10-1Pm in the Hackney CVS Adiaha Antigha Conference Room

CEN Executive and Network leads Tues 23rd July 2013 10-1pm in the Hackney CVS Adiaha Antigha Conference Room

Present

David Holland Peter Snell Beth Bolitho Eileen Bellot David Blagbrough Aliya El Agib Kristine Wellington Nicola Butler Ali Aksoy Delores McPherson Jo Carter Janette Collins Jackie Brett Danmore Sithole Michael Kerin Nazima Osman Matt Bray

Apologies: Liz Hughes, Kathryn Johnson, Michael Farrell, Paul Monks, Russell Miller

Last minutes and matters arising (Chair)

Jake provided an updated list of CEN reps and networks.

Feedback from Community Insight Group (Deji, Dave, Ergel, Jake)

David Holland provided feedback from the last Community Insight Group meeting. The group was a serious attempt to consider issues on the ground. A State of the Borough report was being pulled together which would include hard statistics and feedback from the VCS about emerging trends, particularly around welfare changes and the issue of gentrification creating ‘two Hackneys’. The group was an opportunity for the VCS to act as a live conduit for grassroots issues. Input from the VCS was very welcomed. The group was considering how all the information collected could be made available online for open access.

Team Hackney Leadership Group meeting 24th July – papers attached

Mary asked CEN reps to consider how the Mayor’s Partnership event went and remarked that there were not as many CEN reps in attendance as expected. Reps commented that the pressures on their organisations had made attending such meetings difficult. Also others stressed that more needed to be done to value the input that smaller organisations make to the partnership. Some felt the event was PR driven, others that the event was dominated by the public sector which skewed the discussions had.

There followed a discussion about some of the key issues facing the borough.

1. Around planning and gentrification it was key to understand what the Council can and cant do to influence change – is regeneration really impacting on all communities or just some? 2. There appeared to be ‘social cleansing’ in South Hackney – was this as a result of the bedroom tax? 3. The Sustainable Communities Act provides an opportunity for the VCS to challenge planning 4. Often the VCS is best placed to affect change amongst lower ranking officers 5. The Council is keen to hear from the VCS but the VCS needs to step up to the plate and provide solutions to the issues affecting the borough. 5) Feedback from Network Chairs/Officers (Network leads)

Jo Carter, Interim Forum Chair, provided feedback about changes in the Children & Young Peoples Providers Forum (CYPPF). The previous structure of 6 reps feeding into the Children’s Trist Board was no longer fit for purpose. Jo and colleagues had mapped the current partnership structure with Amy Wilkinson to work out which areas needed VCS rep coverage. It was decided that there would no longer be elected reps but a wider number of reps that covered all the issues affecting children would represent the sector. It was noted that Education seemed to be missing from the list of key structures, probably due to the fact that the Learning Trust has less influence over local schools. Reps would encourage the CYPPF membership to feed in issues from the ground. Training would be offered to reps and local groups who struggle to participate. Jo was keen to see how the new way of working could be embedded. A new chair would be found in the Autumn and this chair should participate in the Health & Wellbeing Board alongside Michael Kerin. Ida Scoullos would take on this role before a formal chair is appointed.

Concern was expressed as to the relationship between the Health & Wellbeing Board and education issues. Some felt that because the Health & Wellbeing Board was quite bureaucratic and led by the NHS and Council, education issues would not be given sufficient credence. Also concerned was expressed about the current lack of a health strategy for Hackney. There was also a need to coordinate VCS input to the HWB and it was suggested that the two CEN reps and the HW chair meet before HWB meetings and also have opportunities to meet with the HWB Chair. It was noted that Healthwatch has a regular slot on the HWB agenda. ACTION – Jake to explore with relevant people.

There was a discussion about the importance of the JSNA (Health & Wellbeing Profile for Hackney). Through the Health & Social Care Forum, community insight was being gathered to feed into the JSNA process in October/November. It was noted that there need to be coordination of the VCS input to the health strategy as it develops.

CYYPF looking at where it has influence across various subgroups. ACTION – CYPPF to consider how it can best lobby and influence the health strategy. Also to explore links to the Parent Governors network.

6) Looking ahead – a strategic discussion to cement the way forward for the CEN (ALL)

Mary introduced the discussion about the future working and focus for the CEN. She was keen that the CEN consider its future in the light of all the changes in the partnership structure and external environment. In the past there had been lots of opportunities for Team Hackney and the VCS to trial approaches to key issues such as teenage pregnancy. Now the situation was very different with less opportunities for partnership discussions and commissioning, and a greater emphasis on quick task and finish groups around specific issues. In the light of this it was timely then that the CEN had a discussion about its purpose and key priorities moving forward and considered a more flexible approach to representation and engagement with partnership structures. The public sector was more aware of the need to engage communities and local people.

It was suggested that the CEN could do more to support local residents to better represent their issues. Linkage with other local mechanisms and organisations should also be considered e.g. www.hackneyfirst.com It was important that the CEN had a sense of where influence could best happen.

It was clear that the Council wanted the CEN to continue in its role as a critical friend and that in Hackney, there was a strong relationship generally speaking between the VCS and public sector. It was noted that there are a range of opportunities to influence but these are not always coordinated or linked. CEN should ensure it remains flexible and that there are lots of cross linkage/dual approaches between networks around key areas.

There was also a discussion about the impact of shrinking resources for Hackney CVS and what impact this might have on the CEN. Hackney CVS’s core contract resource would be reduced by a further £25k in 2014/15.

Notes for the small group discussions are attached.

Mary summarised the feedback as follows:

1. CEN needs to work more flexibility, particularly in terms of VCS representation on appropriate structures. 2. CEN should consider where it does well and why 3. CEN should continue to push to be at the table and ensure that it hosts lots of opportunities for people to come forward with ideas or concerns 4. Ensuring the networks work together is key, particularly around cross cutting issues.

7) CEN Chair

There was a discussion about Mary’s departure and how the CEN could find a suitable replacement. To date there had been no interest in the role. Everyone praised Mary’s contribution over the last 6 years. ACTION – Jake to set up a meeting with Mary Cannon, Jo Carter and Peter Snell to discuss solutions to the issue of having no CEN chair currently.