services capital budget 2012/2013 includes £1 million towards implementation of the strategy.
1.7 The DfE have recently confirmed that further capital funding will be made available to local authorities to support this expansion – but the allocation for Norfolk has still to be announced.
1.8 The development of two year old places for the most economically disadvantaged families in Norfolk fits with the following strategic priorities by:
Supporting parents to help their children have positive outcomes
Providing and commissioning partners to develop high quality Early Years Services
Creating good learning and educational outcomes for all young people
Supporting disabled children, children with additional needs and young carers to have positive outcomes
Developing capacity in communities to work effectively with children and young people
1.9 This Project also links with our early help and early intervention strategy by focusing on the most disadvantaged two year olds.
1.10 Earlier reports to Panel in January 2012 and July 2012 highlighted the emerging pressure on the supply of places in early years settings, due to the introduction of the new statutory requirement.
2 The Childcare Sufficiency Project
2.1 Ensuring a sufficient supply of high quality early learning and childcare places is a key role for us as a local authority and forms part of our statutory duty under the Childcare Act 2006. The Childcare Sufficiency Project was created in response to the new statutory requirement of providing free places for two year olds. The project was integrated into the wider 0-19 Sufficiency Project which is recognised as one of the Big
Item 12 Free Early Education Places.docPage 2 of 7 Conversation Transformation projects to ensure a sufficiency of learning places across the County.
2.2 In order to focus resources on the areas of greatest need in Phase One (2012/2013) priority areas for development have been identified. The Children’s Centre Lot areas have been used as the sub geographical areas on which to base development. These areas have been ranked based on a number of indicators to identify the twelve priority areas.
2.3 The following indicators were used per Children’s Centre Lot and weighting applied.
Indicator Description Weighting Early Years This data is based on educational attainment figures 1.5 Foundation Stage from 2011. For each Lot area the percentage of children achieving 78 points at Early Years Foundation Stage plus 6+ in PSE (Personal Social and Emotional development ) and CLL (Communication, Language and Literacy) - a “good level of development” - is calculated based on the residential postcode of the child. Out of Work This dataset if from May 2010 and represents the 1.5 Households number of children aged 0-5 dependent on a parent or guardian who is claiming one or a combination of the following out-of-work benefits: Income Support, Jobseeker's Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance, Incapacity Benefit and Severe Disablement Allowance, and Pension Credit. This DWP (Department for Work and Pensions) data is compared to actual 0-5 population numbers from 2011 to arrive at a percentage for each Lot, and these are then ranked. Penetration Rate This calculation gives a feel for the number of Early 1.5 Years places in a Lot area compared to the number of children. The calculation divides the total number of Ofsted registered 0-5 year old places offered by Providers in the Lot area (Ofsted data) by the total number of 0-5 year old children resident in the Lot area (health data), multiplied by 100 to give a percentage. The Lots are ranked by this percentage. Number of 2 Year This is based on health data, and gives the number of 0.5 Olds children resident in the Lot area aged 2 as at March 2012. Eligible 2 Year Based on health data, this is the number of 2 year olds 1.0 Olds 10% Most resident within the 10% most deprived part (according to Deprived the Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2010) of the CC Lot whose date of birth made them eligible to apply for 2 Year Old Funding in Spring 2012, regardless of the wider eligibility factors. Children’s Centres with no deprived area of this type were all given a rank number of 1 to make the scores even.
Item 12 Free Early Education Places.docPage 3 of 7 Indicator Description Weighting Eligible 2 Year Based on health data, this is the number of 2 year olds 1.0 Olds 10-20% Most resident within the 10-20% most deprived part (according Deprived to the Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2010) of the CC Lot whose date of birth made them eligible to apply for 2 Year Old Funding in Spring 2012, regardless of the wider eligibility factors. Children’s Centres with no deprived area of this type were all given a rank number of 1 to make the scores even. Social Care This is extracted from the Norfolk Social Care database 1.0 Referrals 2011 and details the number of children referred to social care in the twelve month period to 31/03/2011. Quality This is based on data from Ofsted, and calculates the 0.5 number of Private, Voluntary and Independent (PVI) Early Years Settings and Childminders within the Lot area whose most recent Ofsted inspection was Good or Outstanding, expressed as a percentage of all PVI Settings and Childminders in the area.
Item 12 Free Early Education Places.docPage 4 of 7 2.4 Applying these indicators and weightings provided the following ranking:
Rank Children’s Centre Lot Total Score 1 CFM CC (Norwich - Catton, Fiddlewood & Milecross) 273.5 2 Great Yarmouth / Greenacre CC 253.5 3 Signpost CC + Woottons + Gaywood N Bank (Kings Lynn) 239.5 4 Seagulls / Gorleston & Hopton CC 238.5 5 North City CC (Norwich) 237.5 6 Bowthorpe, W Earlham & Costessey Area CC (Norwich) 230.5 7 Earlham EY CC (Norwich) 228.5 8 Thetford / Thetford Drake CC 220.5 9 East City & Framingham Earl Areas CC (Norwich) 216.5 10 Thorpe Hamlet & Heartsease / Dussindale CC (Norwich) 212.0 11 Vancouver CC + Springwood (Kings Lynn) 193.0 12 City & Eaton CC (Norwich) 192.0 13 West Walton / Emneth CC 174.5 14 Nar / St Clements CC + East & West Winch 173.5 15 Caister CC + Yarmouth North Ward 164.5 16 Dereham Central / Dereham South / Litcham CC 155.5 17 Wells / Corpusty & Holt / Stibbard CC 147.5 18 North Walsham CC 144.0 19 Watton CC 143.5 20 Hunstanton Area CC 137.0 21 Fakenham Gateway CC 135.0 22 Cromer / Mundesley CC 134.0 23 Attleborough CC 125.0 24 Stalham & Sutton / Broadland CC 123.0 25 Downham Market / Methwold CC 121.0 26 Village Green CC 118.5 27 Spixworth & Sprowston CC 113.0 28 Swaffham CC 110.0 29 Trinity CC 90.0 30 Reepham / Aylsham CC 88.5 31 Diss CC 86.0 32 Harleston / Loddon CC 84.0 33 Long Stratton CC 82.0 34 Wymondham / Hethersett CC 66.0 35 Drayton & Taverham / Hellesdon CC 65.0 36 Acle Area (Marshes) CC 40.5
2.5 Early Years Development Workers will be consulting with Childcare providers and Children’s Centres to develop capacity and increase uptake in these twelve priority areas.
2.6 The project will need to ensure that wherever it focuses development sufficient places need to be available to allow children to transition to a funded 3/4 year old place.
2.7 Two-year olds meeting the eligibility criteria in any of the other Children’s Centre Lot areas will still be entitled to receive a free early education place. It is important to note that the priority areas are where we will initially focus efforts on developing capacity.
Item 12 Free Early Education Places.docPage 5 of 7 3 Resource Implications
3.1 Finance: 3.2 Currently the two year old places are funded through the Early Intervention Grant. In the financial year 2012/2013 revenue funding of £1.7 million has been allocated to cover the expansion. From April 2013 funding for the free early education places for two year olds will be going into the Dedicated Schools Grant.
3.3 The DfE have recently confirmed that capital funding will be made available to local authorities to support this expansion – but the allocation for Norfolk has still to be announced.
4 Other Implications
4.1 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) The Government seeks to enable disadvantaged children to access high quality early education, from age two (a year earlier than the current universal free entitlement). Evidence suggests that only 31% of the most deprived quintile of children access formal childcare at age 2. This excludes many disadvantaged children from the benefits of early education and contributes to gaps in achievement of a “good level of achievement” at age 5 which persist at Key Stages 1 and 2.
4.2 The policy is intended to improve the cognitive, social and behavioural development of two year olds from disadvantaged backgrounds, closing the achievement gap between poorer children and all children (59% of children not eligible for Free Schools Meals (FSM) achieve a good level of development at age 5 compared to 39% of children known to be eligible for FSM, Early Years Foundation Stage Profile 2010). Evidence demonstrates the likelihood of subsequent increases in their achievement at Key Stages 1 and 2 and in lifetime earnings. There are also positive, although less quantifiable, impacts – modelling of positive parenting behaviours; the increase ability of parents to provide a positive home learning environment and a stronger parent-child relationship.
4.3 Communications: The Project’s Communications workstream will develop a communication strategy to ensure effective provider and service user engagement throughout the life of the project.
4.4 Impact on Children and Young People in Norfolk Funding childcare provision for two year olds is intended to increase the take up of funded entitlement at three years and improve Early Years Foundation Stage Profile results, leading to better outcomes for disadvantaged children.
4.5 Any Other implications Officers have considered all the implications which members should be aware of. Apart from those listed in the report (above), there are no other implications to take into account.
5 Section 17 – Crime and Disorder Act
5.1 There are no specific implications.
Item 12 Free Early Education Places.docPage 6 of 7
6 Risk Implications/Assessment
6.1 The Project Board will monitor project high level risks and mitigating activities.
7 Action Required
7.1 Members are asked to:
Agree the twelve priority areas of development for Phase One. Receive an update on progress on Free Early Education Places for Two Year Olds in January 2013, as part of a report on 0-19 Sufficiency (Local Growth & Investment Plan).
Background Papers
Previous Reports to Panel:
The future supply of school, early years and 16-19 places in Norfolk – January 2012 The Forward Planning of Sufficient 0-19 Learner Places – July 2012
Officer Contact
If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with:
Name Telephone number Email Jill Warwick 01603 222646 [email protected] Childcare Commissioning Manager Sarah Spall 01603 224264 [email protected] Head of 0-11 Strategy & Commissioning Manager
If you need this report in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Yvonne Bickers on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
Item 12 Free Early Education Places.docPage 7 of 7 Report to Children’s Services O & S Panel November 2012 Item No……..
Special Educational Needs (SEN) Strategy Update: An update on SEN provision development within Norfolk and direction of travel within the governments new SEN legislative framework
Report by the Director of Children’s Services
Summary
In 2008 / 09 Norfolk County Council Cabinet agreed a Special Educational Needs (SEN) Strategy following a period of extensive review and consultation. Essentially the SEN Strategy focussed on two elements of provision development, building on a continuum of provision that begins with support in local mainstream schools, via the development of:
• specialist resource bases, hosted by mainstream schools • age 3-19 complex needs schools
The implementation of this range of specialist provision was intended to evolve and become established over a 3-6 year period of time; it had always been planned that a ‘mid-term’ review would be reported to Members with the possibility of further provision development taking place during the estimated timeframe of 2012-2015.
Since the strategy was agreed in 2009 there have been many changes, nationally and locally, that have impacted on the planned programme of SEN provision development. This report intends, therefore, to provide Members with the opportunity to comment upon, scrutinise and be informed through commentary on the following elements:
• position statement regarding the provision development that has taken place since 2009 • current project work focussing on reducing high cost ‘out of county’ placements • summary of the governments draft legislation for SEN, within the Children & Families Bill, and the implications for SEN provision within Norfolk in the coming years
It is likely that the government’s plan for an overhaul of the current SEN legislative framework, to be implemented from September 2014, will require a number of reports to be progressed via the Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel onto Cabinet for decision making. Therefore, in part, this report is intended to provide an overview of current SEN developments within Norfolk to ensure that during the course of the next eighteen months Members have a sound basis upon which to test if the changes that we will need to make, within the new duties from government, will improve outcomes for children and young people and increase the confidence of their families in the provision that we co-ordinate for them.
Action Required:
Members are asked to: • comment on the provision development, to date, building on a continuum of provision that begins with support in local mainstream schools, via the development of specialist resource bases, hosted by mainstream schools and age 3-19 complex needs schools
• scrutinise our current plans to reduce high cost ‘out of county’ placements
• agree to receive a series of reports, during the next eighteen months, which will describe the detail of the governments new legislative framework for SEN and the implications for Norfolk
1. Background
1.1 In 2008 / 09 Norfolk County Council Cabinet agreed a Special Educational Needs (SEN) Strategy following a period of extensive review and consultation. Essentially the SEN Strategy focussed on two elements of provision development, building on a continuum of provision that begins with support in local mainstream schools, via the development of:
•specialist resource bases, hosted by mainstream schools •age 3-19 complex needs schools
1.2 Since the strategy was agreed in 2009 there have been many changes, nationally and locally, that have impacted on the planned programme of SEN provision development. This report intends, therefore, to provide Members with the opportunity to comment upon, scrutinise and be informed through commentary on the following elements:
b. position statement regarding the provision development that has taken place since 2009 c. current project work focussing on reducing high cost ‘out of county’ placements d. summary of the governments draft legislation for SEN, within the Children & Families Bill, and the implications for SEN provision within Norfolk in the coming years
To assist Members with the context of SEN provision development needs in Norfolk an extract from our annual statistical return to government, regarding numbers of children with the most complex special educational needs, is provided below:
Number of children, as at 19 January 2012 (and 2009 in brackets), for whom the authority maintains a statement of special educational needs.
a. Under age 5 134 (122) b. Aged 5 to 10 1794 (1852) c. Aged 11 to 15 2662 (2328) d. Aged 16 to 19 193 (238) e. Total (a + b + c + d) 4783 (4540)
Of these children, on the roll of:
a. Non-maintained early years setti ngs in private and voluntary sector 11 (16) b. Resourced provision in LA maintained mainstream schools 0 (22) c. SEN units in maintained mainstream schools 173 (223) d. LA Maintained mainstream schools (including foundation schools) 2731 (2962) e. LA Maintained Special Schools (including foundation schools) 1053 (1024) f. Non-maintained special schools 6 (11) g. Independent special Schools 93 (146) h. Other independent schools 193 (70) i. Hospital schools (including foundation schools) 0 (0) j. Pupil referral units 62 (46) k. Academies (excluding special academies recorded at l below) 393 (20) l. special academies 0 (0)
Total 4783 (4540)
SEN2 statistical return from Norfolk County Council to DfE, January 2012 (2009)
1.3 a. Position statement regarding the provision development that has taken place since 2009
The SEN Strategy agreed via Cabinet in 2009 outlined the plans to remodel the previous ‘learning support unit’ model to a range of ‘specialist resource bases’, hosted by mainstream schools, and to change the designation of the separate ‘moderate learning difficulties’ and ‘severe learning difficulties’ special schools into a model of age 3-19 complex needs schools.
Both of these provision developments (specialist resource bases and complex needs schools) intended to not only change the model of provision but to also change the geographical location to ensure that there was a far better distribution of specialist provision across the county. The maps at Appendix 1 illustrate the distribution of specialist provision in 2008 and the current distribution.
The table below summarises the changes that were planned in 2008/9 to illustrate the merits within the new model of delivery proposed at that time:
Summary of benefits within the new models of specialist provision Specialist Resource Bases Complex Needs Schools Both
No longer requiring children to Removing the previous Relocating provision to provide have Statements of SEN to designation of ‘moderate an equitable spread across the access specialist provision - an learning’ and ‘severe’ learning, whole county early intervention model to make sure children could access their local complex needs school offering a full range of provision
Increasing the number of Ending the different age ranges Providing discrete capital specialist units from 38 to 59 within different types of special funding to build new provision schools, making all complex and refurbish existing provision needs schools age 3-19
Providing specialisms that had Co-location of specialist Increasing the revenue funding previously not been available services within complex needs available to ensure more within special units, eg Autism schools, for example health funded places available across and Behaviour therapy professionals the county
However, during the early stages of the implementation plan a number of external factors made the delivery of the original plan in full difficult to achieve and a number of amendments to the plan took place.
These factors and the implications of these are summarised in the table below:
Summary of changes made within the implementation plan for the new models of specialist provision Specialist Resource Bases Complex Needs Schools Both
Revenue cost pressures : a Government capital Capital cost pressures : a focus reduction in the planned programme reduction : a focus on refurbishment of schools number of SRB’s from 59 to 48 on smaller scale developments with extra capacity rather than within existing special / purpose built in ideal strategic complex needs schools locations Reluctance of some schools to host specialist behaviour difficulties provision : changing the delivery model from mainstream schools to the Short Stay School for Norfolk / Pupil Referral Unit
The following table confirms those elements of the original SEN Strategy / provision development implementation plan that have been completed:
Summary of progress / benefits realised from the original SEN Strategy implementation plan Specialist Resource Bases Complex Needs Schools Both
All SRB’s now operate a Our only special school for Investment in purpose built flexible model enabling pupils Emotional, Behaviour & Social specialist provision, totaling in with/without Statements of SEN Difficulties has retained this excess of £20 million in areas to benefit from both time limited discrete special school of the county that have / assessment placements and designation. previously had limited specialist permanent placements provision, in particular the Our other special schools are North and West of the county. now all designated as complex needs schools and are progressing their individual evolution to this full provision model, with a focus on offering placements to ‘local’ children and contributing to reduced travel times. *
We have invested annual Our special school for pupils We have built seven purpose revenue funding of with Emotional, Behaviour & built SRB’s and expanded approximately £4.5million via Social Difficulties, now provides three special / complex needs 48 SRB revenue streams, £75k Key Stage 1 in addition to Key school provision in the & £95k per year, providing the Stages 2 to 4. following locations: following specialist provision •Cromer x 1 respectively Our 10 Complex Needs •Watton x 1 •Learning Difficulties Schools are now all registered •Dereham x 2 •Dyslexia to provide age 3-19 provision •Kings Lynn x 3 •Language Difficulties and are progressing their •Norwich x 2 & individual evolution to this full •Great Yarmouth x 1 •Autistic Spectrum Disorder age range model, eg Parkside •Behaviour Difficulties school in Norwich is currently piloting post 16 provision in partnership with Hewett High School and City College.
*note: maps will be provided in the Members room to illustrate current range of ‘catchment’ for each special / complex needs school
To provide further context for Members, regarding provision for children and young people with the most complex needs in Norfolk, below is a table which summarises the judgement of Ofsted for each of our special / complex needs schools. This summary highlights the sustained improvement and overall good and outstanding rating of these schools:
School Name Ofsted Judgement Current Ofsted during 2008/2009 Judgement John Grant (Caister) Satisfactory Good Chapel Road (Attleborogh) Outstanding Outstanding Churchill Park (Kings Lynn) N/a Satisfactory – rapidly improving Sheringham Woodfields (Sherringham) Outstanding Outstanding Sidestrand Hall (Sidestrand) Good Good – improving well Fred Nicholson (Dereham) Good Good – improving well Eaton Hall (Norwich) Outstanding Outstanding Clare School (Norwich) Good Outstanding Hall School (Norwich) Satisfactory Good Harford Manor (Norwich) Outstanding Outstanding Parkside (Norwich) Good Outstanding 1.4 b. Current project work focussing on reducing high cost ‘out of county’ placements
The ambitious plans within the 2009 SEN Strategy for the new model of complex needs schools included the relocation and expansion of Chapel Road School (Attleborough) together with plans to build two new schools in Swaffham and Long Stratton; each of these schools would have had capacity for 110 pupils. At the time it was believed that the Building Schools for the Future programme would in time achieve these new school developments.
However, in the current financial climate and the ceasing of significant government capital budget allocations we have concentrated on smaller scale developments within the existing special / complex needs school estate. The key driver for these developments is to reduce the need for high cost placements within the independent and non-maintained sector, often ‘out of county’. These developments are outlined in more detail within section 2. of this report along with commentary on our current plans to realise our number one priority to relocate and expand Chapel Road complex needs school.
1.5 c. Summary of the governments draft legislation for SEN, within the Children & Families Bill And the implications for SEN provision within Norfolk in the coming years
During the summer of 2011 the government published a Green Paper relating to proposed changes to the legislative framework for SEN, ‘Support & Aspiration: A new approach to SEN & Disability’. This consultation paper outlined changes to the entire SEN framework and linked this to support for disabled children also, within the context of age 0 - 25 provision across ‘education, health and care’.
In September 2012 the government published draft legislation, following the outcome of consultation on last years Green Paper, and have signalled that the recommendations / programme within the Green Paper will be implemented via the Children & Families Bill for changes to the current system by September 2014.
Whilst we still await the detail of the changes, via a new code of practice and regulatory guidance, it is possible to say at this stage that there will be significant changes to the way in which the local authority currently provides SEN and Disability services / provision and there will be a need for transformational project work to commence in early 2013 for an eighteen month period; project work that will lead to the need for decision making via Cabinet and, therefore, for reports to be progressed via the CS Overview & Scrutiny Panel. More information on these changes are provided in section 2. of this report; further, a web link to the Ministerial statement provided when the draft legislation was published, is provided within the list of appendices at the end of this report.
2. Contents of Report
2.1.1 Position statement regarding the provision development that has taken place since 2009
In section 1 of this report there is an overview of the main elements of the provision developments planned within the SEN Strategy in 2009, namely the development of specialist resource bases and complex needs schools.
Whilst the SEN Strategy implementation plan, in 2008/9, concentrated on these specialist provision elements, the plan was being shaped and taking place in a context of building upon a continuum of provision which rightly provides for the majority of children and young people with special educational needs (SEN) within their local mainstream school.
This section of the report will outline the changes that have been made to our arrangements for SEN within mainstream schools, to illustrate the changes that have taken place in parallel to the implementation of specialist provision within the SEN strategy. This commentary on the current position within a mainstream school context will also inform the future changes that will occur as a result of the proposed government changes to legislation for SEN and Disability.
This section of the report will also expand upon the summary in section 1 of the report, regarding specialist resource bases and complex needs schools, to provide more information on the implementation plan to date and our intended next steps.
2.1.2 Up to and including the academic year 2008/9 support for children with SEN in mainstream schools had been provided via a combination of formula funding to all schools using a range of proxy indicators, known as the School Specific Allocation (SSA). This funding was intended to support children and young people via School Action and School Action Plus interventions. For children with more complex needs in mainstream schools who had Statements of SEN additional funding was provided via Pupil Specific Funding (PSF). This particular funding scheme had been implemented in 2004/5 and had built upon a model of mainstream school funding that had existed for many years in Norfolk prior to that, essentially providing for all funding on a per pupil basis over and above the first 5 hours per week of teaching assistant support.
2.1.3 As part of the 2008/9 fair funding consultation process this model of funding in mainstream schools was changed to ensure that more funding was available to schools via their SSA formula funding and with PSF allocations being provided where weekly teaching assistant support was required for 20 hours per week or more. This resulted in approximately half of the funding being provided via the SSA formula and half via the per pupil PSF (in 2008/9 approximately £24million in total).
2.1.4 Further changes to the way in which mainstream schools receive funding for SEN were outlined in the Big Conversation consultation process as part of the ‘B6’ proposal. The outcome of that consultation and review process was the decision, taken via Cabinet in January 2011, that 100% of the funding for SEN with mainstream schools would be delegated rather than the local authority continuing to allocate on a per pupil basis. Therefore, as part of the 2011 fair funding consultation process it was determined that the current total mainstream funding for SEN (approximately £31million) would be allocated in part via the previous SSA formula, to individual schools, and with funding for pupils with more complex needs being delegated to school clusters. This approach was designed to reduce the reliance on Statements of SEN as a means of accessing funding and, therefore, reduce bureaucracy and assist early intervention.
2.1.5 This year we have again consulted schools via the fair funding process on further changes to these delegation arrangements, in response to the new school funding regulations introduced by government earlier this year. These new regulations require us to provide more funding direct to schools and, therefore, the approximate £31million available to mainstream schools in Norfolk for SEN provision will now be distributed so that £21million is via formula to individual schools and £10million is via school clusters. In addition we are responding to the outcomes of this years consultation where we outlined plans to delegate the funding for the Learning Support Team to school clusters also (approximately £2million). Recommendations relating to these current proposals are being reported to Members via the Cabinet meeting of 5 November. We anticipate needing to consult schools again in the autumn of 2013 regarding changes that may need to be made in line with the governments planned legislative changes to SEN & Disability, in particular with regard to the concept of personal budgets within an education context.
2.1.6 The new school funding regulations also require changes to the way in which we provide funding for specialist provision. Essentially government are implementing a ‘place plus’ funding model that determines each child with SEN having access to a notional figure of £10,000 regardless of placement type and for children with the most complex needs having access to top up funding. This has resulted in proposals within this years fair funding consultation for specialist resource bases and our funding model for complex needs schools. We do not anticipate that the changes to funding models will impact on our current evolutionary changes for our complex needs schools, as they progress individually to the full complex needs school model, however, we do believe the changes to the funding model for specialist resource bases requires a review and our plans for this have been outlined to schools recently. A copy of the recent Management Information item to schools on this proposal is provided within Appendix 2 of this report for Members information.
2.1.7 Subsequent reports to the Overview & Scrutiny Panel during the course of 2013, linked to the new legislation for SEN & Disability, will provide an opportunity to also report the outcomes of our review of specialist resource bases. However, in order to provide Members at this point in time with further information regarding the implementation of this part of the project and it’s impact on children and young people a brief summary of two of our developments our provided within Appendix 3. This summary illustrates the way in which we have planned, where possible, to develop specialist resource bases in areas of the county where other specialist provision is available in order to begin to develop hubs of specialist provision.
2.1.8 Within the tables in Section 1. of this report there is a summary statement confirming that since 2009 a total of approximately £20million capital has been invested in specialist provision. Approximately £11million was provided for the new complex needs school in Kings Lynn, Churchill Park School, which opened in 2010 and provides 150 places for children with complex needs. The remaining balance of £9million was focussed on specialist resource base development, improvements to the pupil referral unit estate and expansion of specialist provision within some of our special / complex needs schools.
The summary information in Section 1. also highlighted the disappointment regarding the ceasing of Building Schools for the Future capital programme and the subsequent difficulties in achieving further complex needs school development in Norfolk. From an SEN Strategy perspective the development of a new build Chapel Road School (Attleborough) on an alternative site remains the priority and we continue to work closely with the school to consider possible solutions to enable this capital development to be realised.
The Capital Priorities Group has received reports this year regarding Chapel Road School and also regarding progress within the SEN Strategy to date, including investment within current special / complex needs schools to reduce the reliance on high cost ‘out of county’ placements. Members within the Capital Priorities Group have recently ‘earmarked’ a sum of £1.040million, in principle, for SEN purposes, pending the outcome of current further analysis of SEN priorities, including Member views via this report, on our current focus on creating extra capacity within our maintained complex needs schools. Therefore, current priorities for further capital investment remain Chapel Road School and the further development of specialist provision within our complex needs school estate, in addition to those already developed and outlined within Section 2.2.2 / 2.2.3 below, and to increase the range of alternative provision to reduce the reliance on high cost ‘out of county’ placements.
2.2.1 Current project work focussing on reducing high cost ‘out of county’ placements
There has always been a focus on seeking to reduce high cost ‘out of county’ placements for children and young people with SEN and the complex needs school model, within the SEN Strategy, was planned in part to address this issue. For example, the ambitious plan to expand Chapel Road School in a new location and the development of two new complex needs schools in Swaffham and Long Stratton would have provided additional capacity to return, as appropriate, young people already placed out of county and to certainly prevent such high cost placements in the future.
However, since the ending of the building schools for future national capital programme we have focussed our energies on smaller scale developments within our existing special and complex needs school estate, with an increase in the total number of funded places within our special schools of 75, increasing from 1022 in 2008 to a current total of 1097.
This section of the report will outline the provision developments that we have implemented to date, developments in the planning stage and a current procurement exercise which is designed to ensure that costs within this sector are controlled in future and the council achieves the same value for money within the non-maintained and independent sector as we currently enjoy with our maintained special / complex needs schools.
2.2.2 Almost all of Norfolk’s eleven special / complex needs schools have received recent Ofsted Inspections of either Good or Outstanding. In recent years we have been working closely with the Norfolk Association of Special School Headteachers (NASSH) to increase provision within those schools that have the capacity to do so. A focus of this work has been to prevent the need for high cost out of county placements and, where possible, to return children to provision within Norfolk. We remain extremely grateful to all members of NASSH for their continuing exemplary work in this area of our joint working.
The table below summarises where we have increased provision within our special / complex needs schools.
School No. of places Note
Fred Nicholson (Dereham) 12 ‘Orchard House’ Autism day provision
Fred Nicholson (Dereham) 6 general growth
Eaton Hall (Norwich) 10 Key Stage 1 provision
Parkside (Norwich) 10 ‘Pathways’ Post 16 provision
Parkside (Norwich) 3 general growth
Hall School (Norwich) 2 general growth
John Grant (Caister) 15 general growth
Sidestrand Hall (Sidestrand) 6 Clement Lodge’ ASD residential *
Sidestrand Hall (Sidestrand) 5 general growth
Sheringham Woodfields 6 general growth (Sheringham) * provision planned and currently pending outcome of consultation / public notice process
2.2.3 In addition to developing provision within our maintained complex needs schools we have also been developing a commissioning approach to specialist provision in recent years. This approach has taken place across the sectors – maintained, independent and non-maintained – and has enabled evidenced based provision to be developed countywide.
The table below summarises these recent developments:
Provision Type Sector No. of Places Investment
Alternative provision – Maintained / Multi- 18 current East therapeutic disciplinary £336,000 current per year behavioural difficulties 18 planned £336,000 planned per year Central & West
Alternative provision – Independent 80 countywide £1.5million per year behavioural difficulties
2.2.4 Our focus on a commissioning approach is developing further, beyond the purchasing of new provision, with a new procurement exercise which is taking place from November 2012 to February 2013 which will result in a ‘select provider list’ for specialist provision in Norfolk. This procurement will ensure that in future the county council is able to secure value for money across both SEN and LAC placements together with an increased focus on quality assurance. This exercise will ensure that current and future providers of specialist SEN and LAC provision, within the independent and non-maintained sector, do so within a cost and quality framework established by NCC Children’s Services. Currently we ‘spot purchase’ or ‘block book’ provision within this sector with minimal ability to control costs. As this is a current procurement exercise it is not possible to provide further detailed information at this stage.
2.3.1 Summary of the governments draft legislation for SEN, within the Children & Families Bill, and the implications for SEN provision within Norfolk in the coming years
2.3.2 Below is an extract from the Minister’s Foreword which introduced the draft legislation at the start of this academic year:
“Children and young people who have a special educational need or disability deserve the same life chances as every other child. But, too often, the systems that should support them and their families fail them, putting bureaucratic barriers in their way and failing to address their true needs...In May 2012, we published Support and aspiration: A new approach to special educational needs and disability – Progress and next steps. ...provided proposals to reform provision for children and young people with special educational needs or with disabilities...the draft legislation to put those proposals into practice, providing significant improvements to the support provided to children and young people, and to their parents. A single system would ensure children and young people received the support they need regardless of age or where they are taught, providing for them from birth until, where appropriate, their 25th birthday, with comparable statutory rights and protections throughout.
Local authorities in England would be required to work with local health services, to plan and commission support across education, health and social care. They would also be required to set out a local offer of the services available to children, young people and their families.
The current SEN statements and learning difficulties assessments would be replaced by a single assessment process. The resulting Education, Health and Care Plans would provide a commitment from all services to support educational and other outcomes. All young people and parents of children with an Education, Health and Care Plan would have the option of holding a personal budget, giving them greater control over how their support is delivered...”
2.3.3 This draft legislation follows on from last summer’s Green Paper from government, ‘Support & Aspiration: A new approach to SEN & Disability’. The Green Paper set out the government’s intentions for significant reforms to the legislative framework for SEN and Disability and asked for responses as part of the consultation process. Norfolk was exemplary in providing a response as a county, rather than as a Local Authority, due to the fact that the response to the consultation was provided by the Additional Needs & Disability Partnership (with a membership across the statutory agencies, such as the county council and health, in addition to parent groups and school representatives). This partnership has again submitted information to government in response to the draft legislation via the current Education Select Committee call for evidence process. This is of particular importance as we are demonstrating in Norfolk the spirit of the new legislative framework, ie joint working between statutory agencies, parents and schools to co-produce the ‘local offer’ for children and young people with SEN and Disability which the new legislation will require.
2.3.4 The response to the draft legislation from the partnership to government is focussing on our initial views in the following way:
Positive Concerns Questions
Duty for local authorities and Current limited detail on how Will the regulations state which clinical commissioning groups personal budgets, within an professional reports are to joint commission services education context, will operate mandatory for the education, health and care plan assessment, eg educational psychology
Proposing integrated services The green papers’ joint focus Will government be making across education, health and between SEN & Disability changes to teaching training / care appears to be ‘watered down’ professional development to in the draft legislation with a ensure that teaching and focus on SEN and limited detail learning is improved for all regarding disability / care children with special educational needs
Single Plans from age 0 - 25 Plans to make mediation What are the transition across education, health and compulsory prior to Tribunal arrangements, from September care to overcome the hearings 2014, regarding the move from sometimes negative issues of the current systems of transition Statements of SEN and the new Education, Health & Care Plans system
2.3.5 The current timescale within the draft legislation provides for an implementation date of September 2014. From this date it is likely that the current system of statutory assessments and Statements of SEN provided by the local authority for school age children will be replaced by ‘education, health and care plans’ that will be provided from birth and up to age 25, where appropriate. The new system will require joint commissioning and integrated services to be co-ordinated across the statutory agencies, potentially resulting in integrated services across education, health and care and with all services and provision outlined to children and young people and their families within a ‘local offer’. The changes are likely to be significant and will require major change across the SEN system in Norfolk.
2.3.6 We are confident that in Norfolk we will be able to respond to the new requirements and look forward to engaging positively with the new legislation to ensure that we challenge ourselves to continually review our provision and to design new services alongside parents and other partners. It is likely that elements of the new legislative framework will require changes to our systems that will require decision making at Cabinet level and, therefore, we anticipate providing a range of reports to Members via the Children’s Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel throughout 2013 and the first half of 2014.
3. Other Implications
3.1 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA)
Equality impact was a key element of the 2008/9 SEN Review / Strategy work, one of the key drivers of the strategy was the intention to increase the availability of specialist provision across the county and to ensure an equitable spread.
The changes to SEN funding within maintained mainstream schools outlined in this report were subject to Equality Impact Assessment in 2011 as part of the consultation process linked to the Big Conversation (B6) and subsequent transformational additional needs project.
The impact of the governments planned legislative changes to provision / services for SEN & Disability with be subject, locally, to full equality impact assessment prior to reporting to Overview & Scrutiny Panel and Cabinet over the course of the coming eighteen months.
3.2 Impact on Children and Young People in Norfolk
The purpose of the SEN Strategy since 2009 and the subsequent changes to the funding of SEN within mainstream schools has been to promote early intervention strategies, to increase the provision available and to ensure that provision is located and accessible equitably across the county. The impact of the SEN Strategy to date, therefore, is positive and this report has outlined the areas where progress has been achieved against the planned strategy and where we have encountered some difficulties.
It is clear that outcomes for children and young people within our special / complex needs schools continue to improve. However, evaluation of the impact on the new specialist resource base provision is pending and will be reported to Members in subsequent reports planned during 2013.
3.3 Risk Implications/Assessment
Officers have considered all the implications which members should be aware of. Apart from those listed in the report (above), there are no other implications to take into account.
4 Section 17 – Crime and Disorder Act (this must be included)
4.1 There are no direct implications, however, Members are asked to note that there is a strong link between SEN and behaviour and we would hope that an improvement in provision for these young people will have a considerable and longer term positive impact on crime and disorder reduction across Norfolk.
5. Action Required
5.1 Members are asked to:
5.2 Comment on the provision development, to date, building on a continuum of provision that begins with support in local mainstream schools, via the development of specialist resource bases, hosted by mainstream schools and age 3-19 complex needs schools
5.3 Scrutinise our current plans to reduce high cost ‘out of county’ placements
5.4 Agree to receive a series of reports, during the next eighteen months, which will describe the detail of the governments new legislative framework for SEN and the implications for Norfolk
Background Papers
A) Appendix 1 – (a) 2008 SEN provision maps & (b) Current SEN provision maps
B) “Government proposes reforms to SEN system – Ministerial Statement” http://www.education.gov.uk/childrenandyoungpeople/send/sen/b0075344/government- proposes-biggest-reforms-to-special-educational-needs-in-30-years
C) Appendix 2 - copy of MI Sheet to schools for review of specialist resource Bases
D) Appendix 3 - summary of specialist provision developments in Dereham and Kings Lynn
Note: Additional Maps are available to County Councillors within the Member’s Room. These Maps illustrate the geographical location of the home address for children attending all special / complex needs schools.
Officer Contact
If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with:
Michael Bateman Tel No; 01603 223760 [email protected]
If you need this report in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Yvonne Bickers on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
Norfolk County Council at your service
Report to Cabinet 11 August 2008
Results of the Feasibility Studies on the Location of Complex Needs Schools & Specialist Resource Bases – part of the Strategy for Special Educational Needs
Appendix 2 – Location Maps Existing Specialist Provision and Recommended Complex Needs School and Specialist Resource Base Locations Including Number of Proposed and Forecast Complex Needs School Places
Originated by: Michael Bateman Created: 23 June 2008 Originators Ref: App 2 Cab 11Aug08 Location Maps v2 Norfolk County Council at your service SEN Strategy July 2008 - Existing Specialist Provision
! School 34 (! ( 7 !( Mainstream Unit 11 !( 35 !( Special School !(!( 41 (! 30 31 26 !( (! (! A Road 12 B Road 28 10 (! (! (! 3 (! 16 17 (!(! ( 8 (! (! 4 (! (! 44 (! 36 21 !( 45 25 24 !( 15 Norwich
1 43 !( !( !( 5 29 !(
42 !( 77 9 !(!( !( 6 34!( !( 19 !(35 30 !( !( 31 !( 37 2288!(10!( !(!(!( !(16 17 !(!(!(!( 8 !( 40 4 !( 44 21 32 !( 3 45 !( 48 !( 22 33 !( 25 24 !(!( !( 38 23 46 !(!( 18 47
!(!( 2 14
!( 39 13 !( This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of !( Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery 27 Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown 20 !( copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Norfolk County Council. Licence No: 100019340, 20 June 2008
Originated by: Michael Bateman Created: 23 June 2008 Originators Ref: App 2 Cab 11Aug08Date Prin Locationted Maps v2 SEN Strategy - Existing Provision 20 June 2008 Information & Research Centre Scale 1: 398194 [email protected] Ref: C:\GIS_2008\sen\SEN_Strategy\SEN_Strategy2008-06.mxd Centred on 600463 312905 ® Norfolk County Council at your service
Existing Special Schools and Mainstream Units
Numbered Numbered Marker School Marker School 1 Alderman Jackson Special School 25 Colman Junior School 2 Chapel Road Special School 26 Cromer Junior School 3 Clare Special School 27 Diss High School 4 Eaton Hall Special School – BESD 28 Earlham High School 5 Ethel Tipple Special School 29 Flegg High School 6 Fred Nicholson Special School 30 George White Junior School 7 Hall Special School 31 Heartsease Primary School 8 Harford Manor Special School 32 Hethersett High School 9 John Grant Special School 33 Hillside First School 10 Parkside Special School 34 Kinsale Junior School 11 Sheringham Woodfields Special School 35 Mile Cross Community Primary School 12 Sidestrand Hall Special School 36 Millfield Primary School 13 Abbey Junior School 37 North Denes Middle School 14 Attleborough High School 38 Oriel High School 15 Aylsham High School 39 Rosemary Musker High School 16 Bignold Primary School 40 Southtown First School 17 Bluebell Primary School 41 Suffield Park Infant & Nursery School 18 Browick Road Infant School 42 Taverham High School 19 Caister High School 43 Terrington St Clement Community School 20 Charles Burrell High School 44 The Hewett School 21 City of Norwich High School 45 Tuckswood Community Primary School 22 Clackclose Community Primary & Nursery School 46 Watton Junior School 23 Cliff Park Community Middle School 47 Wayland Community High School 24 Colman Infant School 48 Wroughton Middle School
Originated by: Michael Bateman Created: 23 June 2008 Originators Ref: App 2 Cab 11Aug08 Location Maps v2 Norfolk County Council at your service SEN Strategy July 2008 - Recommended Specialist Provision Locations
School (! Complex Needs School !( 27 65 !( !( (! 12 26 Specialist Resource Base !(!(64 41 5 !( 53 57 61 A Road (! 13 !( (! !( 56 25 23 !( !( 24 B Road !( 46 !( !( !(!( 35 Location to be determined 28 (!11 33 36 !( 4 (! 6 17 (! !( (!!( 67 29 !( 8 !( !( !( 68 62 !( 30 47 !( 49 37 !( 31 !( Norwich 59 60 16
!(55 !( 66 40 !(!((! 3 !( 32 63 !( 51
27 65 !( 44 !( !( !( 48 41 5 61 (! 71 !( (! 57 10 !( 19 9 (! 23 !(!( 56 !(!( 46!( !( !(35 58 24 28!( (!11 33 36 2 !((! 6 17 (! !( !( (!!( 67 54 !( 4 8 !( 37 68 !( 72 !( 38 !( 21 !( 50 22 !( 18 69 !( !( 70 !( 39 !( !( 45 7 (! 15 1 42 !( 43
!( 52 14 !( !( 34 This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of !( Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery 20 Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Norfolk County Council. Licence No: 100019340, 27 June 2008
Date Printed Originated by: Michael Bateman Created: 23 June 2008SE N Strategy - Recommended Provision Originators Ref: App 2 Cab 11Aug0827 June 200 8Location Maps v2
Scale 1: 278719 Information & Research Centre Ref: C:\GIS_2008\sen\SEN_Strategy\SEN_Recommended2008-06.mxd [email protected] Centred on 594335 305496 ® Norfolk County Council at your service
Recommended Complex Needs Schools
Location Children’s Current Funded Proposed Funded Forecast Funded Number School Services Area Places Places Places* Complex Needs School in Long Stratton - 1 Exact location to be determined South n/a 73 107 Complex Needs School in Swaffham - 2 Exact location to be determined West n/a 80 134 3 Churchill Park Complex Needs School West 151 151 151 4 Clare Complex Needs School Central 95 68 83 5 Hall Complex Needs School Central 79 68 83 6 Harford Manor Complex Needs School Central 76 67 82 7 Chapel Road Complex Needs School South 63 100 107 8 Eaton Hall Complex Needs School – BESD Central 44 44 44 9 Fred Nicholson Complex Needs School North 95 77 95 10 John Grant Complex Needs School East 120 136 165 11 Parkside Complex Needs School Central 144 68 83 12 Sheringham Woodfields Complex Needs School North 90 90 90 13 Sidestrand Hall Complex Needs School North 105 40 80 *Subject to housing growth
Originated by: Michael Bateman Created: 23 June 2008 Originators Ref: App 2 Cab 11Aug08 Location Maps v2 Norfolk County Council at your service
Recommended Specialist Resource Base Locations
Location Number School Children’s Services Area 14 Abbey Junior School (Primary School with effect from January 2009) South 15 Attleborough High School South 16 Aylsham High School North 17 Bluebell Primary School Central 18 Browick Road Infant School South 19 Caister High School East 20 Charles Burrell High School South 21 Clackclose Community Primary School West 22 Cliff Park Community Junior School East 23 Costessey High School Central 24 Costessey Junior School Central 25 Cromer High School North 26 Cromer Junior School North 27 Drayton CE VC Junior School Central 28 Earlham High School Central 29 Fakenham High School North 30 Fakenham Infant & Nursery School North 31 Fakenham Junior School North 32 Flegg High School East 33 George White Junior School Central 34 Harleston CE VA Primary South 35 Heartsease High Open Academy Central 36 Heartsease Primary School Central 37 Hethersett High School South 38 Hillside Primary School East 39 Hobart High School South 40 Howard Junior School & Howard Infant and Nursery School - Shared Resource West 41 Kinsale Junior School Central Continued on next page Originated by: Michael Bateman Created: 23 June 2008 Originators Ref: App 2 Cab 11Aug08 Location Maps v2 Norfolk County Council at your service
Location Number School Children’s Services Area 42 Long Stratton High School South 43 Manor Field Infant & Nursery School South 44 Marshland High School West 45 Methwold High School & Duchy of Lancaster CE VC Primary (Methwold) - Shared Resource West 46 Mile Cross Community Primary School Central 47 Millfield Primary School North 48 Neatherd High School North 49 North Walsham High School North 50 Oriel High School East 51 Park High School West 52 Rosemary Musker High School South 53 Smithdon High School West 54 Southtown First School East 55 Springwood High School West 56 Sprowston Community High School Central 57 Sprowston Infant School Central 58 SRB in Acle cluster - Exact location to be determined East 59 SRB in Northern Area - Exact location to be determined North 60 SRB in Northern Area - Exact location to be determined North 61 SRB in Sprowton Cluster - Exact location to be determined Central 62 St. George’s CE Junior School (Dersingham) West 63 St. Michael’s Primary School West 64 Suffield Park Infant & Nursery School North 65 Taverham High School Central 66 Terrington St Clement Community Primary School West 67 The Hewett School Central 68 Tuckswood Community Primary School Central 69 Watton Junior School West 70 Wayland Community High School West 71 West Walton Community Primary School West 72 Wroughton Junior School East
Originated by: Michael Bateman Created: 23 June 2008 Originators Ref: App 2 Cab 11Aug08 Location Maps v2
CS Overview & Scrutiny Panel – SEN Strategy Update - November 2012 Appendix 3
Summary of specialist provision developments in Dereham and Kings Lynn
Dereham
School Provision Type Age Range No. Funded Places Neatherd High Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) 11 – 16 20 School Specialist Resource Base Fred Nicholson Specialist ASD unit ‘Orchard House’ 4-16 12 School within Complex Needs School
Dereham Neatherd High school was identified in the first ‘wave’ of SRB host schools to receive capital funding for a new purpose-built resource base. This was completed in January 2011 at a cost of £640k. The school received revenue funding from September 2010 to allow the appointment of staff, training and preparation to open immediately the building was finished.
The headteacher used a rigorous recruitment and selection process, which included the SEN Commissioner on the interview panel, for the lead teacher appointment. This resulted in the appointment of a lead teacher with specialist knowledge and experience of ASD. Building on the experience of two terms of being fully operational, during which time the SRB became fully subscribed with demand for places outstripping supply, the school requested a doubling of provision.
Additional revenue funding was agreed and provided to the school from October 2011, with staffing increasing to 2 teachers and 5 teaching assistants to enable an increase from 10 to 20 places for children and young people with a diagnosis of ASD to access mainstream school.
The model operated by the SRB, whereby pupils worked towards full supported integration into mainstream classes, meant the resource base had capacity to support a greater number of pupils, thus enhancing the efficient use of the building. Commissioners acknowledged that Neatherd High was ideally placed geographically, being at the centre of the county with good transport links and also close to other specialist ASD provision in Dereham at Fred Nicholson Complex Needs School. This was felt to offer potential to establish an ASD ‘Hub’ which could act as a centre of excellence and through joint working, could offer sharing of expertise and transition opportunities from complex needs provision to mainstream provision and vice versa where appropriate.
The specialist ASD provision at Fred Nicholson Complex Needs School has also doubled in size this year. The first phase of ‘Orchard House’ provision was established in refurbished provision in 2009, providing for 6 young people age 11-16 who have complex needs and autism; the provision was accredited by the National Autistic Society in August 2010. Building upon the specialist expertise developed by the school the local authority have worked with the school this year to establish further provision, again in refurbished buildings within the school site, to now provide a further 6 places for children age 5-11.
These developments are ensuring that a range of specialist ASD provision is available for children and young people in the centre of the county both within mainstream and complex needs school.
Kings Lynn
School Provision Type Age No. Funded Places Range St Michael’s Behaviour, Emotional & Social Difficulties 4 – 11 10 Primary School (BESD) Specialist Resource Base Churchill Park Complex Needs School 3 -19 150 School
St Michaels CEVA primary school operates a mostly 2-term turnaround model of behaviour support, which was the intention for the model of behaviour SRBs. The children remain on the roll of their home school and return there following intervention from the SRB.
St Michael’s was the first SRB to be fully operational, receiving revenue funding from January 2009. The school had just relocated at that time into a new building as part of the NORA (Nene/Ouse Regeneration Area) development, which meant this pioneering SRB benefitted from a purpose-built base which had been designed as an integral part of the main school.
This model has enabled the headteacher to establish a whole-school ethos towards the SRB from the outset, which included the expectation that all staff would have training opportunities in the SRB to enhance their behaviour management skills. This has enabled flexible staffing arrangements when cover is needed in the SRB. The SRB has been consistently fully subscribed and has become a centre of expertise for the surrounding schools and those further afield. The headteacher welcomes visits from other professionals and a number of other behaviour SRB staff have visited the school as part of their professional development or in preparation for setting up their own behaviour SRBs
This first SRB development in Kings Lynn was taking place at a time when other specialist provision developments in the area were being built and planned, in line with the feedback from the 2008 SEN Review to ensure gaps in provision in the West of the county were addressed, this has resulted in the following provision:
. Howard Infant & Junior Schools’ SRB – Learning . Dersingham St Georges Junior School SRB – Behaviour . Terrington St Clement Community School SRB – Language . Clackclose Community Primary School SRB - Autism . Hockwold and Methwold Community School SRB – Behaviour . Wayland High & Watton Junior Schools’ SRB – Learning . Churchill Park Complex Needs School
Churchill Park Complex Needs School received a capital investment of £11million and opened in 2010. This flag-ship complex needs school brought together the previously separate moderate learning difficulties and severe learning difficulties special schools in the town onto a single site. The purpose built school provides all age (3-19) provision for children with a range of complex needs, including a therapy suite with hydro-therapy pool. The school is lead by a Norfolk headteacher who secured an ‘outstanding’ rating in her previous school and within a short period of time at Churchill Park School has secured a ‘rapidly improving’ judgement from Ofsted in the current inspection report. Report to Children’s Services O & S Panel 8th November 2012 Item No……..
Looked After Children Capital Project – Update on progress
Report by the Director of Children’s Services
Summary
This report provides an update of progress against the five areas of investment approved to ensure that the target increase of in-county placements for Looked After Children is met.
Since March 2012, significant progress has been made against all of the key investment areas.
The £5.4m funding has been allocated to the investment areas and it is projected that the objectives set within each investment area will be achieved. Below is a brief summary of progress;
* One property is operational as an assessment and reunification centre following successful registration with Ofsted. * It is expected by summer 2013 a further 2 children’s homes will also be operational, whilst the search continues for other viable properties. * The objectives for 16+ accommodation have led to various placements being secured across the County, through partnership working with other organisations. This will continue due to the success of using this approach. * Outside of the property requirements, a team manager has been recruited to manage the Clinical Commissioning team, which is a new specialist team working to prevent admission of children into care wherever possible.
All the provision being set up with the allocated £5.4m funding will continue to be funded, by savings achieved as a result of the reduction in out of county placements.
Recommendation :
Panel is asked to note the approach and the progress made to date.
1. Background
1.1 Appendix B of the Leader’s Budget Report (Cabinet meeting dated 23.01.2012) provides detail of the £5.4m funding and areas for investment. Below is the extract from this report highlighting the overall investment.
‘£5.4m to provide an extra 40 places for Looked After Children in Norfolk, so only those for whom it is in their best interests will have to live outside of the county, and provide additional support for children and young people at risk of coming into care’.
2. Approach and progress to date
2.1 The following section sets out each investment area and provides detailed information on progress in each area. For reasons of privacy to residents, the precise addresses of properties are not identified. Also detailed is the number of placements currently in place against the number of placements expected to be achieved. There are five areas for investment, highlighted in bold. Four relate to the provision of placements and the final investment area is the creation of a clinical commissioning team.
2.2 A Project Board is in place which is chaired by the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services to oversee the project, and a full time Project Manager is in place to provide management in accordance with the Norfolk County Council Project Management principles.
2.3 Investment area 1: An additional Children’s Home that will increase current capacity for emergency short term assessment places by 6 places
The Lodge in Norwich was opened in August 2012 and is currently running at full capacity (6 places).
Placements currently in place : 6 places (completed) Amount allocated from £5.4m : £0.55m
2.4 Investment area 2: Additional Children’s Home that will increase current capacity for short term ‘task centred’ placements where the Care Plan goal is reunification with family/friends by 6-12 additional beds
The purchase of a property in Norwich was completed on the 3 rd October. This property will provide 4 beds. Refurbishment is underway and the property is expected to be operational by the end of May. Another property in Stratton Strawless has had an offer accepted following approval by Cabinet. This property will also be the replacement for the property at Blofield which is currently a 2 bed unit. The purchase is expected to be completed by mid November and this will also be a 4 bed unit, providing an additional 2 beds. The recruitment of team managers to manage the two above properties has begun NPS are continuing to seek other viable properties for additional children’s homes. It is expected that the property in Norwich will be taking placements at the end of May and the property at Stratton Strawless by the end of July.
Placements currently in place : 0 places, with 6 additional placements to be available by summer 2013 (Ongoing) Amount allocated from £5.4m : £3.45m
2.5 Investment area 3: Accommodation to offer short term assessment placements to homeless 16/17 year olds by obtaining an additional 20 placements
Secured provision at Fairstead House in Kings Lynn to provide 7 beds. This provision is provided by The Benjamin Foundation. Secured provision at the YMCA in Norwich to provide 2 beds. This provision will be ready by the 5 th November. Additional properties being viewed in Great Yarmouth, Kings Lynn and Norwich.
Placements currently in place : 7 places, with an additional 2 placements to be available by Nov 2012 (Ongoing) Amount allocated from £5.4m : £0.53m
2.6 Investment area 4: Accommodation to better enable young people leaving care to live independently (or semi-independently) by providing 20 additional placements
12 placements have been secured via Supported Lodgings schemes. These have been provided by the Benjamin Foundation (7 placements) and the YMCA (5 placements). Provision has been secured with Broadland Housing. This provision is a self contained flat that provides 2 placements along with a support package provided by Children’s Services. We are working with other housing associations to find potential properties that fulfil the requirements for 16+ accommodation.
Placements currently in place : 14 places (Ongoing) Amount allocated from £5.4m : £0.47m
2.7 Investment area 5: The creation of a Clinical Commissioning Team to support the needs of families with children ‘on the edge of care’.
Team manager is now in post, a qualified Clinical Psychologist. The team manager has already linked in with The Lodge, Easthills and Norwich Road (existing Children’s Homes) and has begun monitoring the outcomes and impact on budget of Clinical Commissioning Team. Team will consist of the roles below and recruitment is expected to be completed by Dec 2012; o Clinical Psychologist o Educational Psychologist o Primary Mental Health Worker o Senior Social Worker o Business Manager o Youth Worker.
Amount allocated from £5.4m : £0.4m
2.8 Overall significant progress has been made and the project is on track to deliver within the overall budget and timeline agreed.
3. Resource Implications
Of the £5.4m allocated to this project, £1.3m has been spent so far. This includes the capital and revenue costs for the reopening of The Lodge, purchase costs for the property in Norwich and Stratton Strawless and revenue cost for the Clinical Commissioning team.
There is a robust project plan in place to ensure that the £5.4m funding is invested to achieve the outcomes set by March 2014.
4. Other Implications
4.1 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA): The activity being undertaken within this project is agreed as part of the Council’s wider Corporate Parenting Strategy which has clear equalities criteria for staff and children.
4.2 Impact on Children and Young People in Norfolk : This project has an overall objective to improve the outcomes for Looked After Children as a result of the emphasis on creating greater placement choice closer to home address and to provide targeted services to prevent entry into care wherever possible.
4.3 Any Other implications
Officers have considered all the implications of which members should be aware. Apart from those listed in the report (above), there are no other implications to take into account.
5. Section 17 – Crime and Disorder Act
There are no direct implications but seeking more appropriate placements supports Looked After Children in their integration with the local community.
7. Action Required
7.1 Action Required –
Panel is asked to note the approach and the progress made to date.
The panel is also asked to note that a benefits paper detailing the financial and social care benefits achieved through the £5.4m investment will be presented in due course.
Background Papers
Leaders Budget Report – Cabinet 23.01.2012
Officer Contact
If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with:
Officer Name: Chris Scott Tel No: 01603 223742 email address: [email protected]
If you need this report in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Yvonne Bickers on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
Cabinet January 23rd 2012 Item 9
County Council Plan and Budget 2012/14 Report from the Leader of Norfolk County Council
1. Context for this budget
1.1 Last year, the Big Conversation set a direction of travel for Norfolk County Council to help us weather the economic downturn and support council taxpayers through tough times ahead.
1.2 A year on, these challenges remain and the financial climate looks set to become even more difficult.
1.3 As we move into the second year of what is our three-year financial strategy, we can already see the impact of our prudent planning. Costs are down, we are driving out inefficiencies and we are on track to save the required £60m in this financial year. There is still much more to do and we continue to face difficult challenges, but I believe our financial strategy remains sound and enables us to spend the resources we do have wisely for the people we serve.
1.4 Despite the difficult economic conditions, we continue to provide ambitious leadership for Norfolk, through focusing on our strategic ambitions which underpin the Council’s long-term planning. We want Norfolk to:
Be an inspirational place with a clear sense of identity Have aspirational people with high levels of skills and achievement Have a vibrant, strong and sustainable economy
1.5 The Council’s core role, agreed this time last year, provides a strong framework for managing on behalf of our residents.
Speaking up for Norfolk.
Assessing people’s needs and commissioning efficient, responsive and cost effective services to meet them.
Supporting, developing and maintaining the infrastructure that helps our economy.
Being a safety net for the most vulnerable people in our county and protecting the public.
Signposting people to the services they need and providing good quality information to help people choose services relevant to them.
Helping and enabling others to build and maintain strong, sustainable and caring communities, giving back community ownership of locally important priorities best tackled through local community action.
1.6 Taken together, these ambitions and the core role are the backbone of the County Council Plan, and I recommend to Full Council that we confirm them as the strategic planning framework for 2012/13.
2 Budget 2012/13
2.1 We set out the impact for the Council of the 2012/13 provisional Government grant settlement in a report to Cabinet earlier in January 2012. It confirmed broadly what we expected given the economic climate, we will see a reduction in our Formula Grant next year of £17.1m at a time when there are more demands on our services, and inflationary costs which are beyond our control continue to rise.
2.2 Details of the overall 2012/13 revenue budget of £595.770m are set out in the technical report from the Head of Finance elsewhere on this agenda.
2.3 During November 2011 and January 2012, the cost pressures and savings proposals for next year have been considered in detail by Overview and Scrutiny Panels and Panel comments are reported in Appendix B of the technical report. In January, Overview and Scrutiny Panels also discussed how the one-off Council Tax Freeze Grant could be allocated. In addition, there has been public consultation on some specific proposals, and the detail of this is contained in section 4 of the technical report.
2.4 We froze council tax in 2011/12 and we have been determined to avoid an increase in council tax in 2012 because we are mindful that our residents continue to be concerned about jobs, about housing and meeting their own household bills. For this reason, our forward planning assumptions for 2012/13 and 2013/14 are based on a council tax freeze in both years. As reported to Cabinet earlier this month, we had the welcome news that the Government is able to provide one-off funding worth £8.624m to support a council tax freeze in 2012/13.
2.5 At Cabinet on 3 January, we signalled our intention to use this one-off funding to make a swift and significant difference to three priority areas – roads, getting young people into employment and supporting looked after children.
2.6 We asked Overview and Scrutiny Panels for their views, and we have received a high degree of support for this approach. Councillors have particularly welcomed the much-needed investment in roads and apprenticeships and training – a benefit which will help all Norfolk residents.
2.7 During the course of the current year, we have been tightly monitoring revenue budgets and we are forecasting an underspend at the end of the current financial year as reported elsewhere on this agenda. I am now confident that we can ear-mark a proportion of this underspend to add to the Government’s tax freeze grant, and make a real difference in these important priority service areas.
2.8 Following comments from Panels, and from public feedback, I now wish to propose some changes to the budget proposals. These are:-
£3.5m investment in road maintenance to allow in the region of 100km more of Norfolk's roads to be treated next year. This sum will boost both the road surface dressing and resurfacing programmes - and help reduce the number of potholes suffered by motorists.
£5.4m to provide an extra 40 places for Looked After Children in Norfolk, so only those for whom it is in their best interests will have to live outside of the county, and provide additional support for children and young people at risk of coming into care.
£3m to provide apprenticeships for young people who are struggling to get a foot on the employment ladder.
£0.5m to support work placements for young people, to help break the cycle of no-experience, no job.
£0.051m for 24/7 free travel for eligible blind pass holders and free travel for companion pass holders.
£0.051m saving from increased County Farms rental income to support the blind and companion pass holders proposal.
£0.123m for public rights of way. Last year we reduced spending on public rights of way, and introduced a new approach which focuses on Norfolk Trails and enforcement. Recognising the vital role that public rights of way and access to the countryside have to play in tourism, recreation and mobility for Norfolk, we do not propose to go forward with the planned saving, and instead use the funding to support our strategy and enhance our work with landowners.
£0.050m for the library book fund. Investing in stock is important for delivering a quality and up to date service that will continue to attract an active library membership and I am recommending that spending is maintained at its current level for 2012/13, rather than making the saving we had proposed. We know just how much Norfolk values its libraries, with the Millennium Library being the most well used library in the UK.
£1.5m saving on the interest payable/receivable budget based on our treasury management strategy and proposed capital programme for 2012/13.
2.9 The net effect of my proposals are to be funded from the revenue budget (£0.829m), one-off council tax freeze grant for 2012/13 (£8.624m) and by use of part of the 2011/12 forecast underspend (£1.620m).
2.10 In accordance with the Cabinet decision of 3rd January 2012, Officers have begun to develop plans for the use of this additional funding for Looked After Children, apprenticeships and supporting work placements, (see Appendix A and B) so that if Council agrees, we can move swiftly to implement these initiatives.
3. Council Tax
3.1 I am pleased to confirm that for the second year running we are recommending a council tax freeze.
4. Supporting Prevention
4.1 Late last year we received good news on our legal challenge to recover Icelandic bank investments. We anticipate getting back £32.1m of the £32.5m we had invested before the banks collapsed, so I am confident – on the advice of the Head of Finance – that we can reduce the amount, on a prudent basis, we had set aside in a reserve, and make this money available for front-line needs.
4.2 Therefore, I am proposing to release £2.5m and invest this in Adult Social Services prevention. This additional funding will complement the Prevention Fund we created last year to help support the changes to day care for older people. This new money, working alongside the existing fund will particularly help smaller voluntary groups adapt to the new and very different funding environment while also helping older people to stay independent for longer.
5 Capital Investments
5.1 I also draw to your attention our proposals for capital investment which is so important in sustaining the quality of our services and it also maintains and creates employment. Our capital proposals next year amount to £78.204m and are detailed in Appendix F of the technical report. This will be money invested in Norfolk, which could add to Norfolk based jobs and growth. I am particularly pleased to see that these proposals include a new Fire Station for King’s Lynn and also that the funding for the NORA and Thetford regeneration programmes are now confirmed. The welcome news of the Council Tax Freeze Grant, coupled with an underspend through good financial management and income generation, now allows me to confirm the funding for NORA and Thetford, which had previously been put on hold.
6. Conclusion
6.1 At this point in the economic cycle, we cannot do otherwise than continue to radically re-shape the Council and its services so that it is fit for the future. We are making enormous progress towards this, creating more responsive and efficient public services, streamlining, cutting red tape, rooting out waste and all of which will help a further £44.509m in savings to be achieved in 2012/13. Our staff have played a critical role in the work so far, demonstrating enormous dedication and the ability to adapt to new ways of working, and this gives me – and the rest of the Cabinet – confidence in delivering the task ahead.
6.2 If agreed, this budget will still see some £595.770m being spent on council services for Norfolk people, and a further £78.204m for capital projects. But we do know that times are hard, and whilst we have a clear course for the future, I believe it is right to invest where we can using one-off funding to make a difference now, particularly for those most vulnerable, and on the County’s hard-pressed road network.
7. Recommendations
7.1 As a consequence of the significant amendments I am able to propose in this paper, I recommend that Cabinet agrees to recommend to Full Council for a decision on 13th February:
1. The proposals as set out in this report. 2. The confirmation of the Council’s ambitions and core role as set out in 1.4 and 1.5 3. The recommendations as set out in the Cabinet report from the Head of Finance “Council Plan and 2012-14 Budget”.
Item Appendix A to Leader’s Budget Report January 23rd 2012
Apprenticeships and work placements for young people in Norfolk
Officers from Children’s Services and Economic Development were asked to give some initial thought to ways in which a one-off investment in apprenticeships and work placements could help young people in the current difficult economic climate. This paper provides a progress report for Cabinet. If Council agrees investment in these areas, detailed reports will be brought to relevant Overview and Scrutiny Panels in March 2012.
1. Background
1.1 Tackling youth unemployment is a national priority, and through apprenticeships and grants to businesses the Government is offering incentives to employers to take on young people.
1.2 Historically in Norfolk, we have made huge strides to reduce the number of young people not in education, employment and training (NEET) but of late we have seen the percentage increase as the impact of the recession has been felt.
1.3 Employers tell us that they are concerned about the work readiness of young people and the rising need for higher level skills in the workforce.
1.4 A one-off injection of funding would allow some key groups to be targeted with support.
2. Target groups
2.1 We are seeking to assist a number of different groups of young people aged between 16 and 24, including:
those who are disadvantaged, including care leavers those who are not in employment, education or training those with few or no qualifications unemployed graduates)’
3. Rationale for supporting these groups
Young people are finding the current jobs market very tough, particularly those with few qualifications.
Some care leavers, in particular, are leaving education with low levels of attainment and are experiencing difficulties in finding employment.
Where graduates are concerned, they often report that they cannot get a job without relevant experience, but do not have the opportunities to gain that experience and can end up in a ‘catch 22’ situation.
Many smaller employers are worried about the risk of taking on an apprentice in the current climate and wage subsidy will help overcome these barriers
Employers responded positively to this approach when approached regarding the Regional Growth Fund bid. We know the demand is there.
4. Suggested way forward
4.1 We suggest there are two distinct, but interdependent, objectives:
To provide a range of apprenticeships To provide pre-apprenticeship training, for young people in the target groups.
4.2 The project would be developed using a wage subsidy model, which would pay a proportion of the apprentices’ wages. This would be very welcome to the small and medium businesses we expect to take up the offer. It would also introduce employers to apprentices and persuade them of the value of apprenticeships as part of their workforce development strategy.
4.3 We would seek to match apprenticeships with the needs of key sectors – sectors that have identified skills gaps, such as social care or that have significant growth potential, such as engineering and advanced manufacturing
4.4 In order to implement a scheme we will need to work with young people, parents, schools, employers, further education colleges and training providers to improve perceptions of apprenticeships as a realistic career option.
4.5 We also want to use our investment to create a sustainable apprenticeship model in Norfolk for years to come through the creation of Apprenticeship Training Agencies.
4.6 A third, more stand-alone, objective would be to provide work experience placements at the County Council, under the Government’s ‘Get Britain Working initiative’, for unemployed graduates. The placements could be for 2-8 weeks and initial thinking suggests around 30-50 placements, in a range of service areas, over a two year period.
4.7 Members of both the Environment Transport and Development and Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panels have expressed their support for the idea of the project.
Item Appendix B to Leader’s Budget Report January 23rd 2012
Ensuring Sufficient Norfolk Placements for Norfolk’s Looked After Children
Officers from Children’s Services were asked to work on the potential costs, plans and options for improving in-county provision for Looked After Children. This paper provides some suggestions for this provision and a progress report for Cabinet. If Council agrees investment in these areas, detailed reports will be brought to relevant Overview and Scrutiny Panels in March 2012.
1. Background
1.1 Norfolk currently has 1034 children in care (01/01/12) an increase of 64 on the start of the financial year. An increase of 100 from 01/04/11 to 01/04/13 has been built into financial planning assumptions. 1.2 Norfolk is currently a ‘net exporter’ with more Looked after Children from Norfolk placed outside Norfolk than placed in Norfolk by other Authorities. 1.3 Actions identified in the Corporate Parenting Placement Strategy 2011-14 presented to Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel in October 2011 are currently being delivered. This Strategy will see an increase of 30 agency residential placements and a minimum of 60 agency fostering placements available in Norfolk. The Strategy is also driving forward a decrease in the unit cost of accommodation for children in care from £52k/year to £46k/year and so achieving the savings of £10m required by April 2014. 1.4 The Strategy is largely focused on stimulating the independent marketplace to support the Local Authority in providing Norfolk solutions for Norfolk children. This approach has been highly successful and Norfolk has seen voluntary and private sector investment on a scale not seen previously. 1.5 This successful approach, however, would be further improved by Local Authority capital investment in the areas identified below.
2. Five Key Areas for Investment
2.1. Identified below are the five key areas that investment could best support on an ‘invest to save’ basis. Such developments would ensure that Norfolk does not need to place outside its geographical boundaries except in isolated cases where the need is exceptional.
1. An additional Children’s Home that will increase current capacity for emergency short term assessment placements
Why required? When a child first comes into care this placement type enables us to undertake a thorough assessment, reunify the child with family/friends where appropriate or identify the most appropriate placement match when not. When this placement type is not available we have no choice but to ‘spot purchase’ a placement with an agency registered to take same day referrals. The costs for these unplanned referrals are high and the 1 matching process not what would be desired. Most of this type of accommodation is outside Norfolk making attempts at reunification particularly difficult. Many of the children moved out of Norfolk are young compounding the anxiety caused. Current provision We currently use an in-house 4-bedded unit for this purpose. Data shows that this unit operates at full occupancy or very close to it. Likely level of To greatly reduce the need for emergency ‘spot purchased’ agency need? placements we would need to increase our emergency assessment bed capacity by 6. This would take out capacity at any one time to 10. Potential Solution Open a 5-bedded Assessment Unit and increase capacity at Norwich Road, Dereham from 4 to 5.
2. Additional Children’s Homes that will increase current capacity for short term ‘task centred’ placements where the Care Plan goal is reunification with family/friends
Why required? This type of placement is required when the Care Plan goal for a child in care is reunification with family or friends but some social work with child and family needs to take place first to enable this return to be a success. The chances of success are enhanced when the placement is relatively close to home address as this makes contact much more straightforward to arrange.
Current provision We currently use three 2-bedded in-house units for this purpose. Data shows that these units operate at full capacity or very close to it. A waiting list for this accommodation operates and 8 children are currently placed out of county instead making contact with family / friends much harder. Past history shows that this often brings unnecessary delay into the reunification process. Likely level of 6 additional beds for this purpose will ensure need is met and voids are need? minimised Potential Solution Increase placement capacity at Blofield Children’s Home by 1 to 3 in total Currently exploring other properties within the County Council’s portfolio to ascertain whether they can be adapted to meet the Ofsted requirements of a regulated Children’s Home.
3. Accommodation to offer short term assessment placements to homeless 16/17 year olds
Why required? The single biggest factor contributing to the rise in the children in care population over the last 12 months has been the numbers of 16/17 year olds coming into care. This has resulted from what is most commonly known as the ‘Southwark judgement’. Practice on the ground until this recent clarification of the law saw Housing Departments take lead responsibility in most of these type of cases. Many of these young people present as homeless with us knowing little of their needs and family context. We need short term emergency assessment placements that will enable us to assess the young person’s needs, explore opportunities for reunification and where this is not possible, secure the most appropriate accommodation placement. Such assessment placements would be for a maximum of 13 weeks to enable the necessary work to be completed and a plan agreed and actioned. Current provision No such provision is currently available as described above
2 Likely level of It would be best if three assessment centres could be identified across need? the county in Gt. Yarmouth, Norwich and Kings Lynn as this is where the greatest need is. In total 20 placements would be required to meet existing demand. It is likely that existing provision could be reconfigured to meet the Assessment Centre specification. Potential Solution YMCA Central in Norwich is already commissioned by Supporting People to be a short term assessment unit for 34 homeless young people aged 16-24 with 16/17 year olds given priority. It makes best sense, therefore, to work with Supporting People to ensure that the identified needs for Norwich and its surrounds are met. Potential smaller sites in Kings Lynn and Gt. Yarmouth have also been identified. A procurement process will identify which premises are best to move forward with. It is planned that this provision will be available from Summer 2012.
4. Accommodation to better enable young people leaving care to live independently (or semi- independently)
Why required? A number of young people in our in-house residential units (or accommodation provided by others) stay there longer than required when ready for independent living. This is usually due to the lack of appropriate move on accommodation. If the number of appropriate independent or semi-independent accommodation options could be increased then the whole placement system could be better managed with clearer, timelier pathways identified. Current provision Many public, private and voluntary organisations manage such accommodation. What is often most important is identifying the ‘floating support’ that is needed to enable the placement to succeed. Likely level of An additional 20 placements with support available as required need? Potential Solution This funding will enable a pilot project with Broadland Housing Authority to develop. The pilot 2 flats could be rapidly increased to 20+ flats if successful in line with recommendations from In care council. A range of other similar options are currently being explored to increase capacity and choice
5. The creation of a Clinical Commissioning Team to support with meeting the needs of families with children ‘on the edge of care’.
The new Clinical Commissioning Team will be integral to the ambition of the Authority to reduce numbers of children and young people becoming looked after, and to keep those children and young people who are looked after well supported in Norfolk. This will prevent them from being placed out of Norfolk in the first place and where appropriate returning those young people currently placed outside the county by creating capacity to improve our strategic approach to the commissioning of services to meet need locally. The team will be a professional multi-disciplinary clinical team, and will include child and educational psychology, social work, nursing, primary mental health expertise and youth work, drawing on evidenced based treatments and interventions.
3. Summary
If this investment is agreed then it would see:
An additional children’s home for emergency short-term assessment placements 3 Additional places for short-term placements, where the aim is to reunite children with their family
Extra accommodation for short-term assessment placements to homeless 16 and 17- year-olds
Extra accommodation to better enable young people leaving care to live independently, or semi-independently
The creation of a Clinical Commissioning Team to help identify the needs of children at risk of coming into care and allocate support . Not only will money be saved by reducing the number of out of county placements and reducing the overall number of looked after children but the following outcomes will also be secured:-
Children’s relationships with family and friends will not be so disrupted thus increasing the likelihood of reunification and personal wellbeing Children will not have their schooling disrupted thus increasing their chances of academic success Care Planning for children will be more co-ordinated as key professionals will be both local and known Social Workers will be able to develop closer relationships with children as they will not be spending as long travelling Placement stability will be increased because there will be a better local mix of options to match against
4