ITEM 9
Scottish Borders Council’s Corporate Plan and Performance Management Framework
Report by Chief Executive
Scottish Borders Council
25 April 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
1.1 This report seeks approval for a Corporate Plan for Scottish Borders Council (2012/13 – 2017/18) as well as an updated Performance Management Framework.
1.2 The Council’s ambitious vision is to “Seek the best quality of life for all the people in the Scottish Borders, prosperity for our businesses and good health and resilience for all our communities”
1.3 To make progress in achieving its vision requires the Council to be clear about its priorities, set challenging targets and have in place a mechanism that enables it to monitor and challenge performance to ensure it is able to deliver on commitments to the community.
1.4 Underpinning this is a Corporate Plan which clearly sets out a vision, values and standards as well as priorities for the coming years. A performance management framework that allows Elected Members and officers to assess how well work is progressing towards addressing these identified priorities must underpin this Corporate Plan.
1.5 The Corporate Plan, presented in Appendix 1, addresses a number of important issues including:
o The complex local context within which SBC operates; o The financial pressures that both SBC and partners face; o Key legislative and national policy changes that will affect SBC delivery of services.
Against this backdrop, the Plan presents the vision for SBC, underpinned by a set of values and standards that should guide everything it does, from the policies and strategies that are approved, to the work undertaken by an individual within a service department.
1.6 Eight priorities are then presented in the Plan, a number of which can only be addressed if the Council changes the way it works and in many cases, works closely with partners. Annex 1 to the Corporate Plan covers each priority in detail, showing the key policy drivers that will influence what is
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 done, as well as listing the key pieces of work that need to be undertaken either- o through transformation projects within SBC; o in partnership; o through continually improving high quality service delivery.
1.7 Members, officers and indeed the communities served will only be able to gauge how successful the Council is as an organisation if there is a robust and transparent performance management framework underpinning this Corporate Plan. Although a framework was approved by Elected Members in 2010, corporate and administrative changes, combined with a hugely changed external context, mean that reporting arrangements need strengthening. Annex 2 to the Corporate Plan presents an updated Performance Management Framework (PMF) and covers the reporting arrangements for both SBC and the Council’s new Service Committees.
2 RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 I recommend that the Council approves this Corporate Plan for 2012/13 – 2017/18 and the associated Annex 1, and the Performance Management Framework presented in Annex 2.
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 3 Context for the Development of a new Corporate Plan for Scottish Borders Council 3.1 The previous corporate plan produced by SBC was its Council Priorities 2009-2012 document. This was structured around a large set of local outcomes that formed the Scottish Borders Single Outcome Agreement (SOA) with the Scottish Government. Whilst it did attempt to articulate SBC’s priorities, it presented a very large set of performance measures which were not always consistent in type. Some indicators did indeed demonstrate the impact our activity was having (i.e. they were true outcome indicators) whilst others were simply counting the activity that was undertaken (i.e. they were output indicators). Whilst counting the outputs can be important at a business level, it did not give the Council a measure of the impact of actions and was therefore not entirely appropriate at a strategic level. (Since the last SOA and Corporate Plan were produced, both national and local understanding of outcomes and indicators has matured).
3.2 At the time of approving the Council Priorities document, Council also approved a “Performance Improvement Framework” which detailed the approach to monitoring, reporting and delivering the Borders SOA and, in turn, the Council Priorities. Too much emphasis was perhaps placed on the local outcomes and indicators that related to the SOA and not enough on the needs of SBC as a changing organisation and as an employer, and on how individuals could see their work in the corporate context.
3.3 Much has changed within the past year that meant both the corporate plan and the performance management arrangements that underpinned it needed reviewed:
x The external context has changed, and is continuing to change, significantly economically, socially and environmentally (for example continued economic downturn, reforms to the Welfare system, a clear focus on low carbon); x Whilst SBC and partners find themselves under continuing financial pressures, they still have significant resources to spend locally to improve quality of life; x The Christie Commission report has been the catalyst for a number of national policy changes, with a clear focus on prevention as well as partnership working; x Various Bills, for example Integration of Adult Health and Social Care, are set to radically alter the way services are delivered into the future; x SBC’s Administration set a clear direction of travel with is “Ambitious for the Borders” partnership statement and a clear focus on the economy, young people and services for older people; x The Scottish Government has published revised SOA guidance in light of the agreed Scottish Government/Cosla “Statement of Ambition”, calling for transformational change within community planning partnerships and clear evidence of the value added by working collaboratively.
3.4 Audit Scotland recently undertook an early audit of Community Planning Partnerships, of which the Scottish Borders Community Planning Partnership was a part. Although set in the context of partnership working, the report highlighted weaknesses within our performance management arrangements but has recognised that both corporately and within the partnership, steps are being taken to improve the situation- Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 “Following a recent review, it is now implementing a number of important changes to improve its governance and performance management arrangements. This should help ensure that the partnership is working more effectively and is better able to demonstrate its impact on improving outcomes1”
4 Moving Forward 4.1 Recent restructuring within SBC has provided a renewed focus and lead for strategic and corporate planning, monitoring and reporting. Within the Chief Executive’s Department, a new Head of Strategic Policy will ensure a corporate approach to strategic and business planning, linked directly to delivery.
4.2 The work detailed in Annex 1 to the Corporate Plan has been shared with the Head of Transformation Projects within the Chief Executive’s Department, ensuring that the necessary resources are allocated to significant transformational programmes and projects, whether undertaken by SBC alone or in partnership. Annex 1 will be updated on a regular basis, ensuring that activity across SBC is aligned to corporate priorities.
5 Performance Management Arrangements 5.1 In order to ensure that progress against the corporate plan is being monitored, the Performance Management Framework in Annex 2 to the Corporate Plan details various levels of performance reporting in order that Elected Members, community planning partners and the public can see the impact of the work SBC is involved with.
5.2 Under each of the eight Council priorities, a set of performance indicators is being developed in order that reporting can be undertaken for various purposes and at various levels. These indicators vary, from the more strategic outcome indicators that are contained within the Scottish Government’s “National Menu of Local Outcome Indictors (as part of the SOA) to more process orientated indicators that will be of real interest to Council Service committees.
For example, under Priority 1: Encouraging sustainable economic growth: o Median earnings (£s) for workforce based in the local authority area will be monitored at both SOA and Corporate Plan level by both the Community Planning Partnership and SBC Executive; o Number of planning applications received will be monitored at both a departmental and Service Committee level.
5.3 Covalent, SBC’s performance management system, will be restructured around the eight Council Priorities and each indicator will be labelled within the system according to its relevance e.g. to the SOA, to a Service Committee etc. This will ensure consistent, efficient use of resources, with performance information being entered and updated only once, but able to be used for a variety of purposes. Reporting tools within Covalent have improved and officers will work with Elected Members to ensure that the reports are tailored to the needs of various boards and committees.
1 Community Planning in Scottish Borders Partnership, Audit Report: A report by Audit Scotland prepared for the Accounts Commission and Auditor General Feb 2013
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 5.4 Public reporting also forms an important part of this updated Performance Management Framework. The Council currently places a large range of performance information in the public domain but it is often difficult to find. For example our annual report on Statutory Performance Indicators does not sit alongside Quality and Standard reports from departments. A consistent annual report that gives people a clear sense of direction of travel is required, alongside an area within SBC’s website that pulls the full range of performance reports together. The Council will commit to regularly and consistently reporting over the 5 years of the Plan in order that progress can be monitored.
5.5 The Performance Management Framework will not in itself deliver performance improvement. It will however provide the basis for improvement through the reports it provides for monitoring purposes and through linkages it provides between actions and impact.
6 IMPLICATIONS
6.1 Financial
There are no costs attached to any of the recommendations contained in this report.
6.2 Risk and Mitigations (a) There are obvious risks associated with not having a simple, clear corporate plan to guide an organisation, not least the inability of senior managers to align their work to the priorities that have been identified and the inability of individuals to see how they contribute to the bigger picture. (b) Performance Management has been cited as a weakness by Audit Scotland in a recent audit of Community Planning. Internal Audit is also conducting a piece of work at the moment addressing our arrangements for corporate planning and performance management
6.3 Equalities (a) The Corporate plan embeds the Council’s agreed Equality Outcomes which encompass all the Protected Characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
(b) The Plan identifies eight key priorities for Scottish Borders Council over the next 5 years. In taking these priorities forward, SBC will ensure that equality and diversity, through SBC’s equalities mainstreaming approach and embedding SBC’s Equalities Outcomes, are considered across all eight Priorities and the work done to address these priorities.
(c) The implementation of the Corporate Plan will be central to enabling SBC to meet its equality duties, specifically to develop and work towards a set of equality outcomes and to mainstream its approach to equality and diversity across the organisation.
6.4 Acting Sustainably
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 (a) There are significant economic, social and environmental benefits of addressing the priorities covered in the Corporate Plan.
6.5 Carbon Management (a) There are no effects on carbon emissions
6.6 Rural Proofing (a) The Corporate Plan seeks to address the rural context of Scottish Borders by the priorities that have been identified. Any work undertaken in the context of the Corporate Plan should reflect directly the challenges that service delivery within that rural context presents.
6.7 Changes to Scheme of Administration or Scheme of Delegation (a) There are no changes to be made.
7 CONSULTATION
7.1 The Chief Financial Officer, the Head of Corporate Governance, the Head of Audit and Risk, and the Clerk to the Council have been consulted and any comments received have been incorporated into this report.
7.2 Due to the nature of the content of the report, the HR Manager and Acting Corporate Communications Team Leader have also been consulted and comments have been incorporated into this report.
Approved by
Chief Executive Signature …………………………………..
Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number David Cressey Head of Strategic Policy Tel: 01835 825082
Background Papers: Previous Minute Reference: Scottish Borders Council, 11 February 2010
Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. Sarah Glendinning can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.
Contact us at Sarah Glendinning, Scottish Borders Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, Tel: 01835 826542, Fax: 01835 825059 , [email protected]
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 Appendix 1
Scottish Borders Council Corporate Plan
2012/13 - 2017/18
DRAFT April 2013 1.0 Introduction
This Corporate Plan provides the strategic policy context for driving forward the work of Scottish Borders Council (SBC) over the five year period 2012/13 to 2017/18. The plan has been informed by the Council’s Administration priorities as stated in “Ambitious for the Borders”, by the priorities coming forward from our communities, by key transformation programmes, by projects that are already underway within the organisation and by priorities that we have defined with our community planning partners, founded on a strong evidence base (and contained within our Single Outcome Agreement (SOA) that is submitted to the Scottish Government).
Our local economy has significant strengths in relation to its business, labour and natural assets. However it is being adversely affected by challenging local, national and international economic conditions with unemployment rising, especially amongst young people. There will be a continuing need to maintain and enhance our competitive advantage through investment in education, ICT, roads and infrastructure.
There is a projected increase in the population of the Scottish Borders over the next five years. This will result in a growing older population which will increase pressure on health and social care services. Changing social conditions, including the impact of the Welfare Reform Act, will lead to severe pressures on household budgets; and there is likely to be increased expectations of care services for the most vulnerable children.
Public transport options will be enhanced with the completion of the Borders Railway project. Higher fuel and energy prices over the next five years are likely to have adverse affects on the price of both private and public transport (and subsequently goods and services) and heating, with those on the lowest incomes being most disadvantaged;
The Council faces major financial challenges over the next five years. With limited likelihood of securing additional resources and with an almost certain increase in demand for services, SBC has estimated that the cost of continuing current levels of service provision will increase by £27.1m over the next five years. We are therefore taking a longer term approach to bridging this gap, with a five year financial plan that proposes solutions to meet the financial challenge in ways which impact services least.
During this five year period, there are also likely to be significant limitations placed upon the annual budgets of the Council’s partners, particularly NHS Borders, the Scottish Police and Fire and Rescue Services, Registered Social Landlords, Borders College and Heriot Watt University.
However, despite these challenges, it should also be recognised that over the next five years, SBC will spend £1.5 billion in revenue terms and, combined with the resources of our partners, this will have a significant impact on the economy of the Scottish Borders. In addition to this, SBC has a 10 year capital plan that commits almost £200 million of investment in infrastructure projects in the Scottish Borders. It is vital that our budget process addresses our key priorities, meets the challenges outlined above and spends tax payers’ money in the most efficient, economic and effective way possible. This is also true of our work with partners in addressing the outcomes in the SOA.
There is likely to be legislation over the next five years for the integration of the Council’s adult social care services with health services which are currently the responsibility of NHS Borders. The scale and strategic importance of this change will require careful consideration through the corporate planning process within SBC as well as through the community planning partnership. 2 It is crucial that the Council, together with its partners, takes a creative, innovative, long term and forward-thinking approach, focused on building the strength and capacity of our communities, businesses and households, reducing inequalities between the least and most deprived people and communities, as well as providing high quality services into the future. The manner in which these services are delivered may change but we must not lose focus on the end user, be that a young person in education or in care, an older person living at home, or a community at risk of flooding. Quality of life and the safety of all Borders residents is our priority and delivering services in line with our equality duty is vital to addressing this.
Many of the changes and challenges facing the Council and its partners have spatial implications. Changes in land use and development activity will similarly have implications for many of the services we provide and the environment in which we live and do business. The production and maintenance of robust Strategic and Local Development Plans is vital in ensuring that business and community needs are met, that appropriate development opportunities are provided, and that our valued built and natural heritage is protected.
This plan sets out what we will work on to deliver our priorities over the next five years and it indicates how progress will be monitored. (Business plans for each department sit underneath this plan, providing greater detail)
2.0 Vision & Values
Our vision, our values and our standards will guide the way we work and will inform everything from our strategies and policies, through to the work plans of individuals within the organisation.
Our Vision We seek the best quality of life for all the people in the Scottish Borders, prosperity for our businesses and good health and resilience for all our communities
Our Values Our Standards x Public Service x Putting our customers and staff at the heart x Respect for all of what we do x Courage x Being fair, equal and open x Integrity x Continually improving our services x Honesty x Working with partners and stakeholders x Commitment x Delivering value for money in the use of our resources
3 3.0 Priorities for the Scottish Borders
There are a number of priorities that must be addressed over the next five years to achieve the outcomes outlined within our SOA and “Ambitious for the Borders”. These priorities relate to both externally and internally facing services. A number of the identified priorities can only be addressed if we change the way we work and, in many cases, work more closely with our partners. Quality of life will be at the heart of all we do and we will always ensure that we continue to deliver high quality services to those who most need them. The priorities driving our business are:
Priority 1 Encouraging sustainable economic growth Improving attainment and achievement levels for all our children and Priority 2 young people, both within and out with the formal curriculum Providing high quality support, care and protection to children, young Priority 3 people, adults, families, and older people Building the capacity and resilience of our communities and voluntary Priority 4 sector Priority 5 Maintaining and improving our high quality environment Priority 6 Developing our workforce Priority 7 Developing our assets and resources Ensuring excellent, adaptable, collaborative and accessible public Priority 8 services
In taking these priorities forward, SBC will ensure that equalities and diversity, through our equalities mainstreaming approach and embedding our Equalities Outcomes, are considered across all 8 Priorities and the work we do to address these priorities.
We seek to embed equality, diversity and human rights into all Scottish Borders Council services, functions and business, enabling the organisation to demonstrate its explicit commitment to equality, diversity and human rights (taken from SBC Equality Scheme 2012-2016)
As well as equalities and diversity, we will ensure that sustainability, rural proofing and health and well-being are embedded in all policies and actions.
4.0 Working to address the priorities
Each department within SBC has a range of both external and internal influences affecting the way in which it works. For example: x Curriculum for Excellence is influencing the delivery of education across all age ranges; x Self Directed Support Bill will affect the way that Social Work delivers care and support services; x Climate Change Act requires a shift in how we collect and process waste, and work with households.
Our partners across the public sector are all subject to the financial pressure that was outlined earlier and we need to work effectively with them to change the way we deliver services across the Scottish Borders. 4 As well as policy drivers, our elected members have published “Ambitious for the Borders” and this also influences what we do and the way in which we work with a clear focus on economic development, young people, and quality of life.
There are 3 main ways in which we will work to address the priorities we have outlined. We will do it through transformation, in partnership, and through continually improving high quality service delivery.
Through Transformation In order to respond to changing external conditions, to deliver services that are fit for the 21st Century and to face the budgetary pressures that we are under, our services need to respond and change. The Council is acutely aware that the status quo is not an option and that solutions will, in some cases, require significant service redesign, sharing services with other partners and across other local authorities whilst all the time focusing on creative, flexible and sustainable solutions.
On top of an existing challenging programme of change and improvement, we are currently establishing a major change programme of work based on efficiency targets that will help address our budgetary pressures in four main areas: 1. Service Delivery- we need to examine what we do and see where there is scope to do things differently or to share services with partners to improve efficiency, always putting the customer at the heart of what we are doing 2. Staffing – we must ensure that the terms and conditions of employment are appropriate for delivering services into the future 3. Property - we have a large property portfolio, and as we change the way we deliver services, it will be necessary to reduce the property portfolio. What we retain however, must be customer friendly and importantly more energy efficient, ensuring that we are viewed as a leader in the low carbon agenda 4. Income generation - we must ensure that we are charging appropriately for services and that scope for generating additional income is explored where appropriate.
Some change will require us to invest initially to save in the longer term. For example, planned capital investment in new street lighting will reduce long term maintenance and energy costs, as well as helping to mitigate future carbon tax liability.
In Partnership Some of our priorities will be addressed by working with our public sector partners, with the private sector, the third sector and with communities. With a strong history of effective partnership working, directed by Community Planning Strategic Board, we are well placed to take forward some key programmes of work that contribute directly to the achievement of our priorities.
By addressing these priorities, we will work towards the outcomes we want to achieve in partnership for the Scottish Borders, and we will use the outcome indicators in our Single Outcome Agreement (SOA) to show whether or not we are making progress and improving quality of life for our residents.
Through continually improving high quality service delivery Much of the work undertaken by staff now will continue and we will ensure that high standards continue to be achieved, even when services are being redesigned. Services such as education, winter road maintenance, caring for older people and protecting
5 children at risk will continue to be of paramount importance throughout this period of change and budget reduction.
Annex 1 details the work we are undertaking to address each priority & the key influences on that work.
5.0 Monitoring progress
To address our priorities effectively, we must ensure that the corporate plan, business plans for each service area, the subsequent team plans and individual work plans take account of the priorities and are linked together, as well as each stage within the planning hierarchy shown below having its own monitoring arrangements:
The outcomes the Community Planning Partnership wants to work towards, to improve quality of life. Outcome indicators will allow us to measure progress e.g. Life Expectancy
Our Council Priorities, underpinned by a range of performance indicators (outcome indicators, key performance indicators, statutory performance indicators, service indicators etc) and clearly linked to corporate improvement actions
Business plans, containing performance and operational indicators. Quality/standards reports will also be used to inform corporate improvement actions.
Performance review and development (PRD) for individuals within businesses. Personal performance indicators
A Performance Management Framework has been developed in line with this Corporate Plan (found in Annex 2) and will be monitored by the Council’s Executive Committee, relevant Service Committees and by the Corporate Management Team on a regular basis. This framework covers all levels of performance reporting, from the high level outcome indicators in the SOA e.g. Median earnings to indicators used within individual Council services e.g. occupancy rate of industrial units.
It is critically important that we continually listen to customer feedback from service users and to the views of Scottish Borders residents about how satisfied they are with both quality of life in general and with the quality of services provided by SBC. There is a range of ways that we do this, from input and feedback from service users, to our Household Survey. It is therefore vital that we consider both qualitative information to monitor progress e.g. service user experience as well as quantative information e.g. number/volume of service users.
Progress against the performance indicators in the Performance Management Framework will be presented in an annual report, as part of a suite of performance information. Across each of the 8 priorities, it is important that our framework includes 6 the relevant Equality Indicators, in order that we can measure how effective we are being in working towards our Equality Outcomes covered in 3.0 Priorities for the Scottish Borders.
The various levels of performance information within the Performance Management Framework will feature in Covalent, the Council’s performance monitoring software. The Council’s business plans will reflect the Corporate Priorities and will be underpinned by the Performance Review and Development (PRD) process, which establishes clear performance expectations for individuals that are aligned to the operational and corporate objectives. Covalent will also be used to monitor and report on all transformation projects ensuring accurate timescales and delivery is achieved.
In conjunction with monitoring of performance, self evaluation will be a key part of performance management and the continuous improvement process. For this purpose, the Council has already adopted the Public Service Improvement Framework (PSIF) as a self-evaluation tool, and it is proposed that where there is not a department specific self evaluation tool already in use (e.g. through Education Scotland), PSIF be used for this purpose.
Annex 1: Delivering against our Priorities Annex 2 : Performance Management Framework
7 Annex 1
Delivering against our Priorities
Each of the priorities we have identified is influenced by a range of both national and local policies. These affect the approach we take to delivering our services. More recent national policy development, combined with financial pressures, mean that we need to review the way in which we deliver services both as an organisation and in partnership. Each priority is presented below, along with the key policy drivers and then a high level summary of the work we are undertaking to address the priority.
1 Priority 1 Encouraging sustainable economic growth It is vital that the Council, together with partners, supports the local economy through a combination of strategic economic development, support for employment and training and investment in key infrastructure projects including the Borders Railway project and our transport network. Sustainable transport, next generation broadband and support for businesses using for, example, the Business Loan Fund and Business Gateway is very important. High quality education at all levels will ensure that our young people are ready to be effective contributors, and that our businesses can access the training they need to develop and grow. In developing a stronger and more varied economy which provides higher quality employment opportunities, we will work towards addressing the income and inequality gaps that we know exist in the Borders and help to support those who are furthest from the labour market, either directly as an employer, or through appropriate support. The Council will explore opportunities for supporting businesses and create employment and training opportunities through its own approaches to procurement, through the way it delivers services in the future (e.g. opportunities for outsourcing social care service and working with external providers), and through house building Key Policy Drivers x The Government Economic Strategy (2011) x A Low Carbon Economic Strategy for Scotland: Scotland - A Low Carbon Society (2010) x Europe 2020: European Union’s ten-year growth strategy (2010) x Waverley Railway (Scotland) Act 2006 x South of Scotland Next Generation Broadband Project x Curriculum for Excellence (3-18 curriculum in Scotland) x DRAFT Scotland’s Youth Employment Strategy (inc “Opportunities for All”, 2012) x Scottish Borders Economic Strategy 2020 (March 2013) x Equality Act (2010) Business Transformation Partnership work Core Business NEW x Development of the Low Carbon Economy x Economic Development x Provision of Next Generation Broadband for Borders (also in Priority 5) x Housing x Review of Passenger Transport x Positive Destinations and tackling youth x Asset and Network unemployment Management x Land use and Strategic Infrastructure Planning- x Passenger Transport ONGOING development planning, utilities, housing etc x Design and Projects x Establishment of the Employment Support Service (ESS) x Maximising the economic impact of the Management x Asset Management Planning (see also Priority 7) Borders Railway x Planning & Regulatory x Bus Service Review (E&I) x Tackling Poverty and Social Exclusion Services x Development of Scottish Borders Tourism x Procurement Strategy (2020) 2 Improving attainment and achievement levels for all our children and young people, both within and out with the formal Priority 2 curriculum The council is committed to ensuring that Curriculum for Excellence is embedded throughout all its schools and learning establishments (3-18 years). This will support improvement in learner attainment and achievement, improve outcomes for all children and young people as well as ensuring they have a positive and sustained destination beyond their school career. We will also seek to make necessary improvements to the school estate in order to enhance learning environments
Key Policy Drivers x Curriculum for Excellence (3-18 curriculum in Scotland) x DRAFT Scotland’s Youth Employment Strategy (inc “Opportunities for All”, 2012) x Early Years Framework (2009) x Teaching Scotland's Future - Report of a review of teacher education in Scotland (2011) x Additional Support for Learning Act 2009 x Looked After Children and Young People: We Can and Must Do Better (Corporate Parenting Approach), 2007 x SBC Corporate Parenting Strategy x Equality Act (2010)
Business Transformation Partnership work Core Business NEW x Development of Learning Communities x Nursery classes x Review Provision of Primary Education (ELL) x Primary Schools x Review provision of Secondary Education (ELL) x Secondary Schools (school estate in Priority 7) x Community Learning and x Review SJC Staffing Allocation Model (ELL) Development ONGOING x Integrated Children’s x NGfL Refresh in Schools Services (Additional Support x Schools Asset Management Planning for Learning and inclusion of pupils within main stream education) x Property and Asset Management x Design and Projects Management
3 Priority 3 Providing high quality support, care and protection to children, young people, adults, families, and older people With an increasing older population, increased inequalities due to severe economic recession and reforms to the welfare state, the Council must ensure that everyone feels they can cope and get the support that they need to live independently wherever possible. Whether it’s a family dealing with an older person’s intensifying care needs, or a young person leaving school or leaving care, everyone should feel that they have been supported, and in some cases continue to be supported, in a way that improves their quality of life.
Legislative changes will have a very real impact on the way in which we provide services, not least the introduction of the Integration of Adult Health and Social Care Integration Bill, which will see the integration of the Council’s adult social care services with health services (currently the responsibility of NHS Borders). There is also a continued need to develop our Early Years Network and to provide more support and facilities for young people, and again, service will be affected by legislation through the proposed Children and Young People Bill. Key Policy Drivers x GIRFEC (Getting it right for every child) x Early Years Framework (2009) and Early Years Collaborative x Welfare Reform Act 2012 x Common Core of Skills, Knowledge & Understanding and Values for the “Children’s Workforce” In Scotland (2012) x Integration of Adult Health & Social Care Integration Bill (consultation 2012) x Children and Young People Bill (proposed 2012) x Social Care (Self-directed Support) (Scotland) Bill (2012) x Social Work Scotland Act 1968 x Children (Scotland) Act 1995 x Same as You (2012) x Equality Act (2010) Business Transformation Partnership work Core Business NEW x Integration of Health and Social Care (also in x Older People x Review of Social Work Night Time Support (SW) Priority 8) x Learning Disabilities x Review of Early Years Delivery Model (ELL)- also Priority 2 x Development of Early Years network and additional x Physical Disabilities x Review of Social Work Business Support Services (SW) support for vulnerable children x Mental Health x Review of Social Care and Health Business Support Specific x Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC) x Criminal Justice Services (SW) x Adult Support and Protection x Integrated Children's Services x Supported Living Accommodation (SW) x Older people- reshaping care x Early Years x Development and Implementation of future Social Work Services x Health Improvement, with a focus on prevention x Community Services- Physical (SW) x Welfare Reform- mitigation of impact on individuals Activity x Review of Services provided for SEBN young people (ICS) and organisations in the Borders x Passenger Transport x Review of Further Integration of Integrated Children’s Services (ICS) x Self Directed Support x Review of Community Transport (E&I) ONGOING
4 Priority 4 Building the capacity and resilience of our communities and voluntary sector With shrinking public sector resources, the Council needs to build on the great strengths that we have here in the Borders within our voluntary and community sector. By helping communities to help themselves, we will relieve some of the burden on the public sector as well as ensuring that communities stay safe and resilient. For example, a community that can prepare for flooding or severe winter weather can keep its residents safe until help is available. We need to proactively support communities with our work particularly in the most deprived areas and not just as a reaction to crisis situations. At the same time as developing more effective ways of working at a local level, we must explore the ways in which we can work with communities. As SBC increasingly looks to outsource services, there is a need to strengthen the capacity of the voluntary sector to support their involvement in the delivery of public services through the increasing opportunities of co-design, co- production and procurement. This will include training and development of staff in the third sector.
Key Policy Drivers x Strategic Guidance for Community Planning Partnerships: Community Learning and Development, 2012 x Community Empowerment and Renewal Bill (2012) x Land Reform Review (2012) x Equality Act (2010)
Business Transformation Partnership work Core Business NEW x Development of ‘Whole Town’ plans which x Community Services- aim to bring together public bodies, Community Learning and communities, voluntary bodies and Development business organisations to discuss to x Community Services- ONGOING enhance the vitality and viability of towns Community Arts x Community Asset Transfer and town centres in the Scottish Borders. x Community Services- x Community Resilience- develop community Libraries & Information emergency plans x Leisure and Sport x Community Engagement/Development x Emergency Planning x Development of the Third Sector & x Engineering Asset Communities (also in Priority 6) Management x Estates Management
5 Priority 5 Maintaining and improving our high quality environment The Scottish Borders has the leading edge over other areas in Scotland with its high quality natural environment and its historic towns, each with its own unique character and heritage. From the Council’s Household Surveys it is clear that people are very concerned that this high quality environment is maintained and enhanced. With this in mind everyday services required by residents, such as emptying bins, cleaning streets, cutting grass and repairing potholes, are now firmly focused on the needs of the local customer. Our longer term focus is on promoting high quality physical planning, conservation, regeneration, and community safety to ensure that our towns are clean, safe, secure and vibrant, and can be enjoyed by all our residents and visitors. Added to this, we will continue to provide frontline responses in emergencies e.g. severe weather or flooding, but will increasingly work with communities so that they can mitigate against the effects of such situations and help us to respond safely at a local level.
It is important that the Council provides strong leadership in developing low carbon and sustainable approaches to the delivery of everyday services e.g. waste collection, recycling etc, but also other programmes and projects that we are involved with or can influence across the Scottish Borders.
Key Policy Drivers x Climate Change (Scotland) Act (2009) x Zero Waste Plan- Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2012 x National Planning Framework x Getting the best from our land - A land use strategy for Scotland (2011) x National Roads Maintenance Review- recommendations (2011) x Police and Fire Reform (2012 onwards) x Strategic Development Plan (SDP) for the Edinburgh and South East Scotland area Business Transformation Partnership work Core Business NEW x Development of the Low Carbon Economy x Pay Parking x Street Lighting Efficiency Project (E&I) (also in Priority 1) x Neighbourhood Services- x Develop an Integrated Waste Strategy (E&I) x Community Safety- development of Safer Communities x Review of Parks and Open Spaces provision (E&I) pathfinder x Neighbourhood Services- x Community Resilience- develop community Neighbourhood Operations x Built & Natural Heritage ONGOING emergency plans (also in Priority 4) x Flood/Coast/Reservoir x Trading x Neighbourhood Services- Waste Management x Fleet Management 6 Priority 6 Developing our workforce A highly skilled, motivated workforce is the Council’s most important asset. In rising to the challenges we face over the coming years, we need to develop an agile, highly motivated workforce that can respond and adapt easily to a dynamic working environment across departmental and, where necessary, organisational boundaries. Staff will need to adapt to both where and when they work, as well as the roles that they perform. Key to this will be continuing the take-up of flexible ways of working which equip and enable staff to work anywhere and anytime and promotes a flexible and adaptive mindset. There also needs to be a focus on transferrable skills and competence-based roles – where people define themselves less by their job description and more by their competencies and skill sets.
Developing our workforce in this way will require investment in developing and supporting our staff, and in managing change to enable new ways of working. This will provide opportunities for staff to achieve better job satisfaction, personal and professional development as well as a better work-life balance. The Council needs to be a role model for the rest of the Borders and needs to play its part in providing high quality employment and training opportunities, including apprenticeships. The workforce needs to reflect the diversity of the Scottish Borders population and be accessible to equalities groups such as the disabled, ethnic minority, LGBT, the young and the elderly.
Key Policy Drivers x Teaching Scotland's Future - Report of a review of teacher education in Scotland (2011) x National Competency Framework for Early Years x Equality Act (2010) x Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 x Concordat between the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Scottish Executive (1999) Business Transformation Partnership work Core Business NEW x Development of Third Sector and x Human Resources x Employee Terms and Conditions (also in Priority 8) Communities- support and training (also in x Legal and Democratic Priority 4) Services ONGOING x Information Technology x Workstyle Transformation x Wellbeing & Safety x Equalities Mainstreaming approach and equality x Risk Management, outcomes Business Continuity & Insurance
7 Priority 7 Developing our assets and resources The Council has a large portfolio of land, buildings and other assets. It is important that these are used as effectively and efficiently as possible to deliver on Council policies and priorities, and these assets are fit for purpose to meet the future requirements of service delivery. To meet the financial pressures on the Council there is a need for considerable property rationalisation, involving partners where appropriate, such as for co-location. Our actions should not be to the detriment of the local economy and regeneration of our town centres. Where appropriate the opportunity should be taken to transfer assets to communities. There is a need to identify further renewable energy and energy efficiency opportunities in relation to these assets and resources.
Key Policy Drivers x Report on the Future Delivery of Public Services by the Commission chaired by Dr Campbell Christie (2011) x Equality Act 2010 (especially the new public sector Equality Duty, 2011) x Community Empowerment and Renewal Bill (2012) x Scottish Borders Local Development Plan x Capital Financial Plan
Business Transformation Partnership work Core Business NEW x Joint Asset and Resource Planning – x CS Museums and x Review of the School Estate (ELL)- (links closely to working with our partners to maximise use Galleries Priority 2) resources and create efficiencies e.g. x Property & Facilities x Review of Cultural Service (ELL) shared premises. x Office Accommodation x Increased Planning Fee income (E&I) x Catering x Review of Fees and Charges (E&I) x Cleaning ONGOING x Asset Management x Asset Management Planning (see also Priority 1) x Community Asset Transfer Group x Design and Projects management x Wellbeing & Safety x Risk Management, Business Continuity & Insurance 8 Priority 8 Ensuring excellent, adaptable, collaborative and accessible public services Despite the reduction in public spending Scottish Borders Council and our partners still have significant amounts of money available to provide the services that people need, in places and in ways that suit our communities best. No longer can we provide services “as they’ve always been”. Lifestyles and expectations have changed and we, along with our partners, need to be innovative and respond appropriately, ensuring that services are fully accessible, and are delivered collaboratively when it makes most sense and provides value for money.
Legislation is also going to influence the way we deliver services and work with partners, not least the Integration of Health and Social Care Integration Bill Key Policy Drivers x Report on the Future Delivery of Public Services by the Commission chaired by Dr Campbell Christie. Published on 29 June 2011. x Integration of Adult Health & Social Care Integration Bill (consultation 2012) x Scottish Government Response to the McClelland Review of ICT Infrastructure in the Public Sector in Scotland (2011) x Equality Act 2010 x Financial Pressures (Capital and revenue) x Social Care (Self-directed Support) (Scotland) Bill (2012) x Scottish Government's Digital Strategy and Local Government's IT Strategy Business Transformation Partnership work Core Business NEW x Integration of Health and Social Care (also x Customer Services x Employee Terms and Conditions (also in Priority 6) in Priority 3) x Passenger Transport x Provision of Passenger Transport Services through x Sustainable Transport across the Borders- x Finance and Procurement Community Partners (E&I) development of work with partners x Information Technology x SBC Customer Strategy x Cheviot Pilot (Health and Social Care) x Human Resources ONGOING x Service Improvement through Technology Programme x Information Technology Programme x Resourcelink Self-Service x Call-centre replacement x Library/Contact Centre Integration x Local Bus Service Review x Equalities Mainstreaming approach and equality outcomes x Information Management Programme
9 Annex 2
Performance Management Framework
April 2013
1 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
Contents
Page 1) Purpose……………………………………………………………… 3 2) Performance Management………………………………………… 3 3) Arrangements to Date……………………………………………… 3 4) Single Outcome Agreement for the Borders…………………….. 4 5) Alignment of Activity to the SOA………………………………….. 5 6) Grouping of Activity…………………………………………………. 8 7) Monitoring and Reporting Delivery……………………………….. 8 8) Covalent……………………………………………………………… 11 9) Capturing Partner Activity…………………………………………. 11 10) Aligning Budgets to Council Priorities……………………………. 11 11) Improvement through Self-Evaluation……………………………. 12 12) Public Performance Reporting……………………………………. 12 Links to Individuals’ work and Performance Review and 13) 13 Development (PRD)………………………………………………… 14) Measuring Successful Delivery…………………………………… 13
Corporate Plan- April 2013 2 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
Performance Management Framework
1) Purpose This document details the Performance Management Framework (PMF) that will enable Scottish Borders Council to monitor and report progress against the priorities identified in the Scottish Borders Single Outcome Agreement (SOA) and within its Corporate Plan.
2) Performance Management Effective Performance Management is critical to the success of any organisation, including Local Authorities. It provides a framework to achieve aims/objectives and promotes the continuous improvement of services provided to the public. In terms of best practice, Local Authorities that are recognised as having good performance management in place demonstrate the following characteristics:
x A focus on community priorities, based on facts about customer and citizen need x A strong shared vision of what the organisation is trying to achieve, which is effectively communicated within the organisation x Robust and effective planning systems linked to the allocation of resources x Clear measures demonstrating the impact of delivery x Accountable staff empowered to act within a clear managerial framework x Robust financial management arrangements in place.
Central to this is having a systematic approach to performance monitoring, which is also a core concept of Best Value. Essentially:
x Performance, including financial performance, is systematically measured across all areas of activity x Performance information is accurate, up to date and rigorously monitored x An effective system is in place for addressing areas of under performance x Performance is systematically reported.
3) Arrangements to date Single Outcome Agreements (SOA) require us to focus on assessing the impact that the collective actions of the Community Planning Partnership (CPP) are having on quality of life for people in the Scottish Borders. The monitoring and reporting we have had in the past has tended to focus on delivery of activity (actions and sub-actions in business plans) and placed little focus on the impact this activity is having. Corporately we have not had a robust, broad range of Performance Indicators (PIs) required to demonstrate
Corporate Plan- April 2013 3 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
that work on the ground is having a significant impact. Although a Framework was approved in 2010, corporate changes have meant that reporting arrangements have become less robust.
4) Single Outcome Agreement for the Borders The Government has set out 16 National Outcomes which all 32 local authorities and partners must use as the basis for their strategic planning, as well as 6 policy priorities (part of the revised SOA Guidance, Dec 2012). SBC and Community Planning Partners have defined a number of key strategic themes that align themselves to the national framework and will allow us to develop appropriate joint programmes of work that are of a priority for the Scottish Borders.
Critical for the SOA, and definition of the CPP strategic themes, is a keen understanding of place. Only through the analysis of data, ongoing community engagement, household surveys, audit and inspection and the continuous monitoring of performance can a CPP assess what is a priority for an area, and what is required to be the focus of its collective activity. Equally, this keen understanding of place and of organisational performance is vital to SBC when it comes to planning at both a corporate level and at a business planning level.
A robust Performance Management Framework is the means by which we can assess, monitor and evaluate the impact of our actions. It should allow key decisions makers, managers and the public to assess the effectiveness of our activities and, when used on an ongoing basis, should allow business decisions to be taken. But it can only be effective when: - it is linked at all levels (from the high level strategic to departmental business plans) - it is maintained by all who are involved - it is regarded as useful by those who are making decisions.
The Scottish Government has less interest in the activity being undertaken to drive a change in performance - they have more interest in the impact of this activity (i.e.) improved performance. Therefore, at the front of our performance framework will be the outcome indicators that have been developed nationally and that can show what progress is being made in the Borders by the community planning partnership. Each Community Planning Strategic theme will be responsible for defining appropriate outcome indicators and for co-ordinating a programme of work that ensures the indicators move in a positive direction. For example, work under the “Economy and Infrastructure” theme to deliver the Borders Railway should have a positive impact on economic outcomes, demonstrated by positive trends for economic outcome indicators e.g. earnings, employment rate etc.
As well as partnership priorities, SBC also has a number of corporate priorities that must be addressed and are articulated in the Corporate Plan. Sometimes, these priorities will be addressed by the work we do in partnership but sometimes they will be addressed by the work that we undertake ourselves.
Corporate Plan- April 2013 4 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
Some of the outcome indictors used to monitor progress for SBC will be common to the SOA and some will be specific to SBC services. Performance indicators relating to the Council’s priorities also need to form part of this Performance Management Framework. See Exhibits 1 and 2
Performance Indicators (PIs) will not move in a positive direction unless work is done to influence them (e.g.) the targets set for recycling rates will not be achieved, unless work is undertaken specifically to meet these targets. Capturing the work that directly influences the PIs, whilst not important for Government, is important for our internal reporting and monitoring and gives assurance that any targets set can be achieved.
The absolute measure of success is performance improvement. Delivering pieces of work/strategies/initiatives/programmes is not the measure. However, the delivery of these should give the reassurance that targets will be met and performance will improve.
5) Alignment of activity to the SOA Our SOA is the overarching strategic planning document for the Borders and should allow our Community Planning Strategic Board to monitor and evaluate progress, through a robust set of outcome indicators (which form part of this Performance Management Framework). The Scottish Government will also use the SOA to monitor our progress.
Each partner within the CPP will also undertake work that contributes to the national outcomes but is not directly part of the SOA. For example: x Borders College will deliver training that has a positive impact on employability outcomes for young people x NHS Borders will provide clinical services that have a positive impact on health outcomes.
Whilst we may have some involvement in and influence on what our partners do, the delivery of their core service will be contained within their own corporate planning arrangements. The same is true for SBC. Our Corporate Plan covers not only what we do in partnership, but what we need to deliver as core business. Increasingly however, the way in which we deliver services, both on our own and within partnerships has to change to meet both customer expectations and the constrained financial context facing public services. This complex transformation agenda must be reflected in our actions and form part of our Performance Management Framework.
Corporate Plan- April 2013 5 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
The outcomes the Community Planning Partnership wants to work towards, to improve quality of life. Outcome indicators will allow us to measure progress e.g. Life Expectancy
SBC Priorities, underpinned by a range of performance indicators (outcome indicators, key performance indicators, statutory performance indicators, service indicators, progress milestones for key project etc) and clear links to corporate improvement actions
Business plans, containing performance and operational indicators. Quality/standards reports will also be used to inform corporate improvement actions.
Performance review and development (PRD) for individuals within businesses. Personal performance indicators
Exhibit 1
Corporate Plan- April 2013 6 National Outcome Scottish Community Government Planning Strategic Council Corporate Plan priorities Policy Priority themes O1: We live in a Scotland that is the most attractive place for Economic Growth doing business in Europe and Recovery Economy and Infrastructure O2: We realise our full economic potential with more and Employment P1: Encouraging sustainable economic growth better employment opportunities for our people
O3: We are better educated, more skilled and more successful, renowned for our research and innovation O4: Our young people are successful learners, confident P2: Improving attainment and achievement levels for all our children and individuals, effective contributors and responsible citizens Economy and young people, both within and out with the formal curriculum Infrastructure O5: Our children have the best start in life and are ready to Early Years succeed Early Intervention and Outcomes for Older Prevention O6: We live longer, healthier lives People
O7: We have tackled the significant inequalities in Scottish Health Inequalities society P3: Providing high quality support, care and protection to children, young people, adults, families, and older people O8: We have improved the life chances for children, young people and families at risk
O15: Our people are able to maintain their independence as they get older and are able to access appropriate support when they need it O9: We live our lives safe from crime, disorder and danger Safer Communities and offending Place and Communities O10: We live in well-designed, sustainable places where we are able to access the amenities and services we need
O11: We have strong, resilient and supportive communities where people take responsibility for their own actions and how they affect others P4: Building the capacity and resilience of our communities and voluntary sector O12: We value and enjoy our built and natural environment P5: Maintaining and improving our high quality environment and protect it and enhance it for future generations
O13: We take pride in a strong, fair and inclusive national identity
O14: We reduce the local and global environmental impact of our consumption and production O16: Our public services are high quality, continually Christie Future model of Public P6: Developing our workforce improving, efficient and responsive to local people’s needs Commission Report Service Delivery P7: Developing our assets and resources and P8: Ensuring excellent, adaptable, collaborative & accessible public services recommendations Exhibit 2
7 6) Grouping of Activity Our planning set-up should enable the grouping of Activity, PIs and Risks together for the purposes of monitoring, evaluating & reporting. Groupings can therefore be used to generate reporting on areas such as:
x SOA x Early Years x Economic Development
What is important is that everything aligns to the SOA outcomes and to the priorities in the Corporate Plan that then allows us to monitor and evaluate the impact of our work. The grouping of Performance Indicators or indeed activity is therefore a simple process, allowing management to focus on and monitor/evaluate/report delivery of the most relevant areas.
The National Outcomes are set and directive, but the strategic themes that the CPP has chosen to focus on are specific to the Scottish Borders. The priorities within our Corporate Plan are specific to local need and the complex context in which SBC operates. Business plans at departmental level should always look to the outcomes that are trying to be achieved and their success should be monitored by the impact that activity is having, NOT simply by the completion of tasks.
7) Monitoring and Reporting Delivery
The purpose of monitoring, evaluating and reporting is to ensure delivery and to demonstrate improvement. The indicators used in the SOA will be reported on an annual basis to the Scottish Government. Reporting annually poses no problems because the majority of the PIs in place are updated at least annually. This annual report will be approved by the Community Planning Strategic Board, as well as SBC and equivalent partner bodies.
However, because a large number of PIs are only updated annually, this does pose problems for quarterly reporting e.g. to the Community Planning Strategic Board, and for monthly reporting to Corporate Management Team.
Therefore, the purpose of this more regular reporting should be to promote accountability and provide reassurance that the work in place will deliver the targeted change in the PIs and if not, allow the opportunity to take any required rectifying action. Reporting must therefore be a mixture of the delivery of activity, AND change in PI results. The table overleaf, in Exhibit 3, shows the reporting timetable/requirements.
8 Performance Reports
Audience Report Frequency Purpose / Content
Single Outcome Annual Government requirement to provide a SOA progress report in September of each Scottish Government Agreement (SOA) (September) year including PI results and Local outcome narrative
Community Planning Regular report covering PI results and high level partner activity. Summary and SOA Twice yearly Strategic Board Action from this will also be issued to the Council’s Executive Regular reports to the Council’s Executive and relevant Service Committees on the Corporate Plan Twice yearly delivery of the Corporate Plan. These reports will cover both delivery of activity and PI results Council Executive and Annual SPI comparison report where Scottish Borders performance is compared Statutory Performance Annual relevant Service with the other Local Authorities. This now includes a set of SPIs defined by Indicators (SPIs) Committees SOLACE and will be used for Local Authority Benchmarking purposes Regular report on the complaints received and the time taken to resolve them, Complaints Quarterly through CRM at each relevant Service Committee.
Corporate Management Regular reports, by exception, on the delivery of the Corporate Plan. These reports Corporate Plan Monthly Team (CMT) will cover both delivery of activity and key PI results. Report providing an account of decisions taken by the Chief Social Work Officer in the statutory areas of Fostering and Adoption, Child Protection, Secure Orders, Annual report of the Chief Annual Adult Protection, Adults with Incapacity, Mental Health and Criminal Justice. Social Work Officer Overview of regulation and inspection, workforce issues, social policy themes, and key challenges for the service. Public Performance Education and Lifelong Annual report on the performance of Education and Lifelong Learning services, Reporting Learning- Standards and Annual highlighting achievements and identifying areas for improvement. Quality Report Annual report by the Joint Director of Public Health, presenting a picture of health Annual Report by the Annual in the Borders (key trends etc) and makes comparisons with both the rest of the Director of Public Health UK and with Europe.
9 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
Financial Reporting The purpose of these reports is to advise the level of General Fund resource, to - level of council tax Annual outline Council Tax levels, to detail where the budget allocation and to report of the - financial out-turn performance of the welfare benefits service - welfare benefits Public Performance Reporting Focus on a particular SOA outcome and on a specific Council priority from the SB Connect 3 times a year Corporate Plan
Council Website ongoing All of the above performance information
Exhibit 3
Corporate Plan- April 2013 10 8) Covalent The Covalent system offers the functionality required to effectively monitor and drive not only SOA delivery, but also the delivery of specific action plans, audits, benchmarking, improvement plans etc.... In outline, the mechanism for doing this is as follows:
x Covalent can capture all activity (actions, sub-actions), PIs and Risks x These items can be linked together within Covalent – (e.g.) actions linked to PIs. This enables a direct link to be seen between the work being undertaken on the ground and the resulting impact of this work. x Covalent can group elements together (e.g.) the Children’s Plan actions, PIs and Risks can be grouped together. x Specific groupings can be monitored and reported.
Covalent can easily be structured around the revised SOA. All of the business plan activity can be aligned under outcomes, as can the SOA PIs. Capturing what is being worked on in business plans is vitally important. Internally, we are in a good position to report on how well the Council is delivering, but we must develop the capacity to capture CPP activity.
9) Capturing Partner Activity All SOAs cover more than just Council business – they also capture key PIs relating to Community Planning Partners. For effective monitoring and reporting, it is important to work towards capturing the activity taking place in partner organisations (i.e.) the high level work that influences a change in the PIs, and Covalent can be used for this purpose too. In fact, some of our partners already have a licence to use this.
10) Aligning Budgets to the Corporate Plan A recommendation from the 2010 Best Value (BV) Audit (by the Accounts Commission) and a recurring theme of other BV audits is the integration of financial and business planning. The Council recognises the benefits which would flow from fully aligned corporate budget and planning processes. Initial steps have been taken with the approval of a new 5 year financial strategy on the 7 Feb 2013. The strategy provides the basis for the revised 10 year capital plan and 5 year revenue plan approved by the Administration.
The budget process has been informed by corporate priorities and by the programmes defined within our community planning themes. It is recognised that there is a need to more formally link specific outcomes to the resources deployed through our revenue and capital financial plans, and those of our partners, and this work will be commenced as early a possible in the new financial year.
11 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
11) Improvement through self evaluation (PSIF) Robust and regular self-assessment is critical to inform and deliver performance improvement. The Council has previously undertaken annual corporate self assessments based around the Best Value criteria which have informed its corporate improvement planning. The Council has now agreed to take this work a step further and has signed up to the Public Sector Improvement Framework (PSIF). The Corporate Management Team has carried out an initial corporate self-assessment.
PSIF has been developed and promoted by the Improvement Service as a holistic self-assessment framework that can be applied across the public sector. It is built around EFQM, Investors in People and Charter Mark and also closely aligns with Education Scotland and Social Work Care Inspectorate frameworks. It is hoped that this will become the single self- assessment framework for Local Government in Scotland and will eventually lead to a reduction in the audit and inspection burden currently faced by Councils.
As part of PSIF, the Council will be undertaking a bi-annual self assessment cycle. A rolling programme of more in depth PSIF assessments will also be carried out across Departments. These will generate similar output to the Best Value action plans for improvement. Action plans should be aligned to the Council’s priorities and, built into business plans and progress monitored/reported through this performance improvement framework.
The Council’s Education and Lifelong Learning and Social Work Services carry out their own self-assessment evaluations as part of Education Scotland and Social Work Inspectorate audits. For this reason those services covered by these audits should not be included within the Council’s PSIF self- assessment evaluation programme at this stage.
12) Public Performance Reporting The Government have stated that a ‘one size fits all’ approach to Public Performance Reporting (PPR) does not work. They are stressing the importance of pushing data to interested parties via various means and also having data available for individuals to access themselves. A proposal for PPR is
Proactive: x Focus on specific areas of the SOA in SB Connect (3 times per year) x Focus on specific Council priority in SBC Connect e.g. Priority 1- Economy Made Available via Council website or hard copy: x Annual SOA report to Government (Sep) x Annual SBC Corporate Plan report (May) x Annual SPI report, including SOLACE Benchmarking
Corporate Plan- April 2013 12 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
13) Links to Individuals’ work and Performance Review and Development (PRD)
In order to ensure that an individual employee's performance and development objectives are fully aligned with the priorities of the Council, a robust and regular staff appraisal process is vital. The “Performance Review and Development” (PRD) process will enable this alignment and ensure the establishment of the “Golden Thread”, linking personal objectives right through to delivery of the Council’s strategies, plans and priorities. It is therefore vital that all Heads of Service ensure that PRD is being implemented across their service area. An audit will be undertaken between 20th and 24th May 2013 to establish where gaps exist and to define what further support is required to reach our target of 95% of staff having an up to date PRD (i.e. done within the last 12 months) by the end of 2013.
As part of SBC’s continuing commitment to Investors in People (IIP) accreditation, a clear performance management framework, linking all levels of the planning hierarchy right through to the individual, will be necessary to evidence. This will allow everyone in the organisation to see how their work contributes to the achievement of Corporate Priorities.
The Performance Management Framework will not in itself deliver performance improvement. It will however provide the basis for improvement through the reports and linkages it provides.
In order to deliver improved performance, the Council and its partners will need to take the action necessary to address performance issues and tackle areas of poor performance.
14) Measuring Successful Delivery We must be confident that we are delivering. To do this, we must be clear on the important delivery measures.
There are 3 possible measures of success - PI improvement over time (Trend), PI performance against target (Target) and action/sub-action delivery (Delivery). These areas are examined in more detail in the table below
Corporate Plan- April 2013 13 Annex 2- Performance Management Framework
Performance Description Areas
Covalent is set up so that an UPWARD always demonstrates performance improvement. The trend data is calculated over a set period of time (e.g.) for Trend : annual PIs, a maximum of 4 years data is used to calculate the trend.
An improving trend over time is the focus of Government reporting
Achievement of target is also important. If targets are achieved, then automatically we should demonstrate upward trends over time. Targets set the scene for the performance improvement detailing the gap in Target : improvement and in what timescale it should be achieved
Achieving target is an important element of performance improvement
PIs will not move in a positive direction unless work is done to influence them (e.g.) the targets set for recycling rates will not be met, unless work is undertaken specifically to meet these targets. Capturing the work that Delivery : directly influences the PIs is important for internal reporting/monitoring and to give assurance that any target set can be achieved.
Work must be done to drive performance improvement
These are the measures we used to demonstrate delivery in our first annual report to Scottish Government -
Summary – SOA Report to Government (30th September 2009) Rating
1) A greater percentage of PIs show an improving trend than declining trend : Good (52% improving against 20% declining)
2) Over 50% of PIs show an improving or stable performance trend : Good (52% improving and 8% stable)
3) Almost 60% of PIs are on or above target : Good
However, for internal reporting, we could also set targets for each of the measures
Corporate Plan- April 2013 14 ITEM 10
Proposals by Ofcom for Changes to Television News Programming in ITV Border
Report by the Chief Executive
Scottish Borders Council
25th April 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY 1.1 The purpose of this report is to gain approval for the Council’s response to the proposals put forward by Ofcom for changes to news programming for ITV Border.
1.2 As part of the licence renewal process ITV has been discussing with the independent television regulator Ofcom, a future Border TV service. This would be aimed at increasing the amount of regional news and current affairs programming by enhancing the coverage of Scottish issues for viewers in the South of Scotland (i.e. the Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway).
1.3 The main proposals put forward (see Appendix 1) involve an enhanced nightly Border news programme Lookaround providing 30 minutes of news and a choice between: x A new weekly 30 minute current affairs and politics programme for the Border TV region (i.e. covering Cumbria and the South of Scotland) or x An extra 90 minutes of current affairs programming each week that could be shared with STV and could result in the retransmission of the STV Scotland Tonight programme.
The consultation also asks whether there is a different and more appropriate option to the above in respect to news and current affairs coverage.
1.4 The options form part of a wider Ofcom consultation on TV broadcast licenses which is open until 2 May 2013.
2 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 It is recommended that the Council:
x In relation to the available options being proposed by Ofcom, the Council supports the second option which is an extra 90 minutes of current affairs programming each week that could be shared with STV and could result in the retransmission of the STV Scotland Tonight programme. Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 1 x Indicates to Ofcom that the most desirable way forward for the Scottish Borders would be a Scottish national television channel with strong and effective local news coverage for the Scottish Borders.
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 2 3 BACKGROUND 3.1 ITV provides the Channel 3 television service in England, Wales and parts of Scotland including Border TV and Scottish Television (STV). Public service broadcasters must meet certain programming obligations, such as the provision of news and current affairs programming and the amount of original and independent productions.
3.2 The current UK wide Channel 3 and Channel 5 television broadcast licenses will expire on the 31st December 2014. Ofcom provided advice to the UK Government’s Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on whether the existing licensees could continue to operate services for the 10 years period from 2015 onwards and meet the purposes of public service broadcasting on a commercially sustainable basis. This advice indicated that the existing licensees had presented proposals that were realistic, sustainable and commensurate with current levels.
3.3 In November 2012 the UK Government’s Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport announced that the Government did not intend to prevent the process of the renewal of the Channel 3 Public Service Broadcasting Licenses for a full 10 year term from their expiry at the end of 2014. Based on this decision Ofcom are now continuing the process of negotiation with the existing licensees on the renewal and details of the new licensees, and has issued a consultation paper with a series of questions. (see Appendix 2).The consultation period ends on the 2nd May 2014.
3.4 No changes have been proposed by Channel 3 licensees to regional television areas. This means that Scottish Television would continue to cover central and northern Scotland. However ITV has been discussing with Ofcom, a future service for the Border TV area (comprising Cumbria, Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders) that is aimed at increasing the amount of regional news and current affairs programming by enhancing the coverage of Scottish issues for viewers in the South of Scotland (i.e. the Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway).
3.5 Scottish Borders Council together with Dumfries and Galloway Council and Cumbria County Council were involved in direct discussions over the previous changes to Border TV news programming arrangements in July 2008. This resulted in an early weekday evening ‘Lookaround programme’ involving 15 minutes Border news (covering the Scottish Borders, Dumfries and Galloway and Cumbria) followed by 15 minutes of Border/Tyne Tees news (covering the entire Border /Tyne Tees TV region), and a short weekday late evening news programme following the ITV news.
4 PROPOSALS FOR CHANGES TO NEWS PROGRAMMING 4.1 The UK Government’s Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport indicated to Ofcom that under ITV’s proposals viewers in the South of Scotland (including the Scottish Borders) would not receive the same level of programming about Scotland as those living in central and northern Scotland (who are served by STV licensees). She said that the quality and plurality of news provision was of the utmost importance in the light of
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 3 these concerns.
4.2 To tackle this issue two options have been put forward by Ofcom for changes to new programming in the Border TV area, following discussions with ITV on the licence renewal process. These are:
4.3 Option 1 involves an enhanced nightly Border news programme Lookaround providing 30 minutes of news from Cumbria and Southern Scotland, not including stories from the north east of England.
In addition, it is proposed that there would be a new weekly 30 minute current affairs and politics programme for the Border TV region (i.e. covering Cumbria and the South of Scotland) and that will focus on the stories, issues and concerns of viewers in the Borders. It will have a particular emphasis on matters dealt with by the Scottish Parliament. It would be broadcast at 10.35pm for 30 minutes, in most weeks of the year and could be repeated during the weekend.
4.3 Option 2 involves the same new nightly Border news programme as Option 1 i.e. an enhanced nightly Border news programme Lookaround providing 30 minutes of news from Cumbria and Southern Scotland, not including stories from the north east of England.
In this option there would be an extra 90 minutes of current affairs programming each week that could be shared with STV and could result in the retransmission of the STV Scotland Tonight programme to viewers in Border Scotland while viewers in England would see programming shown on the rest of the ITV network Border.
Ofcom is also asking for views on whether, if this option was adopted, ITV would be required to split the signal for Border so that viewers in Border Scotland see Scotland Tonight (or similar) while viewers in England would see programming shown on the rest of the ITV network.
4.4 ITV’s preference is for Option 1 and, if it is approved by Ofcom, it would intend to have the new services in place by the Autumn of 2013 which would allow it to fully cover the run up to the referendum on independence for Scotland.
4.5 The main Consultation Paper also asks whether there is a different option to the above two options in respect to news and current affairs coverage.
4.6 To complement these proposals Ofcom is also asking whether the Border licence should be amended to reduce the proportion of regional production required to a sustainable level. This would allow more resources to be made available for local news gathering which is important in a licence area serving a relatively small population.
5. The Response
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 4 5.1 News programming is vital for informing the public about decision making in local government and other public bodies and in providing details about other local news and events.
5.2 ITV Border covers a significant number of locally important stories which are unlikely to have been covered by more national TV media. Scottish Borders Council receives fairly good coverage of Council news and events from ITV Border. Between 1 January and 31 March 2013, ITV Border covered 14 items which directly related to the work of Scottish Borders Council.
5.3 Ofcom has carried out research into the preference of Border viewers for regional news. This research which involved full day sessions with participants in four locations including Galashiels, concluded that respondents universally would prefer a return to a service covering a smaller area in the belief that it would lead to more coverage of each of the localities surveyed. Although a service aimed at both central and southern Scotland received some support, many expressed concerns that in such a scenario, coverage would focus on the major population centres further north at the expense of news about the local area.
5.4 Any options for future television news programming needs to be measured on what is best for the people and communities of the Scottish Borders. It is considered that the ideal option would be for a Scottish national television channel with strong and effective local news coverage for the Scottish Borders as happens in BBC radio. This would meet demands for both more Scottish and local news coverage. However this is not an option that has been put forward by ITV or the regional television broadcasting companies.
5.5 With respect to the options outlined above a judgement needs to be made on whether this is best served by a new weekly 30 minute current affairs and politics programme for the Border TV region (i.e. covering Cumbria and the South of Scotland) or an extra 90 minutes of current affairs programming each week that could be shared with STV and could result in the retransmission of the STV Scotland Tonight programme.
5.6 It is considered that Option 2 would be the most appropriate option for Scottish Borders. This option would provide an extra 90 minutes of current affairs programming each week that could be shared with STV and could result in the retransmission of the STV Scotland Tonight programme to viewers in Border Scotland. This option would enable the Scottish Borders to develop and promote a stronger voice within Scotland by providing the opportunity for the area to influence the contents of this STV currents affairs news programming from any domination by the main population centres in central and northern Scotland. Option 2 would also allow an enhanced nightly Border news programme Lookaround providing 30 minutes of news from Cumbria and Southern Scotland which would provide more local news coverage in line with issues and points raised in paragraphs 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 above.
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 5 6 IMPLICATIONS 6.1 Financial
(a) There are no financial implications arising from this report.
6.2 Risk and Mitigations
(a) Local television news is an important media for providing the public of the Scottish Borders with news about the Council and local issues. There is a risk that not responding to this consultation would have an adverse affect on the future of local news programming coverage for the Scottish Borders.
6.3 Equalities
(a) There are no direct implications for equality and diversity arising from this report.
6.4 Acting Sustainably
(a) There are no significant economic, social and environmental issues arising from this report.
6.5 Carbon Management
(a) There are no effects on carbon emissions.
6.6 Rural Proofing
(a) Rural Proofing is not required as proposals do not relate to new or amended policy.
6.7 Changes to Scheme of Administration or Scheme of Delegation
(a) There are no changes to be made.
7 CONSULTATION 7.1 The Corporate Management Team, the Chief Financial Officer, the Head of Corporate Governance, the Head of Audit and Risk, the Clerk to the Council, and Corporate Communications have all been consulted in respect of this report and its recommendations. Their comments have been incorporated into this report. Any further comments will be reported at the meeting.
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 6 Approved by
Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number Douglas Scott Senior Consultant
Background Papers: Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed programming obligations, Ofcom, February 2013
Previous Minute Reference: nil
Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. Rosie Kennedy can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.
Contact Douglas Scott, Senior Consultant Chief Executive’s Department Scottish Borders Council, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 7 Appendix 1
Ofcom’s consultation on programming options for ITV Border
ITV has been discussing with Ofcom proposals to introduce an enhanced, more distinct news service for the Border region. These discussions are part of the Channel 3 licence renewal process to secure a strong and sustainable future for ITV regional news
Ofcom has recently launched a consultation1 asking for views on two options (below) for the ITV Border region.
ITV’s preference is for Option 1 and, if it is approved by Ofcom, we would hope to have the new services in place by the Autumn of this year, allowing us to fully cover the run up to the referendum on independence for Scotland.
Option 1: ITV’s proposal
An enhanced nightly Border news programme Lookaround providing 30 minutes of news from Cumbria and Southern Scotland, not including stories from the north east of England.
In addition, a new weekly 30 minute current affairs and politics programme for the Border region that will focus on the stories, issues and concerns of viewers in Border. It will have a particular emphasis on matters dealt with by the Scottish Parliament. It would be broadcast at 10.35pm for 30 minutes, in most weeks of the year and could be repeated during the weekend.
This proposal is based first and foremost on the needs of viewers. It is clear from both our and Ofcom’s research2 that viewers in Border want news about their local area rather than news dominated by the urban agendas of either Central Belt Scotland or the North East of England.
Option 2: an alternative
The same new nightly Border news programme as Option 1.
An extra 90 minutes of current affairs programming each week that could be shared with STV and could result in the retransmission of the STV Scotland Tonight programme in Border. Ofcom is also asking for views on whether, if this option was adopted, ITV would be required to split the signal for Border so that
1 Ofcom’s consultation: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/c3-c5- obligations/summary/c3-c5-obligations.pdf
2 Ofcom’s viewer research into news provision in Border Scotland: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/tv-ops/tv-border-news.pdf viewers in Border Scotland see Scotland Tonight (or similar) while viewers in England would see programming shown on the rest of the ITV network3.
Background
x In November 2012 the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport announced that the Government will renew the Channel 3 Public Service Broadcasting Licenses for a full 10 year term from their expiry at the end of 2014. x As part of the licence renewal process ITV has been discussing with the regulator, Ofcom, a future Border service that allows viewers to retain a news programme that provides news about their area as well as more programming about Scotland (particularly the South of Scotland). x ITV currently provides 15 minutes Border news plus 15 minutes of Border/Tyne Tees news per weekday evening for the Border/Tyne Tees region. x Even the current Border regional news service, Lookaround, is far more popular than the comparable services in Scotland. Furthermore, Lookaround enjoys the highest viewing figures of any ITV regional programme (and higher than most network programmes).
Share of viewing weeks 1-47 of 2012 ITV1: 18.00 and 18.29 ITV average 19.2% ITV Border Region (Scotland and England) 38.5% ITV Border (Scotland only) 41.5% STV (Central and Northern regions) 26.5%
3 para 4.21 of Ofcom’s consultation: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/c3-c5-obligations/summary/c3-c5- obligations.pdf
Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed programming obligations Proposals for amendments to obligations for Channel 3 and Channel 5 ahead of a new licensing period
Consultation Publication date: 21 February 2013 Closing Date for Responses: 2 May 2013
Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed licence obligations for the next licence term
Contents
Section Page 1 Executive Summary 1 2 Network programme and production obligations 5 3 Nations and regions programme and production obligations for the Channel 3 licensees 12 4 Regional programming options for the Border licence 23 5 Definition of peak-time viewing 32
Annex Page 1 Responding to this consultation 38 2 Consultation questions 42 3 Regional programming: current and proposed licence obligations 43 4 Channel 3 licensees’ regional and local programming: current and proposed provision 47
2 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Section 1 1 Executive Summary Following advice from Ofcom to the Secretary of State about future options for Channel 3 and Channel 5, she has confirmed that she does not intend to prevent the renewal of their licences.
1.1 The current Channel 3 and Channel 5 broadcast licences will expire on 31 December 2014. In preparation for the new licensing period, Ofcom gave advice to the Secretary of State on whether the existing licensees could continue to operate services that would meet the purposes of public service broadcasting (PSB) on a commercially sustainable basis, in accordance with its duty under section 229 of the Communications Act 2003 (the ‘2003 Act’). We submitted a report to the Secretary of State (‘the section 229 report’) setting out our views in May 2012.1
1.2 In the section 229 report, we said that the Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees had, taken as a whole, presented proposals for the delivery of PSB in the next licence period that were realistic, sustainable and commensurate with current levels of delivery. Accordingly, while noting that some amendments to their existing obligations may be required, we advised the Secretary of State that the existing licensees could make a sustainable contribution to PSB purposes in a new licensing period.2
1.3 In November 2012, the Secretary of State wrote to us stating that she did not intend to prevent the process of licence renewal for either the Channel 3 licensees or Channel 5. However, she said that she would be prepared to extend the licences by a year if we were unable to reach renewal settlements with the existing licensees, in order to allow for the advertisement and award of new licences to take place.
1.4 Following the Secretary of State’s decision, we will be considering whether or not to renew the licences of the current Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees and, if so, the terms on which renewal should be offered. This consultation forms part of our preparation for those determinations.
Commercial PSB channels, including Channel 3 and Channel 5, must contribute to the public service broadcasting purposes
1.5 PSB services, such as those provided by the Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees, must contribute to fulfilment of the PSB purposes set out in the 2003 Act.3 At the broadest level, this means that PSB services should include programmes which cover many subjects and, taken together, maintain a high general standard and serve the needs and interests of many different audiences.
1.6 The specific PSB obligations to which the licensees are subject are summarised in Figure 1 and include:
1 See Licensing of Channel 3 and Channel 5: A report to the Secretary of State under section 229 of the Communications Act 2003 (‘the section 229 report’) at: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/tv-ops/c3_c5_licensing.pdf 2 See paragraphs 1.11 – 1.15 and 1.23 of the section 229 report. 3 See section 264(4) and (6) of the 2003 Act.
1 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
a) the provision of news and current affairs at both peak viewing and other times;
b) the inclusion of original productions (programming commissioned or produced specifically for the channel), of programmes made by independent producers, and of productions made outside London; and
c) in the case of Channel 3 licensees, the provision of regional news and non-news programming, and participation, in conjunction with all the other Channel 3 licensees, in arrangements for the provision and broadcast of programming across the Channel 3 network.
1.7 In most of these areas, Ofcom must determine the appropriate level at which to set those obligations, having regard to the PSB purposes, commercial sustainability of the licensed services and Ofcom’s general duties under section 3 of the 2003 Act.
Figure 1: summary of public service broadcasting obligations
Type of obligation Obligation Commercial PSBs affected
To show an appropriate amount All commercial PSBs of national and international news (overall and in peak)
To show an appropriate amount of Core genre Channel 3 licensees regional news and non-news only obligations programmes (overall and in peak)
To show an appropriate amount All commercial PSBs of current affairs programmes (overall and in peak)
To show an appropriate amount of original programming (overall All commercial PSBs and in peak)
To ensure a suitable proportion & Content range of programmes by spend & All commercial PSBs production and volume are made outside the M25 investment To ensure a minimum of 25% of obligations programming is allocated to All commercial PSBs independent productions
To draw up, revise & comply with a code for commissioning from All commercial PSBs independent producers
Channel 3 licensees To ensure approved networking arrangements are in force only Structural obligations To achieve the greatest possible All commercial PSBs level of coverage for PSB channels We invite views on proposed changes to the level of PSB obligations for the existing licences, particularly news provision in the nations and English regions. These changes would be carried forward into the renewed licences.
1.8 In preparing the section 229 report, we invited submissions from licensees and others about the level of PSB obligations that the licensees might be able to provide in a new licence period.
1.9 The licensees told us that, in broad terms and with some amendments, their existing PSB obligations could continue to be sustainable during the next licence period. With
2 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
one exception4, they have not proposed any changes to their network programme and production obligations – in respect of news and current affairs, original production, and Out of London production. We set out what these obligations are in section 2, and explain why, subject to consultation, we consider that it would be appropriate to maintain those obligations at the current levels.
1.10 Some Channel 3 licensees argued that amendments to their regional programming commitments would help to ensure the long-term sustainability of such content. We set out their proposals in section 3 together with our initial assessment. In particular:
a) ITV plc proposed that the regional news services that resulted from merging news services in 2009 should again become more localised services. However, to offset the cost of this change, the amount of regional content required in each of its English licences (including Border) would be reduced; and
b) UTV asked that its regional non-news obligations be reduced by half an hour a week to bring them in line with those in the other devolved Nations (one and half hours a week), now that digital switchover is complete.
1.11 In her letter to us in November 2012, the Secretary of State noted that under ITV’s proposals, viewers in the south of Scotland would not receive the same level of programming about Scotland as those living in central and Northern Scotland (who are served by the STV licensees).5 She said that the quality and plurality of news provision was of the utmost importance. In the light of these concerns, ITV has proposed to supplement the more localised service it had proposed for the Border area by scheduling a weekly current affairs programme, in part to provide viewers in southern Scotland with broader coverage of Scottish politics. We explain this proposal and related options in section 4, together with our initial assessment.
We would also welcome the views on the impact of possible amendments to the definition of peak-time across all PSB services.
1.12 In PSB licences, ‘peak time’ is defined as the period from 6pm to 10.30pm and all the PSB licensees have programming obligations in relation to their broadcast during peak time. For example, Channel 3 licences require that a specified proportion or amount of original productions, news, current affairs, nations and regional programming, is shown in peak time. UTV and STV have proposed that, in relation to regional programming, peak time is extended to 11pm, allowing them to meet their commitments to show some regional programming in peak by scheduling programmes between 10.30pm and 11pm.
1.13 We consider that a common definition of peak time across the PSB licences would be appropriate. Accordingly, a change to the definition of peak time would affect the delivery of the peak time obligations of other PSB licensees and so could impact their viewers, as well as viewers of the STV licensees and UTV. Ofcom believes that we need to have a better understanding of the potential consequences for both viewers and licensees before deciding whether to consult on changes to the definition of peak time, and if so, what options to consult upon.
4 Channel 5’s suggestion that it was no longer necessary for it to meet an Out of London production quota, discussed in paragraph 2. 37 to 2.40 of this document. 5 See Letter from the Secretary of State to Ofcom, 21 November 2012, at: http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/Maria_Miller_letter_to_ed_richards.pdf
3 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
1.14 We are therefore inviting views generally on this issue and welcome any information that stakeholders are able to provide on the potential ramifications of such a change. We will take these into account in deciding whether to pursue the proposal at a future date.
Later in the year, we will publish a statement setting out our decisions on the licence condition proposals we have made.
1.15 Alongside this document, we have today issued two further consultations explaining our intention to establish a separate Channel 3 licence in Wales, splitting the existing Wales and West licence, and our proposed methodology for determining the financial terms of new licences.
1.16 Respondents are invited to consider the proposals set out in this consultation alongside these other documents. We also refer respondents to the analysis set out in the section 229 report, which informs the proposals in this consultation.
1.17 The closing date for responses to this consultation is 2 May 2013. We intend to publish a statement setting out our conclusions on licence obligations as soon as possible thereafter.
4 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Section 2 2 Network programme and production obligations Introduction
2.1 This section:
a) explains the specific PSB network programme and production obligations applying to Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees;
b) summarises how they meet these obligations at present; and
c) invites the views of interested parties on Ofcom’s initial assessment that these obligations remain appropriate and sustainable for the next licence period.
How network programme and production obligations have evolved
2.2 The public service remit of the Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees is the provision of a range of high quality and diverse programming. 6 In addition to fulfilling that remit, the licensees must also comply with specific licence obligations on the programming and productions to be included in their services. These obligations are intended to secure that they make a sufficient contribution to the PSB purposes.
2.3 The value of PSB status to Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees has declined in recent years, due in large part to the loss of exclusivity resulting from the transition from a few analogue channels to the many digital channels now available to viewers. In light of the diminished value of PSB status, Ofcom has sought to identify and prioritise those aspects of PSB content most valued by audiences.
2.4 Ofcom last examined commercial public service broadcasting during our second PSB review, completed in 2009.7 As part of that review, Ofcom concluded that after 2014 the public service commitments of Channel 3 and Channel 5 should focus on:
a) news (at a UK, Nations and regions level) and current affairs, where plurality is particularly valued as critical to a well-functioning democracy; and
b) statutory requirements to secure appropriate levels of original, independent and Out of London8 production, and guidance on commissioning independent productions, aimed at ensuring that the associated quota helped to stimulate a thriving independent production sector.
2.5 In their submissions to us for the purposes of the s.229 report, the licensees did not propose changes to their programme and production obligations, other than:
6 Section 265(2) of the 2003 Act. 7 See Ofcom’s Second Review of Public Service Broadcasting at: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/consultations/psb2_phase2/statement/ 8 ‘Out of London’ production refers to programmes made outside the M25 that meet criteria published by Ofcom (http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/guidance/programme-guidance/reg_prod/).
5 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
a) ITV’s proposals in relation to regional programming (detailed in Sections 3 and 4); and
b) Channel 5’s submission in relation to Out of London productions (detailed in paragraphs 2.37 to 2.40 below.
Channel 3
National and international news and current affairs
2.6 The national and international news obligations on the Channel 3 licensees have remained at the same levels since 2003. Each regional licensee must deliver 365 hours of national and international news per year, of which 125 must be in peak-time. In 2011, the most recent year for which figures are available, the Channel 3 licensees exceeded these obligations, delivering a total of 392 hours of news programming, including 246 hours in peak viewing periods.
2.7 In accordance with section 280 of the Communications Act 2003, these obligations are fulfilled on behalf of the Channel 3 licensees by ITN, their appointed news provider, which provides news programming for simultaneous broadcast across the Channel 3 network.
2.8 Channel 3 licensees must also show 43 hours of current affairs per calendar year, of which at least 35 hours must be shown in peak-time. In 2011, Channel 3 showed 55 hours of current affairs programming,9 compared to 66 hours in 2010 and an average of 86 hours in each of the previous five years.10
2.9 Channel 3 licensees have not proposed any changes to their national and international news and current affairs obligations.
Original productions
2.10 The quota for original productions is at the core of the PSB obligations of the Channel 3 licensees: 65% of Channel 3’s overall schedule must meet the criteria for original programming, including 85% of programmes shown in peak. Programming from all genres contributes to the delivery of this quota, including sports, factual, drama and arts programming.
2.11 The Channel 3 licensees have consistently exceeded their original productions quota, particularly that relating to peak time broadcasts. In each of the five years up to and including 2011, no less than 95% of content in peak time had been commissioned for the channel. The amount of original content shown throughout the schedule during 2011 – at 78% - is also significantly higher than required, although it has declined in recent years from a high of 90% in 2007.11
2.12 Although it is clear that Channel 3 licensees, collectively, could afford to comply with higher original production quotas, both overall and in peak, we do not consider that increased quotas are necessary to achieve the objective set out in legislation of ensuring that ‘the channel is consistently of a high quality’.12 Accordingly, given the
9 Network compliance report 2011 (http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/statistics/2012June/network-compliance.pdf) 10 Section 229 report, p. 19 11 Network compliance report, 2011 12 Section 278(2)(a) of the Communications Act 2003
6 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
requirement placed upon Ofcom to have regard, amongst other things, to the principle under which regulatory action should be targeted only at cases in which action is needed, we do not consider that it would be appropriate to increase the targets.
2.13 The Channel 3 licensees have not proposed any changes to their original productions obligations.
Independent productions
2.14 All of the PSBs are required to ensure that not less than 25% of the total amount of qualifying original programming that they broadcast is allocated to a range and diversity of independent productions. Uniquely among the PSB quotas, this minimum level is specified in legislation.
2.15 The Channel 3 licensees have consistently commissioned a higher proportion of programmes from independent producers than required. In 2011, 38% of qualifying programming commissioned by the network came from the independent sector.13
2.16 Although it would be open to Ofcom to increase the size of the independent production quota, and that (at present) the costs would be sustainable, we do not consider that increased quotas are necessary to secure a broad ‘range and diversity of independent productions’.14 Accordingly, given the requirement placed upon Ofcom to have regard, amongst other things, to the principle under which regulatory action should be targeted only at cases in which action is needed, we do not consider that it would be appropriate to increase the targets.
2.17 The Channel 3 licensees have not proposed any changes to their independent productions obligations.
Out of London production
2.18 Ofcom is required to set licence conditions for both the Channel 3 licensees and Channel 5 to ensure that, in terms of both volume and expenditure, a suitable proportion of Channel 3 and Channel 5 programmes made in the UK are produced outside the M25 area. A similar requirement applies to Channel 4. The quotas which we have set to implement this requirement are known as the Out of London quotas.
2.19 Following our first PSB review in 2005, we increased the Out of London quotas on the Channel 3 licensees from 33% of qualifying content by volume and 40% of original programming by expenditure to 50% by volume and spend.
2.20 During the second PSB Review, we noted that meeting these revised obligations had placed a significant cost on the Channel 3 licensees and that it was becoming increasingly difficult for them to sustain. Consequently, they were being met in part by long-running shows including quiz and other studio-based programming, which had contributed little to diversity. We subsequently cut the Channel 3 obligation to 35% by both spend and volume.
2.21 In recent years, the Channel 3 licensees have comfortably met the volume quota and also met the spend quota. In 2011 the volume achieved was 48% and spend
13 Network compliance report, 2011 14 Section 277(1) of the Communications Act 2003
7 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
achieved was 50%, against a quota of 35%.15 ITV exceeds the quota through a combination of high and low value productions, ranging from Nightscreen, an animated sequence containing programming information aired during late night slots, and flagship, high value content, such as Coronation Street and Emmerdale. Channel 3 licensees have not proposed any changes to their Out of London productions obligations, and we see no compelling reasons either to increase or reduce the current obligations. A reduction would lessen the contribution that Out of London productions make to the scale of regional production across the UK, while an increase would diminish the discretion Channel 3 licensees have about where to commission or produce programmes, which could impact their ability to manage their businesses commercially, and hence to provide an attractive service to viewers.
Ofcom’s initial assessment
2.22 For the reasons set out above, we consider that the current level of network programme and production obligations would remain appropriate for the next licence period. Having regard to the fact that the Channel 3 licensees are not seeking changes to these obligations, and to the fact that Channel 3 licensees have comfortably met the network quotas in recent years, we consider that there is currently no reason to conclude that they should not remain sustainable over the next licence period.
Channel 5
National and International News and Current Affairs
2.23 Channel 5’s obligations for UK news were last reviewed in 2010. At that time we decided to reduce the requirements from 408 hours in each calendar year to 260 hours (the peak time obligation remained at 100 hours) in order that it could concentrate its resources on its most watched bulletins. In 2011, Channel 5 exceeded both obligations, delivering a total of 280 hours of news programming, including 117 hours in peak16.
2.24 Channel 5’s peak time news programme bulletin, shown at 1830 on weekdays, receives a notably lower audience – 250,000 – than that shown on any of the other PSB networks. This may in part be a consequence of its bulletin at 1700 which draws an audience that of c.650,000 viewers, equivalent to that achieved by Channel 4’s 1900 news programme, and which reaches a higher proportion of viewers from DE socio-economic groups than any of the other main television bulletins.17
2.25 In relation to current affairs, Channel 5 must show 130 hours of current affairs per calendar year, of which at least 10 hours must be in peak-time. In practice, Channel 5 significantly exceeds its total current affairs obligation, showing 475 hours of programming, primarily as a result of its morning phone-in show, The Wright Stuff.18
2.26 Ofcom considers that the current obligations in relation to news and current affairs make an important contribution to plurality, but we do not consider it necessary to increase the obligations in order to safeguard this benefit to citizens and consumers. Noting that Channel 5 has not proposed any changes to its news and current affairs obligations, we consider that the current level is likely to be sustainable over the
15 Network compliance report, 2011 16 Network compliance report, 2011 17 See Figure 17 of the section 229 report, after paragraph 3.55. 18 Network compliance report, 2011
8 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
course of the next licence term, and that no change to the licence conditions is required.
2.27 Channel 5 has not proposed any changes to its international and national news and current affairs obligations.
Original productions
2.28 In 2003, Channel 5 was required to ensure that at least 51% of its programming content qualified as original programming, increasing by 2% a year to 60% in 2009 and subsequent years.
2.29 Following Ofcom’s first PSB review, we concluded in 2005 that a progressively increasing quota would be unsustainable given the limited benefits which the broadcaster received from PSB status (given, for example, that it was then available in only approximately 80% of UK homes) and set a fixed quota at 55%. In 2009, following the second PSB review, the quota was reduced to 50%. Channel 5’s peak- time obligations in relation to original productions were reduced at the same time to 40% from the 42% set in 2003.
2.30 Ofcom notes that, in recent years, there have been occasions when Channel 5 has only just met its obligations in relation to original production. We note too that Channel 5 revenues are significantly lower than those of Channel 3, and that this has a bearing on the volume of high quality original production it can reasonably be expected to commission or produce. Given these circumstances, we consider that the current quota is appropriate and, as set out below, is consistent with Article 16 of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive.19
2.31 Neither do we consider that it would be appropriate to further reduce Channel 5’s original production quota. In setting the current level, Ofcom had regard to the United Kingdom’s obligations under Article 16 of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive to ensure, where practicable, that broadcasters reserve a majority of their transmission time for European productions (defined in ways that largely correspond to the definition of ‘original productions’ for the purpose of this quota). Accordingly, we propose no change to Channel 5’s original production quota.
2.32 Channel 5 has not proposed any changes to its original productions obligations.
Independent productions
2.33 Channel 5, like Channel 3 licensees, is required to ensure that not less than 25% of the total amount of qualifying original programming is allocated to broadcasting a range and diversity of independent productions. As explained in paragraph 2.14 to 2.17 above, Ofcom could increase but not reduce this percentage.
2.34 Like Channel 4, Channel 5 has to date been predominantly a publisher broadcaster with only a small in-house production unit. Consequently, it has consistently and significantly exceeded its obligations. In 2011, 91% of qualifying programming commissioned by Channel 5 came from the independent sector.20
2.35 Ofcom notes that Channel 5 has no difficulty in meeting the current quota, and might well be able to sustain a higher quota. However, we do not consider that increased
19 Directive 2010/13/EU OJ L 95 15.4.2010 20 Network compliance report, 2011
9 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
quotas are necessary to secure a broad ‘range and diversity of independent productions’.21 Accordingly, given the requirement placed upon Ofcom to have regard, amongst other things, to the principle under which regulatory action should be targeted only at cases in which action is needed, we do not consider that it would be appropriate to increase the targets.
2.36 Channel 5 has not proposed any changes to its independent productions obligations.
Out of London productions
2.37 Programmes produced Out of London must account for at least 10% of Channel 5’s programme expenditure and output. These obligations are significantly lower than those faced by the other PSBs, in recognition of the difference in regulatory assets that Channel 5 receives from PSB status, compared to other PSBs.22 In 2011, Out of London content accounted for 11% of Channel 5’s qualifying programming by volume and 21% by value.23
2.38 In its response to our open letter, Channel 5 argued that this requirement was no longer necessary given the number of well-established production hubs across the UK and the scale of investment made in recent years by the publicly-owned PSBs, the BBC and Channel 4. In particular, it suggested that the obligation could have a detrimental, if not perverse, impact on its commissioning policy, potentially requiring the channel to invest in programmes it might not want.
2.39 Ofcom is required by section 286 of the Communications Act 2003 to ensure that the Out of London quota is not set at a level that ‘constitutes less than a significant proportion of the programmes or expenditure in question’.24 Under section 263(4) of the Act, it is open to the Secretary of State to provide by order that such a condition be excluded from the regulatory regime applying to Channel 5. Until and unless that happens, Ofcom is not empowered to exempt Channel 5 from this requirement.
2.40 We consider that the current 10% quota by volume and spend is significant but that the scope to reduce that proportion still further, while still fulfilling the statutory requirement, is likely to be limited. Furthermore, as we explained in our section 229 report, because the quota is calculated on the basis of programming that excludes acquired programming, the actual volume of Out of London programming required of Channel 5 is relatively modest.25 As a result, when advising the Secretary of State, we were not persuaded that this was an unsustainable obligation, and we remain of that view.
Ofcom’s initial assessment
2.41 For the reasons set out above, we consider that the current level of network programme and production obligations required from Channel 5 would remain appropriate for the next licence period. In reaching this conclusion, we recognise the more modest contribution to PSB purposes which Channel 5 might be expected to make. However, we do not consider that it would be appropriate to reduce the obligations placed on Channel 5 further without calling into question Channel 5’s contribution to PSB purposes.
21 Section 277(1) of the 2003 Act. 22 See section 6 of the section 229 report for further detail. 23 Network compliance report, 2011 24 Section 286(6) of the 2003 Act. See also section 286(3)(a) of the 2003 Act. 25 See paragraph 4.21 of the section 229 report.
10 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
2.42 As regards sustainability, Ofcom notes that Channel 5 has continued to meet its licence obligations, and has only proposed changes in respect of its Out of London quota. Given the statutory constraints, we do not consider that there is much scope to adjust the level of this quota, nor in practice do we think that it imposes a significant burden. Accordingly, we consider that there is currently no reason to conclude that the obligations should not remain sustainable over the next licence period.
Q1 Do you agree that the existing obligations on Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees in respect of national and international news and current affairs, original productions, and Out of London productions should be maintained at their current levels? If not, what levels do you consider appropriate, and why?
11 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Section 3 3 Nations and regions programme and production obligations for the Channel 3 licensees Introduction
3.1 In this section, we:
a) summarise the evolution of regional programming obligations;
b) set out the specific proposals made by the Channel 3 licensees about content for the nations and regions (with the exception of additional proposals for the Border region, which are dealt with in section 4), and
c) invite views on the obligations that should be set out in their licences.
3.2 Figure 3 below is a map of the current Channel 3 licensed areas. The 2003 Act requires Ofcom to set conditions to ensure that each of the Channel 3 licence holders deliver in their licensed area a suitable level of high quality regional programming as part of their licence commitments. The 2003 Act makes clear that, among other things, regional programmes are designed to be of particular interest to people living within the licence area. Among the commercial PSBs, only Channel 3 licensees face specific regional programming obligations.
How regional programming obligations have evolved
3.3 From 1955, when the first commercial PSB licences were awarded, until the 1980s, the regional ITV broadcasters provided one news service in each licence area. In the 1980s, however, when new licences became available, applicants began making commitments to provide more localised news services in sub-regions. In some cases, this resulted in dedicated local news programmes, in others ‘local opt outs’ during regional news programmes. The high fixed cost of regional news represented the biggest opportunity cost of PSB status for the Channel 3 licensees. However, as only PSB services had access to the analogue frequencies guaranteeing near universal reception in UK households, they benefited from privileged access to advertising revenue.
3.4 From the late 1980s, the growing penetration of digital services eroded this privilege over time. In the second PSB review, we acknowledged that the value of PSB status was diminishing. By that time, ITV plc offered 15 separate main regional news programmes across the 10 regional licences that it then held. The two smallest regions by population – Border and Westcountry – additionally offered short variations within their respective services at a sub-regional level: four in Westcountry, and a split between the English and Scottish parts of Border.
3.5 In response to the second PSB review, each of the Channel 3 licensees suggested changes intended to make the provision of regional content sustainable over the short to medium term. Amongst other things, ITV plc proposed mergers of the regional news operations across two licence areas for Border and Tyne Tees, and for
12 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
West and Westcountry), as well as an end to separate main news programmes for all sub-regions.
3.6 Ofcom concluded, given the importance that viewers attach to regional news, that the PSB obligations of the Channel 3 licensees (and Channel 5) should be focused in this area but agreed that consolidation by ITV in regional news provision and a reduction in volume was appropriate to ensure sustainability.
3.7 Accordingly, Ofcom agreed that ITV could consolidate the 15 regional news programmes then provided in England (including Border) into 8 (albeit with some local opt-outs within that), and reduce the weekly total of regional news and other regional content. We set out in paragraphs 3.9 to 3.11 and Annex 3 below the regional obligations that we imposed on the Channel 3 licensees following the second PSB review and in Annex 4 how they fulfil those obligations in the programming they broadcast.
3.8 The context for nations and regions content continues to evolve. New local TV licences are being awarded in 19 towns and cities across the UK (Belfast, Birmingham, Brighton, Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Grimsby, Leeds, Liverpool, London, Manchester, Newcastle, Norwich, Nottingham, Oxford, Preston, Sheffield and Southampton) and further local TV licences may be awarded thereafter. In Northern Ireland, three channels from the Republic of Ireland (RTE1, RTE2 and TG4), which had been available in some parts through overspill, achieved near universal coverage (94%) when they began being distributed on an additional digital terrestrial television (DTT) multiplex from digital switchover in October 2012.
Current regional obligations
3.9 The regional programming licence obligations for the Channel 3 licensees are cast in broad terms and do not, for example, specify the duration and scheduling of specific news programmes. The main requirements typically included in a Channel 3 licence are set out below:
a) a minimum number of hours and minutes of news and other regional content to be broadcast per week (on average) (currently 4 hours in the English regions, Border and the Channel Islands; 5.5 hours in Wales and the STV regions and 6 hours in Northern Ireland);
b) a minimum number of hours and minutes of regional news to be broadcast per week (on average) in peak viewing hours (currently 2 hours 15 minutes in the English regions and Border; 2 hours 30 minutes in Wales, the STV regions and Northern Ireland);
c) the scope to share news programmes across sub-regions, and in some cases, across licence areas;
d) a minimum number of minutes of other regional content to be broadcast per week (on average) between 5pm and 11.30pm; and
e) a minimum proportion of regional programming to be made in the licensed area – in most cases, 99%.
3.10 Annex 3 provides a more detailed set of the specific regional obligations by licence area and news region.
13 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
3.11 It should be noted that all minutage figures are ‘gross’ – thus a requirement to show 30 minutes of news would represent a requirement to schedule a news programme in a 30-minute slot, which might also include a weather bulletin, advertising, programme trailers and continuity announcements.
Current provision of regional content
3.12 Annex 4 sets out how each of the Channel 3 licensees discharges their regional news programming obligations by licence area and news region. As shown by the bar chart in Figure 2 below, the amount of regional content available to viewers varies. STV in particular has sought to transmit higher amounts of programming than required by its licence. In contrast, ITV plc shows much lower levels of regional content in English regions, albeit still in line with licence obligations.
Figure 2: Average hours of regional programming per week
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
15:00
12:00
9:00
6:00 11:35 11:35 11:27 11:22 10:16 10:08 09:57 09:41 09:34 09:31 09:27 09:17 09:09 09:04 08:59 08:38 07:53 07:29 07:18 07:17 07:09 07:07 06:45 06:45 06:45 06:44 06:41
3:00 06:29 06:17 06:02 05:45 05:41 05:38 05:35 05:30 05:29 04:28 04:24 04:20 04:20 04:16 04:16
0:00 ITV Channel ITV Granada* STV Central STV North ITV Wales UTV Source: Ofcom/broadcasters *Granada figures are used as a proxy for the Channel 3 English regions. Note: Figures exclude programmes aired between 00:30-09:25
Proposals for change
3.13 In 2011, Ofcom published an open letter inviting the views of interested parties on the level of PSB obligations which the Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees should provide in the next licence period.26 In response, ITV and UTV proposed amendments to their regional programming commitments, though STV did not. Their current proposals are described below and summarised in Annexes 3 and 4 below. The proposals in relation to Border and our consideration of them is set out separately in section 4.
26 Open letter about a report by Ofcom to the Secretary of State under s.229 of the Communications Act 2003, Ofcom, 4 October 2011 (http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/tv-ops/Open- letter.pdf)
14 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
English regions (including Border) – regional news programming
3.14 ITV has set out its proposals in a document published alongside this consultation document.27 In brief, ITV is proposing to revert from eight news regions (with some sub-regional opt outs) to the 14 news regions in England (including the Border area) that it provided before 2009. Annex 1 to ITV’s document sets out the detailed proposals for each of its licences.
3.15 Within England, the existing separate services for Granada and London would continue. However, the separate services for the licensed areas of Tyne Tees and Border and for the West of England and South West Enland and for the following sub-regions within individual licence areas would be restored:
a) Yorkshire (North) and Yorkshire (South);
b) East Midlands and West Midlands;
c) Anglia (West) and Anglia (East);
d) South East England (Kent & Sussex) and Southern England (with a local opt-out for Thames Valley news); and
3.16 As now, each of these services would be produced from one of eight hubs: Norwich (for Anglia), Gateshead (for Tyne Tees and Border), Birmingham (for Central), Manchester (for Granada), Whiteley (for Meridian), Bristol (for ITV West and Westcountry), Leeds (for Yorkshire) and London.
3.17 Although there would, in effect, be more ‘news regions’, ITV has proposed that the total weekly minutage of news and current affairs required in an average week (excluding those with Bank holidays) in each area would be reduced from 4 hours of regional programming (comprising 3 hours 45 minutes of news, and 15 minutes of non-news, including current affairs) to 2 hours and 30 minutes.
3.18 In each of these ‘news regions’, ITV says it would interpret the requirement by producing a main early evening news programme (in addition to the national and international news) which would include 20 minutes of regional (or local) news and weather. This 30 minute programme could include up to 10 minutes ‘out of area’ material adapted to interest a local audience, mixed in with regional news. However, there would be no licence obligation for ITV to do more than an average of 20 minutes of regional news and weather in peak (currently 6pm to 10.30pm). From time to time, the 20 minutes of regional news would include items that were relevant across the boundaries of news regions (e.g. a story about the Yorkshire County Cricket Club would be of interest to viewers in both North Yorkshire and South Yorkshire.
3.19 Outside peak, there would be cuts in news minutage, but with more localised bulletins in some places, although ITV’s current proposal is to continue the present number of news bulletins. So, on weekdays, lunchtime bulletins would be reduced from 6½ minutes to 3 minutes, and late evening bulletins from 10 minutes to 5 minutes. The two daily bulletins at weekends would also be reduced from 10 minutes to 5 minutes. As noted above, this reduction would be offset by the fact that in many
27 ITV’s proposals for Nations and Regions News for a new Channel 3 PSB Licence (’ITV’s Proposals’), February 2013, ITV plc http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/c3-c5- obligations/annexes/itvs-proposals.pdf
15 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
news regions the programming would be more localised and so more relevant to individual viewers.
3.20 ITV suggests that these proposals would be sustainable and would have a number of benefits. Amongst other things, ITV suggests that they would:
a) increase the local focus of programmes in the majority of licence areas, providing news coverage of more interest and resonance for the audience;
b) create a more focused news agenda with a high proportion of hard news, as there would be less need to fill programmes with softer material on slow news days;
c) preserve an effective newsgathering machine; and
d) maintain ITV’s ability to broadcast pan-regional stories within licence areas, as stories demanded it.
3.21 ITV also noted that, in focus group research carried out for it by an independent research company, these proposals were accepted and in most cases welcomed by participants28.
28 A copy of this research can be found on Ofcom’s website at http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/c3-c5-obligations/annexes/ITV-Regional- news.pdf
16 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Figure 3: Map of Channel 3 licensed areas, showing regions and sub-regions (local) areas
Note: In parallel with this consultation, we are consulting on splitting the licence for Wales and the West of England to create a stand-alone licence for Wales and adding the West of England to the South West of England licence. The West of England and South West England would then form two sub-regions within the new licence area. The West is therefore shown separately on this map.
17 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Non-news programming in England
3.22 The current licence obligations for each region in England are 15 minutes per day, (of which 14 minutes must be scheduled between 5pm and 11:30 pm. These would remain unchanged. Border is dealt with separately below.
Ofcom’s initial assessment
3.23 Ofcom set out its preliminary assessment of ITV’s proposals for the English regions in the section 229 report. We considered that ITV’s proposals had the potential to deliver more localised and news-driven content, potentially addressing viewers’ needs within the scope of existing costs.
3.24 We consider it likely that viewers would prefer the restoration of more local services, and that this may be a better trade-off than retaining the status quo. While viewers might well prefer to retain a full 30 minutes of local news in early evening bulletins, we do not consider that it is likely to be affordable over the term of the next licence period. Moreover, it should be noted that, for many viewers, the current arrangements for news bulletins covering large areas of the UK inevitably means that much of the news is not of immediate relevance to the region in which people live.
3.25 As regards the proposals to reduce the length of off-peak and weekend news bulletins, Ofcom notes that these attract much smaller audiences than those for the main early evening bulletin (see, for example, the viewing patterns shown in Figures 6, 7and 8 of section 5), and considers that concentrating resources on that bulletin will deliver the greatest benefit to consumers. The retention of bulletins throughout the day would still enable stories of major regional interest to be covered.
Impact assessment
3.26 In our section 229 report, we assessed the commercial sustainability of the Channel 3 licences in the light of information provided by ITV, STV and UTV, much of it confidential and therefore redacted from the published version of the report.29 In respect of its licences, ITV plc said that licences renewed on the basis of its proposals would be likely to sustainable for the next licence period. Ofcom’s own conclusions, based on licensees’ submissions and our own analysis, is that the proposals should be sustainable for the next licence period (although of course this cannot be guaranteed for the entirety of the licence term, given the potential for changes in the market, technology and consumer behaviour).30
3.27 In respect of the regional programming proposals, we consider that many viewers will benefit from more relevant regional news than they do under the current arrangements. There is no reason to consider that accessibility will be reduced by these proposals since bulletins will continue to be broadcast regularly throughout the day and there will be a significant bulletin (albeit of reduced minutage) during the peak period. In line with our finding in the section 229 report, there is a cost associated regional programming and by reducing the volume of regional output, ITV will reduce its costs of provision and thereby help to ensure the sustainability of these licences. We also have had regard to the evidence cited in the section 229 report that around 60% of viewers in England are content with the regional news provision from
29 Paragraphs 6.2 to 6.122, section 229 report. 30 See paragraph 6.84, section 229 report.
18 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
ITV and that the evidence of viewing levels suggests that this type of programming is of less importance than it is to viewers in the devolved nations.31
3.28 Accordingly, Ofcom is proposing to modify the English regional Channel 3 licences in line with the proposals submitted by ITV
Q2 Do you agree with ITV’s proposals for changes to its regional news arrangements in England, including an increase in the number of news regions in order to provide more localised services in many areas, coupled with a reduction in overall news minutage?
Northern Ireland
3.29 UTV considered that its current regional news obligations (to provide a weekly average of four hours of content) would continue to be sustainable throughout the next licence period. As a result, it did not propose any amendments to this obligation.
3.30 UTV noted, however, that under the terms of its current licence, it was obliged to deliver a minimum of two hours of non-news regional content each week: 30 minutes more than in any other Channel 3 licence area. Accordingly, UTV asked Ofcom to bring its licence into line with those which currently apply in Wales and to the STV licensees in Scotland by reducing its weekly non-news obligations to 90 minutes. Specifically, UTV said that:
a) the current arrangements under which Northern Ireland, despite having a smaller population than either Scotland or Wales, had a higher programme quota than licensees in those areas was inequitable;
b) part of Ofcom’s rationale for retaining the two hour quota in 2009, that UTV would benefit from analogue revenues resulting from a later move to digital-only broadcasting than in either Scotland or Wales, was no longer relevant; and
c) UTV currently delivers more programming than required under its quota and was likely to continue to overproduce even with a lower regulatory limit at its own commercial risk. The change would, however, enable it to remove some of its less popular regional content from the schedule and divert “the effort and resources committed to this programming... into other public service output which would be more appealing to a larger audience in peak time.”
3.31 UTV also emphasised that, in the event that Ofcom extended the definition of peak- time programming, it would commit to continuing to broadcast its existing late evening current affairs programme, UTV Live Tonight, “for the first 5 years of the Licence”.
Ofcom’s initial assessment
3.32 In our section 229 report, we said that, as a principle, we consider that equivalent obligations should apply in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in relation to news and current affairs. We said that we would look again at licensees’ regional obligations after the Secretary of State had responded to the section 229 report. We note that UTV is currently required to provide 2 hours of non-news programming (including current affairs) in Northern Ireland whilst the corresponding obligations in Scotland and Wales are for 90 minutes.
31 See paragraphs 3.45 – 3.51, the section 229 report.
19 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Impact assessment
3.33 We note that UTV has said that it has no plans to reduce actual provision of regional non-news content to 90 minutes, though such assurances are not binding. This suggests that the current obligations are not unduly onerous. The way in which UTV meets the current obligations means that viewers have a choice of late night news and current affairs programming from UTV and BBC Northern Ireland.
3.34 However, as indicated in the section 229 report, Ofcom recognises that the news and current affairs provision in the nations, where possible should be broadly equivalent. If adopted, the proposal to reduce UTV’s non-news obligations to 90 minutes a week would be equivalent to the current (and proposed) non-news obligations for Wales, as well as the two licences for Scotland.
3.35 Ofcom seeks views on UTV’s proposal to reduce the amount of non-news programming that UTV is required to provide in line with its proposals.
Q3 Do you agree with UTV’s proposal for non-news obligations should be reduced to 90 minutes a week? If not, what alternative would you propose and why?
Scotland (excluding Border)
3.36 STV did not propose any changes to its obligations, but did propose that the definition of peak time (currently 6pm to 10.30pm) be extended by half an hour to 11pm. We discuss this in section 5. With this proviso, STV has told us that it considers that the existing level of licence obligations will remain sustainable during the next licence period.32
Ofcom’s initial assessment
3.37 Ofcom considers that maintaining the current level of obligations, which are some way below the level of regional content currently delivered by STV, would help to safeguard a reasonable amount of regional content throughout the next licence period.
Impact assessment
3.38 STV considers that the current level of obligations is sustainable, notwithstanding the unpredictability of the commercial environment in future. We consider this a reasonable assessment, given that STV’s actual provision of regional content significantly exceeds its current requirements, enabling it to trim provision in the event of adverse commercial circumstances. We also consider that the amount of regional news and content which the STV licensees are required to provide adequately serves the interests of citizens and viewers in their licensed area and contributes to a plurality of providers in these areas. We therefore do not propose to make any amendments to the existing regional programming obligations in the STV North and STV Central licences.
Q.4. Do you agree with the proposals by STV to maintain overall minutage for regional content in the northern and central licence areas of Scotland at 5 hours 30 minutes a week, as detailed in Annex 3? If not, what alternative would you propose, and why?
32 Paragraph 6.15, section 229 report.
20 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Wales
3.39 ITV plc proposed no changes to the requirements for news and non-news programmes broadcast in Wales.33
Ofcom’s initial assessment
3.40 Following further discussion with the licensees, we consider that the ITV plc’s proposal to retain the current levels of regional programming in Wales may represent a suitable means of meeting viewer needs in the next licence period.
Impact assessment
3.41 ITV considers that the current level of obligations is sustainable. We also consider that the amount of regional news and non news content which the Wales licence is required to provide adequately serves the interests of citizens and viewers in their licensed area and contributes to a plurality of providers in these areas. It is equivalent to those regional programming obligations for viewers in Northern Ireland and those served by the STV held licences in Scotland. We therefore do not propose to make any amendments to the existing regional programming obligations in the Wales licence.
Q.5 Do you agree with the proposals by ITV to maintain the overall minutage for regional content in Wales at 5 hours 30 minutes a week, as detailed in Annex 3? If not, what alternative would you propose, and why?
Channel Islands
3.42 ITV proposes that the Channel Islands should have a combined regional programming obligation (covering news, current affairs and other regional programming) of 3 hours 20 minutes in a typical week, instead of 4 hours at present. As part of this, ITV proposes to retain a full 30 minute early evening weekday bulletin of regional news, but ‘to ensure a sustainable service’34 to reduce minutage at other times of the day and at weekends along the lines summarised in paragraph 3.22 above.
3.43 Ofcom considers that these proposals reflect a reasonable balance between the demands of a news agenda driven by the specific geographical and constitutional circumstances of the Channel Islands, and the fact that the small size of the Channel Islands population compared to other Channel 3 regions significantly limits the amount of advertising revenue ITV can earn from this service.
Q.6. Do you agree with the proposals by ITV to reduce the overall minutage for regional content in the Channel Islands from 4 hours a week to 3 hours 20 minutes as detailed in Annex 3, while maintaining the present provision of a 30 minute early
33 These currently form part of the obligations under ITV’s Wales and West licence. We are proposing to redraw the boundaries of this licence area, however, in order to create a new Wales only licence http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/consultations/c3-licensed-area This will not affect the current regional programming obligations that apply in Wales which will be carried over into the new licence. 34 http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/c3-c5-obligations/annexes/itvs- proposals.pdf
21 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
evening regional news programme? If not, what alternative would you propose, and why?
Q.7 Do you have any views on any other aspects of the nations and regions programming and production obligations of the Channel 3 licensees?
22 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Section 4 4 Regional programming options for the Border licence Introduction
4.1 The Border Channel 3 licence covers the area shown in Figure 4, which straddles the border between Scotland and England and comprises most of the administrative areas of the Scottish Borders, Dumfries and Galloway and most of Cumbria. Regional news arrangements for this area therefore need to take account of the particular interests of residents in both the Scottish and English parts of the licensed area.
4.2 This section summarises the current and previous arrangements for providing content relevant to residents of the Border region, sets out regional news provision in neighbouring licence areas and the proposals that ITV made to modify its current regional news obligations for Border for the purposes of the section 229 report. It then discusses the two options for regional programming obligations in the Border licence that we are putting forward for consultation.
Figure 4: map of Border Channel 3 licence area
Eyemouth
Peebles
Galashiels
Dumfries Scottish / border Stranraer
Carlisle
Workington Penrith
Kendal
Regional programming obligations in Border to date
4.3 Before the changes made in 2009 to the structure of regional news arrangements in England (described in more detail in section 3), there was a dedicated 30 minute
23 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
early evening news programme for the region on Channel 3 (‘Lookaround’), together with shorter regional news bulletins at weekday lunchtimes, late evenings and weekends. Following the consolidation of news regions in 2009, this was replaced by joint news arrangements for viewers in the Border and Tyne Tees licence areas, including the metropolitan centres of Newcastle and Gateshead, though with regional opt-outs in the weekday early and late evening news bulletins.
4.4 The specific obligations for regional programming in the Border licence are similar to those in the other English licences and currently include in a typical week:
a) a minimum average of 4 hours per week of regional news and other regional content;
b) of this, the licence states that at least 2 hours shall be of particular interest to persons living in the Border licence area. A further 1 hour 45 minutes may be shared with the Tyne Tees licence area;
c) a minimum average of 2 hours 30 minutes of regional news to be broadcast in peak viewing hours;
d) a minimum average of 14 minutes of other regional content to be broadcast between 5pm and 11.30pm; and
e) a minimum proportion of regional programming to be made in the licensed area – in this case, 96%.
4.5 ITV currently meets these obligations with the following programming:
a) a main weekday early evening, peak time bulletin of 30 minutes, shared with Tyne Tees, which includes a 15 minute segment focused on the Border region;
b) a late evening 8 minute bulletin just for the Border region; and
c) weekday lunchtime and weekend daily bulletins shared with Tyne Tees of 6 minutes 30 seconds and 10 minutes respectively.
4.6 As explained in paragraph 4.17, this regional programming is produced in ITV’s regional hub in Gateshead, although news gathering continues to be carried out locally.
Regional programming obligations in the other Scottish and nations licence areas
4.7 Channel 3 licences for the devolved nations (other than Border) and the Channel Islands require the provision of more regional news and non-news programming than the Channel 3 licences in England. This reflects the fact that there are separate political and constitutional arrangements in those nations, and the fact that UK news programmes include coverage of issues stemming from the political and constitutional arrangements in England.
4.8 In Scotland and Wales, Channel 3 licensees are required to provide 5 hours 30 minutes of regional programming, including 1 hour 30 minutes of non-news, a proportion of which must be current affairs. In Northern Ireland, UTV is required to provide 6 hours of regional programming, including 2 hours of non-news, although UTV propose to reduce this in line with the requirements applying in the other
24 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
devolved nations, as noted above. In the Channel Islands, ITV is required to provide 4 hours of regional programming, but is proposing to reduce this to 3 hours 20 minutes,
4.9 In the rest of Scotland (i.e. outside the Border region), the Channel 3 service is provided by two subsidiaries of STV – STV North and STV Central, serving northern and central Scotland respectively. Both of the STV licensees are required to produce 4 hours per week of regional news in a typical week, In addition, each licence has a specific sub-regional obligation, namely to broadcast 5 minutes of regional programming each week day at 6pm (or on average 25 minutes each week) devoted to the east and west of its central Scotland licence, and the north and south of its northern Scotland licence. The weekly average for non-news regional programming is 1h 30min, of which 33min must be current affairs. As set out in Section 3 of this consultation, STV has not made any proposal to reduce these obligations.
4.10 STV currently over-delivers on these obligations. STV Central broadcasts a 30 minute sub-regional news programme each weekday, where the licence obligation is for 5 minutes. In addition STV broadcasts Scotland Tonight four nights a week which typically delivers 80 minutes of current affairs compared to the licence requirement of 33 minutes.
Ofcom’s section 229 report and subsequent developments
4.11 In its submissions for the section 229 report, ITV proposed that the regional programming obligations in the Border licence should be amended so that it would be required to provide Border residents with 2 hours 30 minutes per week of regional news focussed on the Border region, rather than shared with viewers from Tyne Tees, and 15 minutes a week (average) of non-news regional programming. As set out in Section 3, ITV proposed to fulfil such amended obligations with a 20 minute early evening regional news bulletin and by halving the length of its existing lunchtime, late-evening and weekend regional bulletins.
4.12 In our section 229 report to the Secretary of State, we said that obligation levels for the devolved Nations (including the Scottish Border region) must take account of the specific need for plurality in news and current affairs content which enable viewers to engage fully in democratic processes. We said as a principle, that equivalent obligations should apply in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.35 Since, under ITV’s original proposals, viewers in the Scottish part of the Border licence area would have access to much less news and current affairs about political affairs in Scotland than residents in other parts of the country, we suggested that it would be appropriate to examine the issues more closely in the run-up to the next licensing period.36 In particular, we said that we would conduct further consumer research if asked to do so.
4.13 We also set out possible options that we considered might meet the aspirations of viewers in the south of Scotland for coverage of both regional and national matters:
a) a dedicated regional service for viewers in the south of Scotland, supplemented with coverage of national Scottish issues. Under this scenario, viewers in the English Border region might continue to receive the existing Border / Tyne Tees service; or
35 See paragraph 4.17 of the section 229 report. 36 Figure 23 and paragraphs 5.15 to 2.20 of the section 229 report.
25 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
b) an amendment to regional obligations in the Border region (either as a whole or only for viewers in the south of Scotland) to ensure Border’s Scottish viewers received a level of news consistent with obligations in northern and central Scotland; or
c) auctioning a new all-Scotland licence in place of the existing licences held by STV and the area of southern Scotland currently covered by the Border licence.
4.14 Ofcom was then asked by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport to carry out research into the preferences of Border viewers for regional news. While there was some support for more Scottish-based content, the main finding of the report, summarised in Figure 5 below, was that viewers in the Border region wanted to see the return of the dedicated Border regional news they had before 2009 rather than the status quo, or (for Scottish viewers) incorporation within STV’s regional news arrangements.37 The research findings chime with the qualitative and deliberative research commissioned separately by ITV. 38
Figure 5: Audience research on Channel 3 news in the Border region Ofcom commissioned deliberative research from an independent agency in September 2012. The researchers undertook full-day sessions with participants in four locations in the Border region (Galashiels, Penrith, Stranraer and Dumfries) to investigate audience satisfaction with the current regional news provision on Channel 3 and specifically with ITV1’s 6pm Lookaround bulletin. In particular, the researchers were asked to explore what type of regional TV news service audiences would ideally like to receive and the importance that viewers in the south of Scotland placed on news coverage both of regional and wider Scottish issues. The results of the deliberative research indicate that: • viewers perceive the role of Channel 3 regional news to be the provision of interesting and relevant local and regional content. As such, the current programme received by viewers in the south of Scotland, which additionally serves Cumbria, Newcastle and the north east of England, is perceived as covering too large an area geographically. This is viewed as diluting the share of news relevant to viewers in the Border area.
• the equivalent BBC programme, which serves the whole of Scotland, is viewed as having a different role to Channel 3 – to provide news for and about the Scottish nation. The two services are therefore seen as complements, rather than substitutes.
• consequently, the lack of Scotland news received by viewers in the south of Scotland is not a key cause of dissatisfaction, which is derived more from a lack of coverage of their own region.
• respondents universally would prefer a return to a service covering a smaller area, in the belief it would lead to more coverage of each of the localities surveyed. Although a service aimed at both central and southern Scotland received some support, many expressed concerns that, in such a scenario, coverage would focus on the major population centres further north at the expense for news about their area.
37 ITV Border News – A research report for Ofcom, October 2012, Essential Research (http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/tv-ops/tv-border-news.pdf) 38 ITV Regional News – Territories & Timing, ITV, November 2012 http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/c3-c5-obligations/annexes/ITV- Regional-news.pdf
26 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
4.15 Responding to Ofcom’s section 229 report and the consumer research, the Secretary of State noted that ITV’s proposals would mean that viewers in the Scottish Borders region would not receive the same level of reporting about Scotland as viewers in other parts. She also noted that the research demonstrated the particular value viewers in the Border region placed upon news about their own area. She said that she regarded the quality and plurality of news provision to be of the utmost importance, and looked to Ofcom to find a way forward with ITV plc that addressed these concerns.39
ITV’s revised proposals
4.16 Following the observations of the Secretary of State and further discussions with Ofcom, ITV has revised its proposals for regional programming in the Border licence area as follows:
a) in place of the original proposal for 20 minutes of news within the early evening news bulletins of particular interest to Border residents, ITV now proposes a 30 minute early evening regional news bulletin focused on the Border region. While the make-up of bulletins would depend on what was newsworthy, ITV says that it would be reasonable to assume that on a typical night, at least 10 of the 30 minutes would come from Scotland, roughly reflecting the population spread across the licence area; and
b) an additional half hour of regional current affairs and political programme per week, with two thirds to three quarters focused on southern Scotland, and reflecting the political debate in Scotland in particular. This would run for 40 weeks of the year at 10.35pm on a weeknight, with a repeat during the week. Special programmes could be scheduled to address big events such as the independence referendum or Scottish general elections. ITV says it would recruit a new ITV Border Political Editor to present the programme and contribute to Borders’ regional news programmes.40
4.17 While newsgathering and the compilation of reports would take place within the Border region, regional programmes for the Border licence area would continue to be produced from the regional hub in Gateshead.
The regional programming options for consideration in the Border area
4.18 In the light of ITV’s revised proposals, we have identified two options for regional programming in the Border area on which we are inviting views. In formulating these options, we have taken into account the following considerations:
a) the preference expressed by viewers in both the Scottish and English parts of the Border region for regional news focused on their area rather than one skewed by the news agenda in neighbouring regions, whether the northern eastern metropolitan region of England or the central belt of Scotland;
39 Letter from Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sports to Chief Executive, Ofcom, 16 November 2012 (http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/Maria_Miller_letter_to_ed_richards.pdf) 40 ITV’s proposals for nations and regions news for a new Channel 3 licence, February 2013, ITV http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/c3-c5-obligations/annexes/itvs-proposals.pdf
27 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
b) the importance of serving the needs of citizens in the Borders for plurality in news and current affairs content, that enables them to engage fully in democratic processes. In our view, this consideration should be given particular weight because of the different constitutional arrangements that apply on either side of the border, and the forthcoming independence referendum in Scotland;
c) the principle that there should be equivalent regional obligations in each of the nations of Scotland (including the Scottish part of the Border licence), Wales and Northern Ireland;
d) the need to balance the importance of plurality in regional news and current affairs with viewers’ interest in other networked programming that expanded provision of news and current affairs might replace; and
e) the costs of meeting more onerous obligations in relation to the provision of regional news and current affairs in an area which is one of the more sparsely populated parts of the UK.
4.19 Both options we have identified entail modifications to the current regional programming obligations in the Border licence. We have not pursued the option identified in the section 229 report of auctioning a new all-Scotland licence in place of the existing licences held by STV and the area of southern Scotland currently served by ITV. We do not consider that the disruption this could result in for both viewers and licensees would be likely to be proportionate, given
a) our findings in the section 229 report on the sustainability of the existing Channel 3 licences and the ability of the licensees to contribute to PSB purposes;
b) the enhanced level of Scottish programming that STV is providing in its area over and above its licence obligations; and
c) the proposals made by ITV to enhance its coverage of Scottish issues in the Border region and the research findings set out above,
Option 1
4.20 This option would comprise ITV’s current proposals (explained in more detail in paragraph 4.16 above) for a dedicated Border news service, whose main early evening news bulletin would comprise 30 minutes of news of specific interest to Border viewers, with appropriate coverage of Scottish issues, and a weekly half hour regional current affairs and politics programme for the whole of the Border region and specific to the region, with two thirds to three quarters of the programme focused on southern Scotland, and reflecting the political debate in Scotland in particular.
Option 2
4.21 This option would comprise the enhanced regional news service described in Option 1, but in place of a 30 minute current affairs programme which must be specific to the Border region, ITV would be required to provide 90 minutes of non-news regional programming (including current affairs) a week, in or near peak-time. This would still have to be of relevance to viewers in the Border region, but this programming could be produced in conjunction with the other Scottish Channel 3 licensees. This would allow ITV to make its own regional current affairs programme (which might be scheduled, for example, after the late evening Border news bulletin) or to reach a commercial agreement with STV to show its current affairs programme, Scotland
28 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Tonight (which currently runs from Monday to Thursday). It is important to note that the decision as to whether to broadcast bespoke programming for Border or to share programming with STV would be a commercial one for ITV and STV, and not one that Ofcom could dictate in the licence for either Border or STV.
4.22 If ITV were to opt for scheduling Scotland Tonight in order to fulfil an extended regional current affairs programming obligation (or for making Scotland based programming of its own), it may not attract viewers south of the border because of the wider Scottish focus of the programme. In these circumstances, it might be appropriate to require ITV to split the Border digital terrestrial transmission between the English and Scottish portions (effectively creating sub-regions), so that viewers in England would see programming shown on the rest of the ITV network, rather than programmes principally concerning current affairs in Scotland. As the requirements of the PSB licence relate to DTT provision only, it would be a matter for ITV to decide whether it wished to do the same for its simulcast satellite transmissions.
Impact assessment
4.23 ITV has pointed out the Border region has one of the smallest populations of any Channel 3 region at around 614,000 ‘TV’ individuals - only the population of the Channel Islands region is smaller (about 154,000 people). As noted in the section 229 report, ITV has said that it already spends more on a per capita basis in Border than it does in any other region of the UK where it holds a licence.41 ITV has provided Ofcom with confidential cost data, showing that under both options, its costs of meeting its regional programming obligations in Border would increase further and would result in ITV spending substantially more on regional news per head than for any English region. While ITV has said that it would be willing to provide regional programming as set out under Option 1, it has suggested that Option 2 would be disproportionately expensive.
4.24 Ofcom’s initial assessment is that Option 1 would meet the demand of viewers in Border for programming focused on their area. In addition, it has the potential to offer an alternative source of more in depth coverage of relevant political issues in Scotland in the proposed weekly current affairs programmes, while doing so in a way that reflected the particular interests of viewers in southern Scotland. The programme would also provide more regionally specific current affairs coverage in the Border region than elsewhere in England but less than in the rest of Scotland, as well as Wales and Northern Ireland. It would only have a limited impact on th4.15ose viewers who were less interested in current affairs and preferred to see networked programming after the late news. We note that ITV would be prepared to bear the cost of this option, so have assumed that it would be sustainable for the duration of the next licence.
4.25 Option 2, like Option 1, would meet the demand of viewers in Border for programming focused on their area through the 30 minute regional news bulletin. The 90 minutes of regional current affairs per week has potential to enhance significantly the coverage of Scottish current affairs for Scottish residents of the Border region and make a positive contribution to plurality in that regard. The obligations as a whole would secure equivalence with the current affairs obligations that apply to licensees serving Scotland and Wales, and which UTV has asked should apply in Northern Ireland. The additional programming could be produced in-house, or sourced from STV, by commercial agreement. For example, there could be scope to retransmit Scotland Tonight in the Borders.
41 Paragraph 5.8 of the section 229 report.
29 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
4.26 However, the programmes may be less relevant to viewers in southern Scotland compared to option 1, if they relate to the whole of Scotland, rather than the Border region. Such programmes may also fail to attract viewers south of the border. Depending on whether regional programming was produced in house or sourced from STV, the cost of Option 2 could be equivalent to or cheaper than Option 1. However, the variant of this which would split the Border digital terrestrial transmission between the English and Scottish portions, so that viewers in England could see networked programming, may increase the cost materially.
Q.8. Which option would you prefer in respect of the news and current affairs in the Border region, and why?
Q.9 If option 2 were to be adopted, should ITV be required to provide separate transmission for the Scottish and English parts of the region on DTT?
Q.10. If you would prefer a different option to those set out in Questions 8 and 9 above, please explain what, and why.
Regional production requirements
4.27 Each of the Channel 3 licences provides for a large proportion of regional content to be produced within the licensed area, generally 99% (see paragraph 3.9 above). This is in line with the statutory requirement that the licences include a condition to secure that a significant proportion of regional programming is made in the licence area. From 2009, in order that regional news provision could be sustained, licensees were allowed to aggregate many aspects of production in regional hubs, though newsgathering continues to be carried out locally42. However, with the exception of Border, all licence areas include a regional hub, so there is no obstacle to complying with the existing requirement.
4.28 In the case of Border, while news gathering is carried out locally, news programmes are compiled and broadcast from the regional hub at Gateshead in the Tyne Tees licence area. This is not currently reflected in the regional production requirement in the Border licence, which requires that 90% of regional programming broadcast by time is made in the licensed area. We have therefore considered whether this should be modified.
4.29 As Ofcom explained in the second PSB review, we consider the physical location of production centres is less important than local news gathering.43 Clearly, news gathering and the production of local packages for insertion in regional programmes are essential components of the production process, and contribute more to the regional focus of the content than other aspects of the production process carried out in the studio. Indeed, if ITV had to establish a regional production hub for a licence area serving a relatively small population, this would be likely to significantly reduce the resources that could be devoted to local newsgathering, and could have a detrimental effect on the service made available to viewers.
42 Paragraph 7.9, Ofcom’s second public service broadcasting review – Phase Two: preparing for the digital future, Ofcom, September 2008 http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/psb2_phase2/statement/psb2statement.pdf 43 Paragraph A1.31,Ofcom’s Second Public Service Broadcasting Review – Phase 2: preparing for the digital future,
30 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
4.30 Accordingly, we propose to amend the Border licence to reduce to an appropriate and sustainable level the proportion of regional production required, taking account of the costs of provision and the statutory requirement for regional production.
Q.11 Do you agree that the Border licence should be amended to reduce the proportion of regional production required to a sustainable level? If not, what proposals would you like to make?
31 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Section 5 5 Definition of peak-time viewing Introduction
5.1 This section:
a) summarises a proposal by STV and UTV to extend the definition of peak-time from the current 6.30 to 10.30pm, to run from 6.30pm to 11pm, to make it easier for them to meet obligations to schedule regional programming in peak without conflicting with networked programmes popular with viewers;
b) explains that each of the commercial PSB licensees (Channels 3, 4 and 5) have programming and production obligations that must be met in peak time, so that a change to the definition could have wider repercussions;
c) provides background information on viewing patterns;
d) explains that Ofcom would like to find out more about the potential implications before deciding whether or not to consult on possible changes to the definition of peak time, and seeks views from interested parties.
The definition of peak time
5.2 Since the Channel 3 licences were last awarded in 1991, the peak viewing time for each of the PSB channels has been defined as 6pm to 10.30pm.44 Ofcom sets obligations in the PSBs to show a certain amount of news, current affairs and original programming during that period.45 In relation to regional content on Channel 3, in some cases we also set obligations for the periods immediately preceding and following peak viewing time – these are known as ‘near peak’ or ‘shoulder peak’ periods.
5.3 A different definition of peak-viewing time applies to rules on how much advertising can be shown. Since 1998, the PSBs have been subject to specific restrictions on the amount of advertising they can carry between 6pm to 11pm.46
Proposals for amendments to definition of peak time programming
5.4 UTV and STV have proposed that peak time should be extended to run from 6pm to 11pm, so that they could meet some of their regional peak-time obligations by showing programmes between 10.30pm and 11pm.
44 The Act gives Ofcom the flexibility, if desired, to set the peak period differently for each of the commercial PSB services. The BBC has determined peak time for BBC Three and BBC Four to run from 7pm to midnight, as they do not start broadcasting until 7pm. 45 Additionally, party election broadcasts on television on behalf of ‘major parties’ throughout Great Britain must be carried in peak time, as must PEBs on Channel 3 in the relevant nations on behalf of the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the major Northern Ireland parties. Referendum campaign broadcasts on behalf of designated organisations must also be scheduled in peak time. 46 See Code on the Scheduling of Television Advertising at http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/other-codes/tacode.pdf.
32 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
5.5 STV noted that extending peak time to 11pm would bring the programming definition in line with the television advertising rules. It argued that its flexibility to schedule regional programming at present was curtailed for a number of reasons. These include the amount of weekday peak programming already given over to news content and the expectations on viewers that certain programme slots would be filled with new dramatic content, including long running series. For these reasons, it was extremely difficult to deviate from the network schedule in order to run regional content.
5.6 UTV pointed out that other definitions of peak are used elsewhere in the European Union – for example, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland defines peak time as 6pm to 11.30pm. Although UTV stated that it did not feel strong how peak time should be defined, supporting either 6pm to 11.30pm or 5pm to 11pm as a definition of peak, UTV argued that an extension was necessary as it was becoming increasingly difficult to find peak-time slots to opt out of the network schedule in order to broadcast its regional programming.
5.7 UTV said that it received a significant audience for regional programmes scheduled at 10.30pm. UTV outperformed the network at this time, averaging a 16.2% share of total television audience viewing compared to the Channel 3 average of 9.3% for the same slot. Consequently, it should not be perceived as a low value slot with low audiences, at least insofar as Northern Ireland was concerned.
5.8 UTV said that it would like to make regular use of the late evening slot from 10.30pm for regional content. In the event that the peak viewing period was extended to 11pm, it would commit to retaining its late evening regional current affairs programme for at least the first five years of a new licence period, at the current level of 2 hours of non- news programming even if the obligation were reduced to 1 hour 30.
Additional considerations
5.9 The 2003 Act requires that, for a number of PSB obligations, quotas are set for peak viewing times. For example, in setting the requirement for news and current affairs, Ofcom must make provision for the broadcasting of such programming to be split between peak and other times.47 In these cases, Ofcom may set individual peak periods for each of the PSB channels. In addition, in the case of the regional programming obligations of the Channel 3 licences, Ofcom may set individual peak periods for each of the licensees.48 Our approach to date, however, has been to have the same peak period across the licensed PSB channels and the Channel 3 licensees.
5.10 Our view has been that, even if there are slight differences in viewing patterns in different Channel 3 licence areas, it is unlikely to be appropriate to adopt separate definitions given the fact that Channel 3 is intended to be a generally networked service. Adopting different peak time definitions for different parts of the network could make scheduling difficult, limit the access of viewers to some networked programming, and discriminate against those licensees who did not benefit from more relaxed (and commercially beneficial) definitions.
5.11 We note the present intention of STV and UTV to continue to offer content during an extended peak in weekdays, in addition to the licence obligations that they are currently over-delivering which is of particular interest to people in those regions.
47 Section 279(3) of the 2003 Act 48 Section 287(8) of the 2003 Act.
33 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
However, it is possible that a change could have other consequences that might adversely affect viewers.
5.12 In the event that we chose to extend the defined peak viewing period for all licensees until 11pm, it would be open to the PSBs to move national peak-time news bulletins to 10.30pm. It is possible that such changes could reduce the reach and impact of the programming which we regard as a key element of PSB provision. For example, on both occasions that a Channel 3 network news programme has moved from 10pm to later points in the schedule, the number of viewers watching that bulletin declined.49
5.13 Further, a change in the peak period could place an additional burden on PSBs by increasing the amount of content they would be required to show in order to meet their peak time production obligations. Channel 5, for example, would be required to show significantly more original content each year in order to continue to meet an unchanged peak-time quota, potentially leading to it to reduce its average spend per programme in the absence of an increased commissioning budget.
5.14 As noted, however, we could set a different peak period for the regional programming obligations of the Channel 3 licensees to that which applies for other PSB obligations. Alternatively, we could set individual peak periods for each of the Channel 3 licensees for their respective regional programming obligations, as proposed by UTV and STV. That would avoid the difficulties set out in paragraphs 5.12 – 5.13 above. It would enable the licensees to move their regional news bulletins to later in the schedule but may reduce the reach and impact of the programming (as the evidence from changes in the national news scheduling might suggest.)
5.15 Furthermore, in order to pursue this option, we would need to ascertain whether it would cause scheduling difficulties for the Channel 3 licensees in relation to network programming and, in particular, make it harder for them to deliver their other peak time PSB obligations.
5.16 In addition, any changes to peak obligations would, in all likelihood, necessitate changes to the ‘shoulder peak’ obligations placed on some regional Channel 3 licensees.50 For example, in Wales, ITV plc must broadcast 30 minutes of content of particular interest to Welsh viewers each week during the periods 5pm to 6pm and 10.30pm to 11.30pm. Without amendment, extending peak time could either curtail the flexibility of the licensees to meet their shoulder peak obligations (if the period of shoulder peak time is simply reduced to half an hour) or could have an impact on the ability of viewers to access this content, if the shoulder-peak is time-shifted to very late in the evening.
49 In March 1999, Channel 3 replaced its 10pm bulletin with one beginning at 11pm, with viewing falling from 5.7m in the twelve months prior to the change to 3.2m in the twelve months after. In February 2004, Channel 3 replaced a news bulletin which ran at 10pm on at least three weeknights with a programme at 10.30pm every weeknight, with another overall decline in viewing. It is worth noting, however, that the Channel 3 licensees are able to meet their current UK peak news obligations without the 10pm news bulletin. 50 Section 287 of the 2003 Act requires that a suitable proportion of regional programmes appear at peak viewing times and at times immediately preceding or following these times. It is these latter periods which are referred to as “shoulder peak”.
34 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Viewing patterns in and around peak time
5.17 As part of our assessment of obligations ahead of licence renewal, and in order to assess the impact of the request by STV and UTV, we have updated our analysis of television viewing patterns, on the PSB channels funded by advertising in particular, and examined other possible consequences of an extension to the peak period.
Television viewing during peak periods
5.18 As shown in Figure 6 below, overall television audiences tend to be larger at the weekends, with a more gradual increase in audience viewing throughout the day than is typically seen on weekdays. On both weekdays and weekends, however, total viewing drops sharply from a peak around 27 million between 9pm to 9.30pm, falling below 5 million by 1 am.
Figure 6: Average television audiences in 2012
Average audience (millions) 28
24
20
16 Weekend
12 Weekday
8
4
PEAK VIEWING PERIOD 0 06:00 - 08:00 - 10:00 - 12:00 - 14:00 - 16:00 - 18:00 - 20:00 - 22:00 - 00:00 - 02:00 - 04:00 - 06:30 08:30 10:30 12:30 14:30 16:30 18:30 20:30 22:30 00:30 02:30 04:30 Source: BARB
5.19 Despite the rapidity of the decline, total viewing volume between 10.30pm and 11pm, i.e. outside the current definition of peak viewing, is comparable to that of the total audience between 6pm to 6.30pm at the start of the peak period. On average 18.3m viewers watch live television between 6pm and 6.30pm on weekdays (19.2m on weekdays), compared to 17.7m watching between 10.30pm and 11pm on weekdays (19.3m on weekends).
5.20 On a channel by channel basis, however, different viewing patterns emerge. In broad terms, although Channel 3 follows a similar pattern to the overall trend, viewing climbs at a steeper rate earlier in the evening and declines more sharply from 10pm. Consequently, the number of people watching Channel 3 between 6pm and 6.30pm is significantly higher (with 3.3m on weekdays when regional news programmes are shown across the network and 2.4m on weekends) than between 10.30pm and 11pm (1.4m viewers on weekdays and 1.7m on weekends) – see figure 7 below.
35 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Figure 7: Channel 3 audiences in 2012
Average audience (millions) 7
6 Channel 3 weekends 5
4 Channel 3 3 weekdays
2
1
PEAK VIEWING PERIOD 0 06:00 - 08:00 - 10:00 - 12:00 - 14:00 - 16:00 - 18:00 - 20:00 - 22:00 - 00:00 - 02:00 - 04:00 - 06:30 08:30 10:30 12:30 14:30 16:30 18:30 20:30 22:30 00:30 02:30 04:30 Source: BARB
5.21 Viewing levels also rise from a low base in the case of both Channel 4 and Channel 5, although some of the most popular programming on both channels (such as Deal or No Deal and Neighbours) is shown before the peak period. On both channels viewing falls during peak when news bulletins are broadcast, before rising to their highest levels between 9.30pm and 10pm. Between 10.30pm and 11pm, Channel 4 viewing is generally slightly lower than between 6pm and 6.30pm whereas Channel 5’s audience is notably higher – see figure 8 below.
Figure 8: Channel 4 and Channel 5 audiences in 2012
Average audience (millions) 2.5
2
Channel 4 1.5 weekdays
1 Channel 5 weekends 0.5 Channel 4 Channel 5 weekends weekdays PEAK VIEWING PERIOD 0 06:00 - 08:00 - 10:00 - 12:00 - 14:00 - 16:00 - 18:00 - 20:00 - 22:00 - 00:00 - 02:00 - 04:00 - 06:30 08:30 10:30 12:30 14:30 16:30 18:30 20:30 22:30 00:30 02:30 04:30 Source: BARB
5.22 In the light of the evidence of viewing trends set out in Figures 6, 7 and 8 and the issues we have identified in relation to a change to the definition of peak, we are inviting views generally on the issue and any information that stakeholders may be
36 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
able to provide on the potential ramifications, in order to be in a better position to assess whether to put forward for consultation an alternative approach and if so, the scope and nature of any such revised definition.
Q.12 What views do you have on the proposal by STV and UTV to extend peak time to 11pm, which would extend the window in which they could schedule regional content that must be shown in peak time?
37 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Annex 1 1 Responding to this consultation How to respond
A1.1 Ofcom invites written views and comments on the issues raised in this document, to be made by 5pm on 2 May 2013
A1.2 Ofcom strongly prefers to receive responses using the online web form at http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/consultations/c3-c5- obligations/howtorespond/form, as this helps us to process the responses quickly and efficiently. We would also be grateful if you could assist us by completing a response cover sheet (reproduced at the end of this Annex), to indicate whether or not there are confidentiality issues. This response coversheet is incorporated into the online web form questionnaire.
A1.3 For larger consultation responses - particularly those with supporting charts, tables or other data - please email [email protected] attaching your response in Microsoft Word format, together with a consultation response coversheet.
A1.4 Responses may alternatively be posted to the address below, marked with the title of the consultation.
Oli Bird Content, Consumer and External Affairs Ofcom Riverside House 2A Southwark Bridge Road London SE1 9HA
A1.5 Note that we do not need a hard copy in addition to an electronic version. Ofcom will acknowledge receipt of responses if they are submitted using the online web form but not otherwise.
A1.6 It would be helpful if your response could include direct answers to the questions asked in this document, which are listed together at Annex 2. It would also help if you can explain why you hold your views and how Ofcom’s proposals would impact on you.
Publication of consultation responses
A1.7 We believe it is important for everyone interested in an issue to see the views expressed by consultation respondents. We will therefore usually publish all responses on our website, www.ofcom.org.uk, ideally on receipt.
A1.8 If you think your response should be kept confidential, can you please specify what part or whether all of your response should be kept confidential, and specify why. Please put any parts of your response you consider should be kept confidential in a separate annex to your response and include your reasons why this part of your response should not be published. This can include information such as your personal background and experience. If you want your name, address, other
38 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
contact details, or job title to remain confidential, please provide them in your cover sheet only, so that we don’t have to edit your response.
A1.9 If someone asks us to keep part or all of a response confidential, we will treat this request seriously and will try to respect this. But sometimes we will need to publish all responses, including those that are marked as confidential, in order to meet legal obligations.
A1.10 Please also note that copyright and all other intellectual property in responses will be assumed to be licensed to Ofcom to use. Ofcom’s approach on intellectual property rights is explained further on its website at http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/accoun/disclaimer/
Ofcom’s consultation principles
A1.11 Ofcom has published the following seven principles that it will follow for each public written consultation:
Before the consultation
A1.12 Where possible, we will hold informal talks with people and organisations before announcing a big consultation to find out whether we are thinking in the right direction. If we do not have enough time to do this, we will hold an open meeting to explain our proposals shortly after announcing the consultation.
During the consultation
A1.13 We will be clear about who we are consulting, why, on what questions and for how long.
A1.14 We will make the consultation document as short and simple as possible with a summary of no more than two pages. We will try to make it as easy as possible to give us a written response. If the consultation is complicated, we may provide a shortened Plain English Guide for smaller organisations or individuals who would otherwise not be able to spare the time to share their views.
A1.15 We will consult for up to 10 weeks depending on the potential impact of our proposals.
A1.16 A person within Ofcom will be in charge of making sure we follow our own guidelines and reach out to the largest number of people and organisations interested in the outcome of our decisions. Ofcom’s ‘Consultation Champion’ will also be the main person to contact with views on the way we run our consultations.
A1.17 If we are not able to follow one of these principles, we will explain why.
After the consultation
A1.18 We think it is important for everyone interested in an issue to see the views of others during a consultation. We would usually publish all the responses we have received on our website. In our statement, we will give reasons for our decisions and will give an account of how the views of those concerned helped shape those decisions.
39 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Next steps
A1.19 Following the end of the consultation period, Ofcom intends to publish a statement in July 2013.
A1.20 Please note that you can register to receive free mail Updates alerting you to the publications of relevant Ofcom documents. For more details please see: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/subscribe/select_list.htm
Ofcom's consultation processes
A1.21 Ofcom seeks to ensure that responding to a consultation is easy as possible. For more information please see our consultation principles in Annex 2.
A1.22 If you have any comments or suggestions on how Ofcom conducts its consultations, please call our consultation helpdesk on 020 7981 3003 or e-mail us at [email protected]. We would particularly welcome thoughts on how Ofcom could more effectively seek the views of those groups or individuals, such as small businesses or particular types of residential consumers, who are less likely to give their opinions through a formal consultation.
A1.23 If you would like to discuss these issues or Ofcom's consultation processes more generally you can alternatively contact Graham Howell, Secretary to the Corporation, who is Ofcom’s consultation champion:
Graham Howell Ofcom Riverside House 2a Southwark Bridge Road London SE1 9HA
Tel: 020 7981 3601
Email: [email protected]
Further information
A1.24 If you want to discuss the issues and questions raised in this consultation, or need advice on the appropriate form of response, please contact Kathleen Stewart on 020 7981 4293.
40 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Cover sheet for response to an Ofcom consultation
BASIC DETAILS
Consultation title: Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed programming obligations
To (Ofcom contact): Kathleen Stewart
Name of respondent:
Representing (self or organisation/s):
Address (if not received by email):
CONFIDENTIALITY
Please tick below what part of your response you consider is confidential, giving your reasons why
Nothing Name/contact details/job title
Whole response Organisation
Part of the response If there is no separate annex, which parts?
If you want part of your response, your name or your organisation not to be published, can Ofcom still publish a reference to the contents of your response (including, for any confidential parts, a general summary that does not disclose the specific information or enable you to be identified)?
DECLARATION
I confirm that the correspondence supplied with this cover sheet is a formal consultation response that Ofcom can publish. However, in supplying this response, I understand that Ofcom may need to publish all responses, including those which are marked as confidential, in order to meet legal obligations. If I have sent my response by email, Ofcom can disregard any standard e-mail text about not disclosing email contents and attachments.
Ofcom seeks to publish responses on receipt. If your response is non-confidential (in whole or in part), and you would prefer us to publish your response only once the consultation has ended, please tick here.
Name Signed (if hard copy)
41 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Annex 2 2 Consultation questions
Q1 Do you agree that the existing obligations on Channel 3 and Channel 5 licensees in respect of national and international news and current affairs, original productions, and Out of London productions should be maintained at their current levels? If not, what levels do you consider appropriate, and why?
Q2 Do you agree with ITV’s proposals for changes to its regional news arrangements in England, including an increase in the number of news regions in order to provide a more localised service, coupled with a reduction in overall news minutage?
Q3 Do you agree with UTV’s proposal for non-news obligations should be reduced to 90 minutes a week? If not, what alternative would you propose and why?
Q4. Do you agree with the proposals by STV to maintain overall minutage for regional content in the northern and central licence areas of Scotland at 5 hours 30 minutes a week, as detailed in Annex 3? If not, what alternative would you propose, and why?
Q5 Do you agree with the proposals by ITV to maintain the overall minutage for regional content in Wales at 5 hours 30 minutes a week, as detailed in Annex 3? If not, what alternative would you propose, and why?
Q6. Do you agree with the proposals by ITV to reduce the overall minutage for regional content in the Channel Islands from 4 hours a week to 3 hours 20 minutes as detailed in Annex 3, while maintaining the present provision of a 30 minute early evening regional news programme? If not, what alternative would you propose, and why?
Q7 Do you have any views on any other aspects of the nations and regions programming and production obligations of the Channel 3 licensees?
Q8. Which option would you prefer in respect of the news and current affairs in the Border region, and why?
Q9 If option 2 were to be adopted, should ITV be required to provide separate transmission for the Scottish and English parts of the region on DTT?
Q10. If you would prefer a different option to those set out in Questions 8 and 9 above, please explain what, and why
Q11 Do you agree that the Border licence should be amended to reduce the proportion of regional production required to a sustainable level? If not, what proposals would you like to make?
Q12 What views do you have on the proposal by STV and UTV to extend peak time to 11pm, which would extend the window in which they could schedule regional content that must be shown in peak time?
42 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Annex 3 3 Regional programming: current and proposed licence obligations
Region Obligation Current Quota Proposed Quota (Licensee)
Wales Regional News 4:00 No change (ITV Wales) requirements Other 1:30 (of which current (average weekly affairs is 00:47) hours) Total 5:30
Regional news in 2 hours and 30 minutes No change peak Peak non-news 45 minutes No change 5pm to 11:30 pm At least 14 minutes of No change programmes other than news Regional 99% produced in the No change production licensed area.
Northern Regional News 4:00 News 4:00 Ireland (UTV) requirements Other 2:00 (if which current Other 1:30 (average weekly affairs is 00:26) Total 5:30 hours) Total 6:00
Regional news in 2 hours 30 minutes No change peak Peak non-news 45 minutes No change Between 5pm to 6 30 minutes No change pm and 10:30 to 11:30 pm Regional 90% produced within the No change. production licensed area.
Central Regional News 4:00 No change Scotland requirements Other 1:30 (STV Central) (average weekly (of which current affairs 0:33) hours) Total 5:30 Regional news in 2 hours 30 minutes No change peak Non-news peak 45 minutes No change Between 5pm – 30 minutes No change 6pm and 10:30 to 11:30 pm 6pm each weekday 5 minutes of regional No change programmes within the East and West sub-regions Regional 90% of regional programmes No change production made within the licensed area. Northern Regional News 4:00 No change
43 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Scotland requirements Other 1:30 (STV North) (average weekly (of which current affairs 0:33) hours) Total 5:30 Regional news in 2 hours 30 minutes No change peak Between 5pm and 30 minutes No change 11:30 pm 6pm each weekday 5 minutes of regional No change programmes within the North and South and sub-regions Regional 70% of regional programmes No change production made within the licensed area.
Channel Regional Regional News 3:09 Total commitment of 3hrs 20 Islands requirements Current Affairs 0:22 for news, current affairs and (Channel TV) (average weekly Other 0:29 non-news. Breakdown to be hours) Total 4:00 confirmed
Regional news in 1 hour 40 minutes per week 2 hours 30 minutes per week peak Between 5pm and 49 minutes of regional To be confirmed 11:30 pm programmes other than news Regional 99% of all regional 99% of all regional production programming made within programming made within the licensed area the licensed area
All English Regional News 3:45 News 2:30 Regions: requirements with the (average weekly Other 0:15 Other 0:15 exception of hours) Border. 51 Total 4:00 Total 2:45
Regional news in 2 hours 15 1 hour 40 peak weekly average52
Borders Regional News 3:45 News 3:20 (Border TV) Programmes Other 00:15 Other 0:15 (weekly average) Total 4:00 Total 3:35
(non news material can be All regional ITV News delivered in programmes that programmes in ITV Border otherwise consist of news) will be regionalised for At least 2 hours of news Border programming to be of particular interests to those
51 East of England (Anglia TV), North East England (Tyne Tees), North West England and Isle of Man (Granada), East and West Midlands (Central TV), Yorkshire (ITV Yorkshire), London (ITV London Weekday and Weekend), South and South East of England (ITV Meridian), South West of England (ITV Westcountry), West sub-region. 52 Non-news programming obligation is currently 15 minutes per week, of which 14 minutes is to be scheduled between 5pm and 11:30pm and may be part of programming that otherwise consists of news. There is no change to this commitment proposed for all the English regions.
44 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
living in the Licensed area broadcast on weekdays. A weekly average of 1 hour 45 minutes of news programmes shared with Tyne Tees Region. Regional News in 2 hours 15 minutes 2 hours 30 Peak
Sub regional commitments
East of Sub-region The Licensee shall include in All news will be sub- England commitment53 the East and West sub- regionalised for the East and regions a weekly (weekday) West sub-regions. average of 1 hour 15 minutes (1 hour 4 minutes annual average to account for holidays) North East Sub-region Weekly weekday average of All ITV news in ITV Tyne England commitment at least 2 hours of news Tees will be fully (Tyne Tees programmes of particular regionalised. TV) interest to those living in the Licensed Area
Weekly average of at least 1 hour 45 minutes shared with ITV Border region
East and Sub-region Each of the East and West All news will be sub- West commitment sub-regions and the sub- regionalised for the East and Midlands region served by the Oxford West sub-regions. (Central TV) transmitter (and associated relays) have a weekly average of 1 hours 15 minutes.
Yorkshire Sub-region Shall include in the Licensed All news will be sub- (ITV commitment service in each of the West regionalised for the North Yorkshire) (Emley transmitter) and East and South sub-regions. (Belmont transmitter) 1 hour and 15 minutes of news of interest to persons living in these sub-regions South and Sub-region Shall include in the West and All news will be sub- South East of commitment East sub-regions at least 2 regionalised for the South England and hours of news of particular and East sub-regions. the Thames interest to persons living in Valley that respective area. (ITV Thames Valley sub-region Meridian) News programmes in the will have a 10 minute opt Meridian West sub-region specific for that region, may be shared with the sub- delivered within the main region of the ITV Central news bulletins from the
53 Where the ITV proposal states that all news for that region will be sub-regionalised, it should be noted that ITV has also stated “In rare and exceptional cases a whole programme might be shared across the whole of the region when the topics being covered are relevant everyewhere”
45 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
service that is served by the South sub-region Oxford transmitter and sub- relays.
South West Regional At least 2 hours of news All news will be sub- of England Programming programmes must be of regionalised for the (ITV particular interest to persons Westcountry region. Westcountry) living within the Licensed Area
1 hour 45 minutes of news programmes may be shared with ITV West region
West 54 Regional At least 2 hours of news All news will be sub- Programming programmes must be of regionalised West sub- particular interest to persons regions living within the Licensed Area
1 hour 45 minutes of news programmes may be shared with ITV South West region
54 This region is currently part of the ITV West and Wales region. Subject to the outcome of a separate consultation, it may be removed from the Wales licence and attached to the South West of England licence.
46 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Annex 4 4 Channel 3 licensees’ regional and local programming: current and proposed provision
* Note: We refer to “regional” programmes when they relate to the whole of a licensed area and “local” when they relate only to a part of the licensed area.
Region Time Current provision Proposed provision (Licensee)
WALES
Wales Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin See note55 (ITV Wales) Evening 30 minute news programme 30 minute news programme
Late Evening 8 minute bulletin See note
Sat / Sun 10 minutes each day See note
NORTHERN IRELAND
Northern Ireland Lunchtime 6 minutes 6 minutes (UTV) Evening 30 minute news 30 minute news programme programme, plus 1 minute bulletins Late Evening 30 minute regional current 30 minute regional current affairs programme affairs programme 56 Sat / Sun 10 minutes each day 10 minutes each day
SCOTLAND (EXCLUDING BORDER)
Central Lunchtime 10 minutes 10 minutes Scotland Evening 30 minute regional news 30 minute regional news (STV Central) programme, with 5 minute programme, with 5 minute local opt-outs for the East local opt-outs for the East and West of the area and West of the area Late Evening 30 minute regional current 30 minute regional current affairs programme affairs programme Sat / Sun 10 minutes each day 10 minutes each day Northern Lunchtime 10 minutes 10 minutes
55 Programming commitments to remain the same, however the exact schedule is yet to be same. 56 Although UTV have proposed to reduce the non-new programming by half an hour in their obligations, the company has indicated that it does not inted to make immediate changes to the current output
47 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
Scotland Evening 30 minute regional news 30 minute regional news (STV North) programme programme Late Evening 30 minute regional current 30 minute regional current affairs programme affairs programme Sat / Sun 10 minutes each day 10 minutes each day
CHANNEL ISLANDS
Channel Islands Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin 3 minute bulletin (Channel TV) Evening 30 minute regional news 30 minute regional news programme programme Late Evening 8 minute bulletin 5 minute bulletin Sat / Sun 10 minutes each day 5 minutes each day
ENGLISH REGIONS (INCLUDING BORDER)
East of England Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin for whole Separate local bulletins: (ITV Anglia) region East: 3 minutes West: 3 minutes Evening Single 30 minute news Separate programmes: programme for the whole East: 20 minutes of local region, with 6 minute local news in 30 minute opt outs for each of the East programme & West parts of the region West: 20 minutes of local news in 30 minute programme Late Evening Separate local bulletins: Separate local bulletins: East: 8 minutes East: 5 minutes West: 8 minutes West: 5 minutes Sat / Sun 10 minute bulletins for the Separate local bulletins: whole region on each day East: 5 minutes each day West: 5 minutes each day Borders Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin, shared 3 minute news bulletin just for (ITV Border) – with Tyne Tees Border see section 4 Evening Single 30 minute regional 30 minutes of regional news for further news programme shared just for Border with at least details with Tyne Tees, but with a 10 minutes devoted to news 15 minute opt-out for Border about Scotland Late Evening 8 minute bulletin just for 5 minute news bulletin just for Border Border Sat / Sun 10 minute bulletin on each 5 minute news bulletin on day, shared with Tyne Tees each day, just for Border North East Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin, shared 3 minute news bulletin just for England with Border Tyne Tees (ITV Tyne Tees) Evening Single 30 minute regional 20 minutes of regional news news programme shared for Tyne Tees within a 30 with Border, but with a 15 minute programme minute opt-out for Tyne Tees Late Evening 8 minute bulletin just for 5 minute news bulletin just for Tyne Tees Tyne Tees Sat / Sun 10 minute bulletin on each 5 minute news bulletin on day, shared with Border each day, just for Tyne Tees North West Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin 3 minute bulletin
48 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
England and the Evening 30 minute regional news 20 minutes of regional news Isle of Man programme in 30 minute programme (ITV Granada) Late Evening 8 minute bulletin 5 minute bulletin Sat / Sun 10 minute bulletin on each 5 minute bulletin on each day day East and West Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin for the Separate local bulletins: Midlands whole region East Midlands: 3 minutes (ITV Central) West Midlands: 3 minutes Evening Single 30 minute news Separate local programmes: programme for the whole East Midlands: 20 minutes of region, but with 6 min local local news in 30 minute opt outs for each of East programme and West Midlands West Midlands: 20 minutes of local news in 30 minute programme Late Evening Separate local bulletins: Separate local bulletins: East Midlands: 8 minutes East Midlands: 5 mins West Midlands: 8 minutes West Midlands: 5 mins Sat / Sun Single 10 minute news Separate local bulletins on bulletins on each day, for each day: the whole region East Midlands: 5 minutes West Midlands: 5 minutes Yorkshire Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin for the Separate local bulletins: (ITV Yorkshire) whole region North: 3 minutes South: 3 minutes Evening Single 30 minute news North: 20 minutes of local programme for the whole news in 30 minute region, but with 6 min local programme opt outs for each of the South: 20 minutes of local North (N, S and W news in 30 minute Yorkshire) and South (E programme Yorkshire and Lincolnshire) of the region Late Evening Separate local bulletins: Separate local bulletins: North: 8 minutes North: 5 minutes South: 8 minutes South: 5 minutes Sat / Sun Single 10 minute news Separate local bulletins on bulletins on each day, for each day: the whole region North: 5 minutes South: 5 minutes London Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin 3 minute bulletin (ITV London) Evening 30 minute regional news 20 minutes of regional news programme in 30 minute programme Late Evening 8 minute bulletin 5 minute bulletin Sat / Sun 10 minute bulletin on each 5 minute bulletin on each day day South and Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin for the Separate local bulletins: South East of whole region South East: 3 minutes England and the South: 3 minutes Thames Valley Thames Valley: 3 minutes (ITV Meridian) Evening Single 30 minute regional Separate local programmes: news programme for the South East: 20 minutes of whole Meridian region, but regional news in 30 minute with two 15 minute local opt programme
49 Channel 3 and Channel 5: proposed obligations for the next licence term
outs one for the South East South & Thames Valley: 20 and one for the South and minutes of local news in 30 the Thames Valley minute programme, but with 15 minute local opt-outs for each of the South and the Thames Valley parts of the area Late Evening Separate local bulletins: Separate local bulletins: South East: 8 minutes South East: 5 minutes South & Thames Valley: 8 South: 5 minutes minutes Thames Valley: 5 minutes Sat / Sun Single 10 minute news Separate local bulletins on bulletins on each day, for each day: the whole region South East: 5 minutes South: 5 minutes Thames Valley: 5 minutes West of England Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin, shared 3 minute news bulletin just for (ITV West) with Westcountry the West Evening Single 30 minute regional 20 minutes of regional news news programme shared for the West within a 30 with Westcountry, but with a minute programme 15 minute opt-out for the West Late Evening 8 minute bulletin just for the 5 minute news bulletin just for West the West Sat / Sun 10 minute bulletin on each 5 minute news bulletin on day, shared with each day, just for the West Westcountry South West of Lunchtime 6½ minute bulletin, shared 3 minute news bulletin just for England with the West Westcountry (ITV Evening Single 30 minute regional 20 minutes of regional news Westcountry) news programme shared for Westcountry within a 30 with Westcountry, but with a minute programme 15 minute opt-out for Westcountry Late Evening 8 minute bulletin just for 5 minute news bulletin just for Westcountry Westcountry Sat / Sun 10 minute bulletin on each 5 minute news bulletin on day, shared with the West each day, just for Westcountry
50 ITEM 11
PENSIONS AUTO ENROLMENT
Report by Chief Executive
SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL
25 April 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY 1.1 This report seeks approval to implement the transitional arrangements and delay automatic enrolment to a pension scheme until 30 September 2017, for those employees who are in employment prior to 1 July 2013.
1.2 With the continued challenging financial climate the Council should make use of the transitional arrangements, available within the legislation, and remove the additional financial pressure of £748k for the current financial year. In doing so removing the potential negative impact on employees who have previously opted out of the pension scheme.
1.3 The transitional arrangements will also allow the processes and systems to become embedded within the Council in advance of the delayed automatic enrolment date.
1.4 In order to reduce the administrative burden associated to the compliance with this legislation, approval is also sought to implement the postponement period of three months for individuals employed on a contract not exceeding three months and those employed on a casual/relief basis. Thus reducing the burden of administration on the Payroll Section and Scottish Borders Council Pension Fund.
1.5 It is important to note that the implementation of the transitional arrangements and the postponement period does not stop employees from joining a pension scheme, they can still do so by opting in.
2 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 I recommend that Scottish Borders Council approves:- (a) the implementation of the transitional arrangements for pensions automatic enrolment for existing employees of the Council; and (b) the implementation of the three month postponement period for new employees where the contract of employment is for a period not exceeding three months.
Scottish Borders Council 25 April 2013 1 3 BACKGROUND 3.1 The Pensions Act 2011 has introduced new Employer pension responsibilities effective from 1 October 2012. The legislation requires employers to automatically enrol certain employees into a pension scheme and to contribute to that scheme.
3.2 The Pensions Regulator is overseeing compliance with the new legislation.
3.3 Within the legislation all employers are issued with a staging date, determined by the size of the employer’s largest tax reference number. The staging date for Scottish Borders Council has been confirmed as 1 July 2013. The Council are required to comply with the new legislation from this date.
3.4 The key requirement of the legislation is to automatically enrol eligible job holders, who are not currently members of an eligible pension scheme on 1 July 2013, into a pension scheme that meets specific conditions. Even if the employee has previously opted out of such a scheme.
3.5 An eligible job holder is a worker who is aged between 22 and 74, working or ordinarily working in the UK under their contract and have qualifying earnings payable by the employer in the relevant pay reference period in excess of £9,440 per annum.
3.6 The eligible pension schemes for automatic enrolment will be the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS), administered by Scottish Borders Council Pension Fund, and the Scottish Teachers’ Superannuation Scheme (STSS), administered by Scottish Public Pensions Agency on behalf of Scottish Ministers.
3.7 With effect from 1 July 2013, any new employee who meets the eligibility criteria will be automatically enrolled into the appropriate Pension Scheme, STSS for Teaching Staff and the LGPS for other employees, in accordance with auto enrolment legislation. At present all Teachers, regardless of contract, are automatically admitted to the STSS and retain membership unless they make a conscious decision to opt out. Similarly, all other employees, who have a contract in excess of three months, are automatically admitted to the LGPS and retain membership unless they make a conscious decision to opt out.
3.8 Within the legislation, an employer can choose to apply the transitional period, thereby, allowing the employer to delay automatic enrolment, for existing employees at the staging date, until 30 September 2017. This option is only available where the employer provides a Defined Benefit of Hybrid Scheme. Both the LGPS and the STSS are qualifying schemes for the transitional period.
3.9 The transitional period will only apply to eligible job holders who were employed prior to 1 July 2013, provided they were entitled to become a member of a qualifying pension scheme prior to this date. These employees will still receive communication regarding the changes to the legislation, including the provision of information on the relevant Pension Scheme and advising that they have a right to opt in, should they wish.
Scottish Borders Council 25 April 2013 2 3.10 As long as the LGPS and STSS continue to retain all the required criteria of a Defined Benefit Schemes for the purposes of this legislation, employees covered by the transitional arrangements will not be liable to auto enrolment until September 2017. It will be at this point they will need to be automatically enrolled.
3.11 In addition to the transitional arrangements, an employer can use the postponement of automatic enrolment, sometimes referred to as a waiting period. Essentially, this postpones the requirement to assess the eligibility of the worker for a period of three months.
3.12 The use of postponement provides an employer with the flexibility to align the administration of the employer duties to existing business and payroll processes. This flexibility allows employers to use postponement to have smooth processing of the automatic enrolment duty in respect of short term workers who leave soon after starting work or workers who trigger automatic enrolment just before ceasing employment.
3.13 In accordance with the legislation an employer can choose to use postponement in respect of one worker, some workers or the entire workforce.
3.14 In accordance with the legislation there is a requirement to issue a postponement notice to the employee. This will state that automatic enrolment has been postponed, however, also advises that the employee has a right to opt in to the relevant pension scheme.
3.15 Communication with all employees is a key element to the auto enrolment legislation, in that “the duty is on the employer to provide the right information to the right individual, at the right time”. The legislation requires that employees receive communications at various points, outlining how they are affected as individuals. The additional communication requirements will place an onerous administrative burden on the Council.
3.16 In order to comply with the legislation it is imperative that accurate records are maintained to: - x prove that the duties have been complied with x avoid or resolve potential disputes with employees x meet the retention period for both active members and opt outs
3.17 In order to meet the administrative burden it is imperative that the integrated HR/Payroll system, Resourcelink, is used successfully and efficiently. The latest version of software provided by the supplier includes additional functionality designed to meet the legislative requirements of auto enrolment. The software has been installed and is currently being tested and evaluated to ensure this meets the Council needs.
Scottish Borders Council 25 April 2013 3 3.18 In accordance with the legislation a further exercise is to be repeated every three years on the anniversary of the staging date or three years after the employee has opted out of the pension scheme, whichever is the later. The re-enrolment will be required every three years. Further enhancing the requirement to maintain accurate records.
3.19 Pension regulators advice has confirmed that Councillors are not covered by this legislation. The Pensions Regulator indicates that Councillors, therefore, the automatic enrolment provisions are not applicable. However, this does not stop Councillors from electing to join the LGPS.
4 PROPOSAL 4.1 The Council implements the transitional arrangements, resulting in a delay in the implementation of auto enrolment, for those employed prior to 1 July 2013, until 30 September 2017.
4.2 The following table outlines the number of employee post holdings (an employee may be a member of the pension scheme in one post but not the other), as at 28 February 2013, who are not currently members of a pension scheme and indicates if they meet the eligible job holder criteria: - Eligible Job Non-Eligible Grand Total Holder Job Holder LGPS Non Member 364 444 808 STSS Non Member 35 17 52 Grand Total 399 461 860
The majority of the employees included in the table above will have made a conscious decision not to join the scheme. There may be a small number of employees who were precluded from joining the scheme under previous LGPS regulations and have not subsequently opted to join. These employees will be written to as part of the communication plan which will highlight the option of electing to join the pension scheme.
4.3 The requirement to automatically enrol existing employees who have previously opted out of the scheme(s) has the potential of causing adverse impacts for administration, financial management and employee relations, including: - x Negative employee reaction to deductions being made from July 2013 salary after previous and long standing employee opt out instructions, despite being made aware of this in communications. x A significant proportion of the 399 Eligible Jobholders are expected to immediately opt back out and, understandably, will seek an immediate refund of contributions. Administratively this will be a high volume of individual transactions in one period for both Payroll and Pensions staff and as such we cannot rule out delays in refunding in spite of best efforts. x There is a significant potential cost to the Council from the auto enrolment of existing employees who are not members of the scheme which is considered at 5.1 below. Scottish Borders Council 25 April 2013 4 x The majority of the Eligible Jobholders who are not in our pension schemes are lower paid employees and the deduction of pension contributions, with a subsequent delay in refunding, may cause some financial pressures.
4.4 Over the years to 2017 it is anticipated that auto enrolment impact will reduce the proportion of staff who are not members of the pension scheme. Additionally phasing this increase over a four year period will provide the opportunity to smoothly manage and finance the change.
4.5 By 2017, the processes and systems, including the required communications, for auto enrolment will be well embedded and any initial issues resolved prior to this significant auto enrolment requirement of existing employees who are subject to the transitional arrangements.
4.6 It is anticipated that increased communication will prompt at least a proportion of Eligible Jobholders to take action to opt to join the pension scheme, even if they are not automatically enrolled. The transitional period will therefore avoid unhelpful side effects of the legislation, whilst also increasing long term membership of the pension schemes.
4.7 The Council implements the postponement arrangements, for all new employees, after 1 July 2013, where the contract of employment is for a period not exceeding three months. By doing so this will relieve the administrative burden on the HR Shared Services Team in dealing with opt outs and refunds for those employed on short term contracts.
4.8 Any employee who is subject to the postponement arrangements will be communicated with and advised that they will retain the right to opt in to a relevant pension scheme. Thus ensuring that all employees will continue to have access to join a pension scheme, although requiring them to take positive action to do so during the postponement period.
5 IMPLICATIONS 5.1 Financial (a) If the Council does not adopt the transitional arrangements there will be a significant financial impact in the current financial year. The analysis carried out assumes that all current eligible job holders would be automatically enrolled on 1 July 2013 and that they remained members of the pension scheme.
(b) The table at 4.2 indicates that there are 399 eligible job holders where the individual is not currently a member of the Pension Scheme. The following table shows the additional funding required, for a full year, based on current rates of pay and current Employers Pension and National Insurance rates.
Scottish Borders Council 25 April 2013 5 Annual Pensionable Pay Eligible Job Holder LGPS Non Member £6,078,654 STSS Non Member £966,195 Grand Total £7,044,849
Increase in Pension Contributions LGPS Employers Pension £1,094,158 STSS Employers Pension £143,963 Grand Total £1,238,121
Reduction in NI Contributions LGPS Employers NI £206,674 STSS Employers NI £32,851 Grand Total £239,525
Net Effect £998,596
(c) For the current financial year, 2013/14, the additional financial pressure, by not agreeing to the implementation of proposal, will be £748,947.
5.2 Risk and Mitigations Failure to comply with the legislation will result in fines being imposed on the Council by the Pensions Regulator.
5.3 Equalities It is anticipated there will be no adverse impact due to race, disability, gender, age, sexual orientation or religion/belief arising from the proposals contained in this report.
5.4 Acting Sustainably There are no significant effects on the economy, community or environment.
5.5 Carbon Management No effect on carbon emissions are anticipated from the recommendation of this report.
5.6 Rural Proofing It is anticipated there will be no adverse impact on the rural area from the proposals contained in this report.
5.7 Changes to Scheme of Administration or Scheme of Delegation No changes to either the Scheme of Administration or the Scheme of Delegation are required as a result of this report.
Scottish Borders Council 25 April 2013 6 6 CONSULTATION 6.1 The Chief Financial Officer, the Head of Corporate Governance, the Head of Shared Services, the Head of Audit and Risk, HR Manager and the Clerk to the Council are being consulted and their comments will be taken into account in the final report.
6.2 The Trades Unions have also been consulted and their comments will be taken into account in the final report.
Approved by
Chief Executive Signature Tracey Logan
Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number Ian Angus HR Shared Services Manager 01835 826696
Background Papers: The Pension Regulator detailed guidance on Auto-enrolment including document 3a on Postponement and 3b on Transitional Period for DB and Hybrid Schemes found on the web site www.thepensionsregulator.gov.uk.
Previous Minute Reference: N/A
Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. Ian Angus can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.
Contact us at Ian Angus, HR Shared Services Manager, Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA; Tel: 01835 826696; Fax: 01835 825011; E-mail [email protected].
Scottish Borders Council 25 April 2013 7 ITEM 12
RESULTS OF CONSULTATION ON PROPOSAL TO RELOCATE KELSO HIGH SCHOOL
Report by Director of Education and Lifelong Learning
SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL
25 April 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
1.1 This report sets out the results of the statutory consultation on the proposal to relocate Kelso High School to a new site. This consultation was carried out in accordance with The Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010.
1.2 Scottish Borders Council is committed to the construction of a new secondary school in Kelso following a successful bid to the Scottish Government’s ‘Phase 3 Schools for the Future’ programme.
1.3 As the intention is to build a new school on a new site the Council is required to carry out a statutory consultation in accordance with the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010.
1.4 A proposal paper, including a statement of educational benefits, was produced and widely circulated among all stakeholders. This was followed up by an online consultation, a Public Meeting and engagement with current pupils within the school. Education Scotland through HMIE also visited the school and spoke with teachers, staff and pupils.
1.5 The consultation showed unanimous support to the proposal to relocate the school to the Council’s preferred site at Angraflat, Kelso.
1.6 Council officers are committed to an ongoing dialogue with the key stakeholders as plans for the new school campus develop.
1.7 There were some concerns expressed by parents during the consultation around safe routes to school once the new building has been completed and these will be addressed as plans develop.
2 RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 I recommend that the Council:-
a) Notes the outcome of the statutory consultation and the unanimous support for Kelso High School and proceed with plans to relocate to the Council’s preferred site at Angraflat.
b) Commits to an ongoing dialogue with key stakeholders – staff, parents, pupils and the wider community as more detailed plans for the new school campus are developed. Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 1 3 BACKGROUND
3.1 On 26 June 2012, the Executive Committee of Scottish Borders Council agreed to make a bid to the Scottish Government’s ‘Phase 3 Schools for the Future’ programme. The bid was for a project that would relocate the existing High School in Kelso to a new build off Angraflat Road in the town. This was the preferred location following an option appraisal process.
3.2 The bid was successful in that a conditional offer of funding was made in September 2012 by the government agency Scottish Futures Trust (SFT). The offer was for eligible costs up to a maximum of 2/3rds funding of the project. The project was identified as being taken forward on a Design, Build, Finance and Maintain type of contract. The Council will enter into a contract with a development company (Hub South East) to cover both the construction and maintenance of the building over a concessionary period. This has similarities with the Council’s 3HS PPP project.
3.3 The Government award was given to Scottish Borders Council with a condition that the Council should make every effort to commence construction within 12-18 months of the award.
3.4 On 29 October 2012, the Council’s Capital Management Group agreed to release initial enabling funding to progress with the early design stages.
3.5 On 7 February 2013, Elected Members approved a revised Capital Financial Plan to include the Kelso High School project at a cost of £18.6M.
3.6 At their meeting on 27 November 2012, the Council’s Education Committee considered and approved a report initiating the statutory consultation on the proposal to relocate Kelso High School in accordance with The Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010.
3.7 As a result the following actions were agreed and implemented:-
x an educational benefits statement was prepared x a proposal paper was published x notice of the proposal was given to the relevant consultees and invite representations x a Public Meeting was held x the proposals were reviewed
3.8 Key stakeholders engaged in the consultation were:-
x The School Parent Council x Parents x Primary School parents who may be affected x Pupils x Staff x Unions x Community users of the school x Local Community Council
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 2 4. THE CONSULTATION
4.1 The consultation process commenced on 3 January 2013 and ended on 14 February 2013. The proposal paper including the educational benefits statement was published on the Council website and the key stakeholders were contacted by letter. Local Ward Elected Members were also briefed.
4.2 There were 27 responses to the proposal on the Council website. In general these responses are overwhelmingly in support of the proposal paper and the relocation of the school. A range of issues have been raised by the respondents which will be dealt with during the next stages of planned consultation with stakeholders as we move towards agreeing the detailed plans of the new school. The responses from the Council website did not identify anyone who opposes the Council’s plan to relocate the school. (A summary of online responses are attached as Appendix 1 to this report).
4.3 On Monday 28 January 2013, a Public Meeting was held in Kelso High School attended by around 50 people. The Executive Member for Education Chaired the meeting and the Director of Education and Lifelong Learning presented a resume of the proposal paper and the educational benefits statement. Once again the general view was one of support for the proposal although those attending sought assurances that there would be continuing involvement in the design and planning process of the new school. There was particular interest in the potential of the sports facilities attached to the school and relevant community access as well as the planned future of the current school building in Bowmont Street. (A summary of the key issues raised at the public meeting are attached as Appendix 2 to this report).
4.4 There was some consultation with pupils of Kelso High School held on Tuesday 5 February 2013 and facilitated by Headteacher, Ruth McKay and CL&D worker Holly Young. Ongoing dialogue with pupils at Kelso High School is planned as the design stage of the new school is progressed.
4.5 HMI as part of Education Scotland visited Kelso during the consultation process and looked at the following issues:-
x the likely effects of the proposal for children and young people of the school; x any other users; children likely to become pupils within two years of the date of publication of the proposal paper; and other children and young people in the council area x any other likely effects of the proposal; x how the Council intends to minimise or avoid any adverse effects that may arise from the proposal; and x benefits which the Council believes will result from implementation of the proposal, and the Council’s reasons for coming to these beliefs.
4.6 HMI concluded that the proposal to build a replacement for Kelso High School is welcomed by all the key stakeholders. They feel strongly that the proposed new school will be of benefit to the local community and provide a much improved environment for learning.
4.7 The Council published a final proposal paper and this was placed on the Council website for final comment between 15 March 2013 and 5 April 2013. There were no additional comments from stakeholders.
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 3 5. CONCLUSION
5.1 As a result of this statutory consultation and on evaluation of the range of responses from the Council website, the Public Meeting, the Pupil Council and the views of Education Scotland it is recommended that the Council proceed with plans to relocate the school to its preferred site. There are strong levels of support from the statutory consultation for the re-location and Council officials are committed to continuing engagement and dialogue with the key stakeholders as we move towards the next stages of design and build. There were some concerns expressed by parents during the consultation around safe routes to school once the new building has been completed. These concerns will be addressed in the next phase of planning.
5 IMPLICATIONS
5.1 Financial There are no costs attached to any of the recommendations contained in this report.
5.2 Risk and Mitigations (a) The report fully describes all the elements of risk that have been identified in relation to this project and no specific additional concerns need to be addressed.
5.3 Equalities (a) An Equalities Impact Assessment has been carried out on this proposal and it is anticipated that there are no adverse equality implications.
5.4 Acting Sustainably (a) There are no economic, social or environmental effects as a result of this report and its recommendations
5.5 Carbon Management (a) There is no impact on the Council’s carbon emissions as a result of this report and its recommendations
5.6 Rural Proofing (a) N/A
6 CONSULTATION
6.1 The Chief Financial Officer, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services, the Head of Audit and Risk, Corporate Communication, the Clerk to the Council and the Head of Strategic Policy are being consulted. Any comments received will be incorporated in the final report.
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 4 Approved by
Director of Education & Lifelong Learning Signature – Glenn Rodger
Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number Colin Easton Policy, Planning and Performance Manager
Background Papers: [insert list of background papers used in compiling report] Previous Minute Reference: Education Committee, 27 November 2012
Note – You can get this document on tape, in large print and various other formats by contacting us at the address below. In addition, contact the address below for information on language translations, additional copies, or to arrange for an Officer to meet with you to explain any areas of the publication that you would like clarified. Contact the Communications Unit at Council Headquarters on 01835 826592.
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 5 APPENDIX 1 KELSO HS – STATUTORY CONSULTATION – RESPONSES
Date Via – From Details Received Consultation Mailbox, Telephone, Letter, E:mail 17-1-13 Mailbox Alan Brotherston Whilst I think that the relocation of Kelso High School is well needed and Kelso, not before time. I do think that the location merits another look at. I do not think that it is appropriate that his Grace the Duke of Roxburghe, should be allowed to 'GIFT' the land on the premise that he gets to build so many houses on adjacent land. If his last projects are anything to go by then these houses will be, how can I say and be polite - shoddy. At his last development at Sunlaws at Heiton, EVERY house has been re-scaffolded and needed extensive remedies due to cut corners etc etc and I know this because I have worked on the remedies for the fixing of the defects. I do not see why he should make approx 10 million pounds from the sale of these houses, in the pretence that he gives the land for the school. Surely a better site for the school is land out on the road to Heiton, on other side of road from Sainsburys at Spylaw. Sure it might COST the Council money to purchase the site, but in my opinion that is better than giving someone 10 million pounds for the site at Angraflat which is basically what the Council would be doing if they go with the Dukes ‘GIFT’. 29-1-13 Mailbox Alastair Martin I am writing to say that I fully support the proposal for a new Kelso High Kelso School on the preferred site at Angraflat Road.
May I add that I have been very impressed by the presentations and information given out to date by all concerned.
29-1-13 Mailbox Cllr Tom Weatherston This is the best news Kelso has had for many years, we are desperately Kelso needing a new school in a new location to allow our children the same learning experiance as other places. The new site is ideal as most of the pupils live at this end of the town. Kelso has been looking forward to this for many years and the whole town is excited and cant wait to see proper plans. This is an ideal chance to have a community hub that will be of benefit to everyone not just children and I fully support the proposal. Date Via – From Details Received Consultation Mailbox, Telephone, Letter, E:mail 29-1-13 Mailbox John Bassett I like others in the town, like that the new school could be on Golf Course Kelso Road.
29-1-13 Mailbox Liane Paterson I fully support the proposal for the new Kelso High School as I believe it is Kelso completely necessary for the future of Kelso. The current building on Bowmont Street is completely unsuitable for the purpose of teaching pupils in a pleasant and safe environment, with the dated classrooms, leaks in the building and the safety aspect of the pupils. To have everything on one campus will be fantastic for the pupils, better more modern facilities, not having to walk the streets of Kelso to take part in physical education and it will benefit the teaching staff also with more modern facilities and teaching aids. There are also the aspects of insufficient safe parking for staff and visitors and keeping pupils away from any visiting traffic during the school day. Providing better facilities for dining at the school will hopefully improve pupil safety as they will hopefully choose to stay at school instead of going to the town for their lunch. I would hope however that a decent bus route could be provided for those pupils who live on the opposite side of the town to the proposed new site. Good luck to Kelso!! 29-1-13 Mailbox Fiona Black I think it an excellent idea to move Kelso High School to the new proposed Kelso site. Not only is the current school in a sub standard condition but moving the school would stop the traffic congestion problems that exist at the moment. Date Via – From Details Received Consultation Mailbox, Telephone, Letter, E:mail 30-1-13 Mailbox Ben Campbell I support the relocation of Kelso High School to a new site. The proposed Kelso site is fine, although if a more central location can be found, I would be happier. I strongly prefer the proposed site to one close to Sainsbury's, as the economic health of central Kelso is likely to benefit more from this. 3-2-13 Mailbox Miss Storrie Where is the new school going? Kelso
4-2-13 Mailbox Gillian R McFadyen Having read the consultation document and attended the Meeting re the relocation of the current Kelso High School I fully support the proposal of a new build at Angraflat Road, Kelso
4-2-13 Mailbox Elizabeth Ann Hill Kelso desperately need a new high school have done for years. If you Kelso take into consideration how many pupils/staff you have and make sure there is enough room for all, especially at a lunchtime I feel it is important to encourage all pupils to stay at school and not wander down the street at a lunchtime. The school should be capable of providing enough meal choices/room etc. The current building is an accident waiting to happen and too close to the street/shops etc, a new up to date building offering all sports facilities etc Date Via – From Details Received Consultation Mailbox, Telephone, Letter, E:mail 6-2-13 Mailbox Colin Dumma I support KHS proposed move to new site at Angraflat. Kelso
6-2-13 Mailbox Harry J Tomczyk The key issues relating to the proposed new High School in Kelso are what Kelso will happen to the existing building which is of importance and a useful asset to the town and the lack of sufficient space for sports in the new site. It is essential that the benefit of moving in terms of sports provision is fully met on the site and does not involve children in leaving the site.
6-2-13 Mailbox Stephen Onley I fully support the building of a new High School in Kelso. Kelso
7-2-13 Mailbox Robert Kilpatrick I am pleased that a new school is finally being planned for Kelso and the Kelso planned location is close to the town. It is important that the sports facilities currently lacking in the town are included in the new school plan as this is a great opportunity to engage children and adults in sport as part of the Olympic and Commonwealth legacy. Date Via – From Details Received Consultation Mailbox, Telephone, Letter, E:mail 7-2-13 Mailbox Julian Howell I support the proposed move of the school and agree with the broad Kelso proposals as put forward. There is an opportunity to combine the town and school library services and make a better library available to the school and community alike. Only pedestrian and vehicle access is listed in the document, the new school should encourage cycling to school as part of reducing vehicle traffic through the school and promoting health. Provision of secure and dry storage, bike lane access close to the school and consider incorporating cycling-specific sports facilities, such as a pump track or lap track and make available to all in Borders education. 7-2-13 Mailbox Norman Anderson I am fully supportive of the relocation of Kelso High School in the area of Kelso Queen's House/ Angra Flats.
7-2-13 Mailbox Mrs McEwan I believe the present High School is outdated. The new building should Morebattle go ahead on the Council's preferred site. Kelso
10-2-13 Mailbox Dr Chris Mowat I fully support the proposal to relocate and build a new high school in Kelso Kelso. Date Via – From Details Received Consultation Mailbox, Telephone, Letter, E:mail 10-2-12 Mailbox Steven Tait Regarding the sport facilities the new high school would hopefully bring. Kelso A 4G or 3G full size pitch is a must! I play for Kelso united and have done for 15 years. The training facilities in Kelso at the moment are non existent! As soon as its too wet or frozen the only place we can go is the wee gym in the high school to play basket ball! As for playing matches we've had two games in three months! Not ideal. A 4G would not only benefit football but every other sport in the town. Hopefully you can work together with the Kelso sports hub in bringing to Kelso the sporting facilities that all these hard working clubs would thrive upon. 10-2-12 Mailbox Alyson Paul I would be happy to see a new high school at the proposed site. I would Eccles like to see integrated sports facilities at the new school including all KELSO weather running track, all weather pitches in addition to grass pitches. I would also like to see it have a gym and squash courts which could be made available to the public at weekends and evenings.
11-2-13 Mailbox Cassandra Gibson Can’t wait for a new school for town. Kelso
13-2-13 Mailbox Ruth McKay As Rector of Kelso High School I am fully supportive of the Council's Headteacher proposals for the relocation of the school and believe the identified Kelso High School preferred site is the best available within the town. The new school will significantly enhance our ability to deliver Curriculum for Excellence. The following aspects will be of particular benefit: on-site sports facilities, a school library capable of accommodating at least one class, improved ICT, improved security, improved accessibility. Date Via – From Details Received Consultation Mailbox, Telephone, Letter, E:mail 13-2-13 Mailbox Dr Chris Mowat As Chair of Kelso High School Parent Council I am responded on their Kelso behalf to say that we fully support the construction of a new high school in Kelso and we look forward to working together with all of those involved to achieve this. 13-2-13 Mailbox Cllr Alec Nicol I am greatly in favour of a new High School premises to be provided in Kelso Kelso. TD5 7BS
14-2-13 Mailbox Colin Easton I fully support the new High School in Kelso and the preferred location Kelso as long as enough land is given to provide excellent sporting and other grounds compatible with the needs of Kelso and the surrounding area. It should not take away anything from the strong heart and community of Kelso itself and should be far reaching in its planning and forsight for the future needs of pupils and the community as a whole. I would also strongly ask the Council to ensure in the meantime that NO CURRENT PUPILS are penalised as a result of the focus on planning but are given the highest possible education with the support of excellent technology and other resources - much of which can be passed on to the new HS. The Council should reflect that IT will change a lot in the next 4 years and therefore they should still invest in IT for pupils now and ensure they have the best available resources at all time. Not in invest because the new school will have up to date IT is shortsighted both in penalising current pupils and also that it will probably be out of date by then anyway. Saying that I would strongly support the new high school and wish the Council every success with this very exciting development and hope that it can be done as quickly as possible. Thank you. Date Via – From Details Received Consultation Mailbox, Telephone, Letter, E:mail 14-2-13 Mailbox Robert Cutting The status quo is not sustainable for all the reasons mentioned in the briefing paper. A new school should enhance the educational experience for future generations of local children. The Angraflat location would seem to be the best on offer. Ensure the building is "future proofed" against projected demographic changes. 14-2-13 Mailbox Simon Mountford As a resident of Kelso and District and a local ward councillor, I wholeheartedly support the proposals for a new high school on a bigger Kelso site. The present school is no longer fit for purpose and a new purpose- built school with on-site sporting facilities will be of enormous benefit to the town and future generations of pupils. [email protected] APPENDIX 2
Note of public meeting held on Monday 28 January 2013 to discuss the relocation of Kelso High School 43 people were in attendance
Councillor Sandy Aitchison, Executive Member for Education welcomed everyone to the meeting and introduced Director of Education and Lifelong Learning Glenn Rodger and project manager Steven Renwick. Glenn Rodger gave a short presentation on the plans for Kelso High School.
The following is a record of the key questions and answers that followed
Question Response 1. Is the decision that Scottish Borders Council is due to take at their Yes – it will be solely around the result of this statutory meeting on 25 April solely about the principle of moving the school consultation. Decisions on the new site for the school will not and not about the agreed site? be part on the 25 April meeting 2. Is there enough money set aside to deliver the full project? Yes – Scottish Government has committed to providing funding and the council also has made provision for their contribution to the building costs as well as land purchase 3. Is it important to respond to this particular consultation? Yes – a positive response to this consultation will give elected members the confidence that the whole Kelso community is behind the proposal for a new school. If there was a negative response members may reconsider their decision to invest in Kelso 4. Is there enough in the budget to build the type of school you want? Yes – we are confident there is sufficient resource
5. There is a suggestion that the council and the community could add The project team which has been assembled to deliver the value to the project by gaining access to additional funding e.g. project will co-ordinate any additional funding bids enhanced sports facilities. Who will apply for and secure this funding? 6. What if the school roll increases significantly beyond the original We now believe that the Scottish Government funding will be design footprint? based on capacity rather than current roll. This should help future proof the school in the event on an increased roll. 7. What about the timing of the project – I hope that there wont be a Scottish Government are keen we complete this project within series of delays once the scheme is agreed in principle a relatively tight timescale. We hope to be starting work on site in 12 -18 months 8. How do we deal with future technology issues – do we know what we This is indeed a challenge. We need to consider how we will need looking into the future? design to future proof our classrooms particularly with the developments in information technology. For example do we need to install desk top PCs in classrooms or will all pupils be using their own hand held devices in the future 9. On the issue of disposal of the current site – if it is sold where do the This would be difficult as capital developments and receipts receipts go? Could they be put in a special pot for other school from sale of buildings are a corporate issue. Financial developments? pressures are evident across all areas of the council so use of any receipts from a sale would be decided by the corporate body 10. What are the current discussions with Sportscotland in respect of There have only been high level initial discussions. Nothing potential additional funding and how do we make sure this doesn’t go will be taken forward without discussions with Sportkelso and against any local discussions? other local bodies. 11. What are the biggest risks? There are no specific major risks at this time as the capital budget is secured, subject to final approval at a council meeting in early February. There may be some risks around the land purchase holding up a start but in the risks are around keeping to the tight timescale not whether the project will happen or not. 12. Tonight is not about consultation on the site of the new school – how Once officers have considered the options and have agreed much consultation will there be at a later stage? an exact preferred location there will be a full public planning consultation process 13. Is there another potential preferred site at this stage? No
14. Is this project different from the PPP high schools? Yes – this is a not for profit scheme. Although there are elements of the new school building which will be delivered externally via the contract e.g. maintenance, services such as janitor, cleaners etc will be delivered as in any normal school 15. Is this plan for a new school exclusive to Kelso? There was talk about Yes it is exclusive to Kelso. Some initial consideration was having a combined high school for Kelso and Jedburgh? given to a joint school for both towns but this was quickly rejected on both financial and educational grounds. 16. The presentation stated that we needed this investment to enable We will obviously ensure that essential maintenance to the Curriculum for Excellence to be fully delivered. Do you intend to school building continues for the lifetime of the existing school. continue to invest in the current school so that existing pupils can fully Although the current building is far from ideal it will not benefit from CfE? compromise learning and teaching and Curriculum for Excellence implementation over the next few years and pupils who complete their education in the current building will not be disadvantaged.
Councillor Aitchison thanked members of the public for their attendance and thanked Glenn Rodger and Steven Renwick for their attendance and their responses to the questions. He looked forward to engaging with the school parents and the Kelso community in the next stages of the development of the new school. ITEM 13
LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: DEVELOPMENT PLAN SCHEME No.5
Report by the Director of Environment and Infrastructure
SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL
25 April 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
1.1 This report proposes that Council approves the revised Development Plan Scheme.
1.2 Publishing a Development Plan Scheme at least annually is a statutory duty and it must include a participation statement setting out how, when and with whom the Council will consult on the various Local Development Plan stages.
1.3 In summary, this report brings forward the revised Development Plan Scheme (Development Plan Scheme No5) for Council approval.
2 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 I recommend that Council agrees:
(a) To approve the proposed Development Plan Scheme No5 for publication, deposit and copying to Scottish Ministers;
(b) That the Development Plan Scheme be reviewed and published at least annually, and;
(c) To authorise the Director of Environment and Infrastructure to make any necessary minor editing and design changes to the Development Plan Scheme prior to publishing it.
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 1 3 BACKGROUND 3.1 The Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 requires a DPS to be prepared at least annually for the LDP. Its purpose is to set out the Council’s programme for preparing, reviewing and consulting on its Local Development Plan.
3.2 After adopting a Development Plan Scheme, the Act requires the Authority to publish it (including electronically), send two copies to Scottish Ministers, and place copies in all public libraries. There is no requirement to consult on the content of development plan schemes and no provision for Ministers to approve them.
3.3 The new Development Planning Regulations (2008) also require Development Plan Schemes to contain a timetable.
3.4 The Development Plan Scheme must include a Participation Statement (PS) which should indicate when, how and with whom consultation on the Local Development Plan is likely to take place. It should also set out the authority’s proposals for public involvement in plan-making.
3.5 The revised, consolidated Scottish Planning Policy (SPP), published February 2010, refers to the need to update the Development Plan Scheme annually. The emphasis within the DPS should be on actions that have to be taken to ensure that an up to date development plan is in place as swiftly as possible. 3.6 The SPP states that the processes of engagement, information gathering, analysis and assessment should be “proportionate and fit for purpose”.
3.7 Best practice in consultation and engagement is set out in Planning Advice Note (PAN) 3/2010 Community Engagement. The aim is to make plan- making more open, inclusive and accessible. People are expected to be engaged early in the LDP process and PAN 3/2010 identifies a number of actions as the means of meeting this requirement. 3.8 The formal requirements aside, there is also an expectation in the wider stakeholder community that the participation statement should contain the activities for consulting stakeholders, tailored to local circumstances and to the issues being dealt with in the plan.
4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SCHEME 4.1 The proposed Development Plan Scheme No5 (Appendix 1) has been prepared to provide information on the development plan system. 4.2 It sets out the latest position on the Council’s development plans. The preparation of the Local Development Plan commenced with a pre-Main Issues Report engagement exercise in October 2010. The Main Issues Report has also been produced and was out for public consultation between on 2 April 2012 to 25 June 2012. It is not expected that the LDP Proposed Plan will be produced until the Strategic Development Plan prepared by SESplan (the strategic development plan authority for Edinburgh and South East Scotland) has completed its formal Examination Process. The current programme is for the SESplan Proposed Plan Examination to be completed by April 2013, followed by the final ministerial decision.
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 2 4.3 The Act requires that, at the subsequent public examination stage of the Local Development Plan, the appointed reporter examines whether the Council has conformed with, or gone beyond, the requirements of the participation statement (PS) that was current at the time the proposed plan was published. 4.4 If the reporter is not satisfied that the authority has conformed to the PS, he or she may request Scottish Ministers to direct that further consultation takes place. Such a scenario could significantly extend the timescale for bringing forward the Local Development Plan.
4.5 To minimise this risk, it is important that the details of the consultation process set out in the PS are requisite but also sufficiently flexible and deliverable. 5 IMPLICATIONS 5.1 Financial The consultation programme set out in the Development Plan Scheme No5 will need to be funded. Budget is allocated to cover reasonable costs.
5.2 Risk and Mitigations The Development Plan Scheme is required under the terms of the new Planning Act. The contents of the Development Plan Scheme set out current and potential future activities aimed at keeping the Development Plan for the Borders up to date to mitigate the risk of non compliance with legislation thus the need to bring this report to Council to approve a DPS at this time. Other risks relating to activity and timescales are outlined in paragraphs 4.4 and 4.5. 5.3 Equalities There are no direct equality implications arising from this report. There will be a requirement for consultation to be accessible by all sections of the community. 5.4 Acting Sustainably There are no direct environmental implications arising from this report.
5.5 Changes to Scheme of Administration or Scheme of Delegation There are no changes to be made.
6 CONSULTATION 6.1 Consultation on this report has been undertaken including with the Clerk to the Council, Head of Corporate Governance, the Head of Audit and Risk, the Chief Financial Officer, the Head of Strategic Policy and the Directors of Social Work and Education. Their comments have been incorporated into this report where appropriate.
Approved by
Director of Environment and Infrastructure Signature ……………..…………..
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 3 Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number Trish Connolly Planning Officer (01835) 825255
Background Papers: Nil
Previous Minute Reference: Scottish Borders Council, 26 June 2012
Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. Jacqueline Whitelaw can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.
Contact us at Jacqueline Whitelaw, Environment and Infrastructure, Scottish Borders Council, Council Headquarters, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA, Tel 01835 825431, Fax 01835 825071, email [email protected].
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 4 Appendix 1: Development Plan Scheme: No. 5 - April 2013
Introduction
As part of the Scottish Government’s reform of the planning system, the Scottish Borders Council is responsible for the preparation of the new Local Development Plan (LDP). The LDP will be prepared to set out the detailed planning policies and land allocations that follow from the Strategic Development Plan (SDP) for the Edinburgh and South East Scotland area currently being undertaken by SESplan.
The Council adopted the Consolidated Local Plan on 10 February 2011 incorporating the Local Plan Amendment, on the basis of the Structure Plan Alteration approved by Scottish Ministers in June 2009. This will provide a robust planning basis for the area pending the new development plans under preparation.
In advance of the production of the Main Issues Report (MIR), the Council carried out an early engagement exercise that informed the production of the MIR. The MIR has already been produced and has been subject to a 12 week public consultation which ran from 2 April 2012 to 25 June 2012. In October 2012 a report was presented to Council which sought the agreement to the proposed responses to the consultation comments received on the MIR.
What is a Development Plan Scheme?
The DPS sets out the programme for preparing and reviewing the LDP. It is to be updated at least every year to keep you informed about the LDP’s progress.
The Scheme includes the following:
x a summary of the development planning system
x a summary and timetable for the development plans currently being prepared
x a Participation Statement with information on when and how you can get involved including a summary of what’s involved at the various stages of preparing the LDP.
What are Development Plans?
The planning system provides the basis for landuse management and affects everyone. Development plans contain the strategy for the future development of an area and set out policies and proposals to guide the future development and use of land. The plans are expected to cover topics on the environment, housing, transport and infrastructure, economic development and retailing.
Under the new system decisions on where and how development will take place in Scotland will be influenced by three statutory documents:
National Planning Framework for Scotland: this is produced by the Scottish Government and sets out, at the national level, the Scottish Government’s strategy for the country’s spatial development, including schemes of national importance. NPF2 was published in December 2008. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/12/12093953/0
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 5 Strategic Development Plan: these will be produced by the new Strategic Development Planning Authorities (SDPAs) which have been set up for Scotland’s four largest city regions. They set out a long term (20 years or more) spatial planning strategy indicating in broad terms where future development will be located and what is needed to deliver it. The DPS for SESplan which covers the Scottish Borders can be found at www.sesplan.gov.uk
Local Development Plan: these will be produced by the local planning authorities and set out more detailed policies and proposals to guide development. These plans, which are adopted by the planning authority, must accord with the approved SDP (in the case of the city regions) and seek to implement its requirements on a site-specific basis.
The Strategic Development Plan and the Local Development Plan will form the statutory Development Plan for the Scottish Borders area. In addition, Supplementary Planning Guidance on a specific planning topic may be prepared and form part of the statutory development plan but only where it has been specifically trailed as needed in an SDP or LDP.
What Development Plans do we have in the Interim?
The new Development Plan system will take some time to gather momentum. To deal with this situation the Council has taken forward updates to its Structure Plan and Local Plan. The development plans for the Scottish Borders area are as follows:
Consolidated Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-18 incorporating:
Scottish Borders Structure Plan 2001-11:
The Scottish Borders Structure Plan was approved in 2002. The approval included the requirement to update and review matters relating to housing land provision by 2006.
Scottish Borders Structure Plan Alteration:
The Scottish Borders Structure Plan Alteration which largely focuses on revising the approved housing strategy up to 2018 was approved by Scottish Ministers in June 2009.
Consolidated Scottish Borders Local Plan incorporating:
Scottish Borders Local Plan
The Scottish Borders Local Plan adopted by the Council in September 2008.
Scottish Borders Local Plan Amendment
The Consolidated Local Plan 2011 adopted by the Council 10 February 2011.
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 6 What are we going to do in the future under the new Planning Act?
Following publication of the SDP by SESplan in November 2011, the Council has already produced the MIR for the Scottish Borders. It is anticipated that the Examination into the SESplan Proposed Plan will be completed in April 2013. It is not intended to produce the LDP proposed Plan until the SDP has been through the formal Examination Process. Therefore it is anticipated that the Proposed LDP will be produced in Summer 2013 with a period for public representation following thereafter. However, this will be subject to review in the next update of the DPS.
LDP Indication of Potential Timeframe (subject to review and update) Proposed LDP Summer 2013 Proposed LDP Representation Period Autumn 2013 Examination of Proposed LDP Spring 2014 Proposed Modifications to LDP Summer 2014 Adoption of LDP Autumn 2014
When will we update our DPS? The DPS will be reviewed every year. If there are significant changes to report in the interim then this could lead to an earlier update of the DPS.
Participation Statement
Background
LDP Authorities must include a Participation Statement (PS) in their Development Plan Schemes. It should set out when consultation is likely to take place, with whom, its form and the steps that we will take to involve the public in the LDP’s preparation or review stages.
The Scottish Government sets out guidance on how the community can effectively engage in the planning process in Planning Advice Note 3/2010: Community Engagement. Early engagement is defined as being the LDP’s Main Issues Report (MIR) stage. However, it is intended, through the proposals set out in this participation statement, to extend engagement proposals beyond the PAN’s minimum requirement.
Scottish Borders Council has extensively consulted throughout the new Local Development Plan Process and so far our consultation had included:
Pre-Main Issues Report/Early Engagement Stage: x Local Development Plan page on the Council’s website kept updated x Expressions of Interest Form (available online or by hard copy) x Community Council Seminar carried out by Planning Aid Scotland x Letter/Emails informing all on the Council LDP Mailing List x Article within the Winter edition of the SB Connect x Consultation with Children & Young People through the Council’s Participation Officer x Presentations to the Teviot and Cheviot Area Committees x Focus Group meetings (Community Councils and other interested parties) x Community Group Meetings (at Duns, Peebles and Hawick).
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 7 Main Issues Report Stage: x Local Development Plan page on the Council’s website kept updated x Letter/Emails informing all on the Council LDP Mailing List x Neighbour Notification letters in relation to potential employment, housing or regeneration sites x Copies of the Main Issues Report were distributed to all Community Councils, Key Agencies and were placed within all Council libraries (including mobile) and contact offices x Advert in the Local Press (Berwickshire News, Hawick News, Peeblesshire News, Southern reporter and Borders Telegraph) x Press Release issued in advance of Main Issues Report Consultation and a further issued alerting of close of consultation x Article within the Spring edition of the SB Connect x Stakeholder Presentation x Main Issues Report Exhibitions (venues at: Lauder, Hawick, Galashiels, Peebles, Eyemouth, Jedburgh, Duns, Selkirk and Kelso) x Banner advertising Main Issues Report Consultation added to staff’s email signature x Advert on the Councils home web page alerting public of consultation x Tweets posted informing public of the consultation, and further tweets 10 days before the consultation ends, and a week before the consultation ends.
Potential Consultation Programme (subject to review)
1. Proposed LDP published and formal representation phase (Summer/Autumn 2013)
Purpose: to give stakeholders and consultees the opportunity to submit formal representations to the plan. Any unresolved representations not withdrawn, will be considered in a subsequent public examination.
2. Public Examination of Proposed LDP (Spring 2014)
Purpose: to allow unresolved reresentations to be heard by an independent reporter.
3. Proposed Modifications to LDP (Summer 2014)
Purpose: to give stakeholders and consultees the opportunity to consider the proposed modifications by the Council to the LDP following public examination.
4. Adoption of LDP (Autumn 2014)
This reflects our current thinking but the timing and content of planned consultation stages are approximate at this stage given the time horizon involved, and the requirement for the SESplan strategic development plan to receive formal approval. Subsequent annual reviews of the DPS will allow increased precision in the timetable.
Keeping you informed
We will notify interested parties and stakeholders at periodic stages throughout the LDP process, but we want to do more than that and maintain a flow of project information. The main home for this real time information will be our web site at www.scotborders.gov.uk. This lets you register your details on the web site, and then be notified of any up and coming developments or events.
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 8 We will try to accommodate the range of consultees and interests with an interest in the future of the Borders, including agencies and organisations, community councils, businesses and the general public.
Getting Involved?
In the past some people have, for various reasons, not been able to, or have chosen not to, get involved in the planning process. But it’s vital we hear from a wide range of interests. So we want to make it as easy as we can to get people involved in the LDP project by making access to information and communication with us as straightforward as possible. There will be opportunities for people to comment on our process and main plan stage outputs.
We plan to use a range of techniques, including:
x publicising an e-mail address where you can ask questions about the LDP process and get a personal response
x keeping a record of everyone who responds in a database for newsletters or up and coming events
x publishing key documents on our web site
x providing paper copies of key plan stage documents at libraries and council area offices
x press releases and awareness-raising publicity at each key stage of the LDP process
x making translations of key documents into the main community languages available on request.
If you want to be involved in the LDP process you can contact us by:
Emailing us at: [email protected] or,
Writing to us at: Plans and Research Team Environment and Infrastructure Department Scottish Borders Council Newtown St Boswells Melrose TD6 0SA
Scottish Borders Council – 25 April 2013 9 ITEM 14
Borders Alcohol and Drug Partnership (ADP) Annual Report and Delivery Plan
Report by Joint Director of Public Health
Scottish Borders Council
25 April 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY 1.1 To alert Members to the Borders Alcohol and Drug Partnership (ADP) Annual Report for 2011-12 and the ADP 2012 – 2015 Delivery Plan 1.2 Summary Borders ADP is a partnership of agencies and services involved with drugs and alcohol. It provides strategic direction to reduce the impact of problematic drug and alcohol use on individuals, families, communities, and frontline services by co-ordinating the work of the Statutory and Voluntary Agencies and by developing and implementing strategies for tackling drug and alcohol problems at a local level. Borders ADP receives and manages an allocation of ring-fenced funding from Scottish Government.
Borders ADP includes representatives from the following organisations: x NHS Borders (Public Health, Mental Health, NHS Borders Addiction Services, Borders General Hospital) x Scottish Borders Council (Elected Members, Education Dept, Social Work Department, Community Safety Partnership) x Lothian & Borders Police x Lothian & Borders Community Justice Authority x Drug & Alcohol Third Sector organisations
This report presents 2 ADP papers for noting by Council: 1. Borders Alcohol and Drug Partnership Annual Report for 2011-12 2. Borders Alcohol and Drug Partnership Delivery Plan for 2012-15 Both papers have been developed and submitted to Scottish Government in accordance with national guidelines. (Papers attached as Appendix 1 and 2 respectively.)
1.ADP Annual Report 2011-12 ADP Annual Report sets out key ADP achievements and performance against key performance indicators for 2011-12. These include:
x Developing work in partnership with Safer Communities Team to increase awareness within the general population of alcohol and drug issues including an award winning initiative in managing drug related litter x Exceeding performance on targets related to 3 week waiting times for people accessing drugs and alcohol treatment and delivery of evidence based interventions to reduce alcohol consumption (alcohol brief interventions)
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 1 xThe ADP has also contributed to inter-agency work to improve Adult and Child protection arrangements such as revised guidance on working with children of parents affected by substance and alcohol misuse.
2. ADP Delivery Plan for 2012-15 This plan sets out the ADP intention to continue delivery of excellent local services and also developing a whole population approach to alcohol and drugs. The term ‘whole population approach’ was developed to acknowledge that problems associated with drinking occur not just for those with a dependency but also for ‘harmful’ and ‘hazardous’ drinkers, that is those regularly drinking over guidelines. Drinking less is in everyone’s interest. ADP will also strengthen prevention approaches for young people through schools and work proactively on reducing the availability of alcohol and drugs within our local communities while delivering high quality interventions for people requiring treatment and support for recovery.
Key to future work is the successful delivery of the Investment Review of ring-fenced drug and alcohol monies. This work commenced in July 2012 via an external consultant and, following their presentation of findings, an action plan to develop local recommendations was agreed. The Review work operates within the following assumptions: that problematic substance use is a pervasive problem in the Borders as elsewhere in Scotland and reduction of related harm requires a strategic synthesis of specialist and mainstream interventions; effective action to reduce prevalence and harm requires prevention, early intervention and a high- quality treatment and recovery system; services should be evidence-based and targeted, and investment should support recovery and sustained achievement of long-term goals, including abstinence where appropriate.
The review aims work aims to examine the current spread of investment in relation to national and local outcomes in order to make recommendations on how best to align funding in the future to deliver on these outcomes. During January – March 2013 the ADP has been delivering on the action plan and will present a recommended way forward at a meeting of the ADP on 18 April 2013.
2 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 I recommend that Council notes the Annual Report and Delivery Plan
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 2 3 SUBJECT MATTER 3.1 Annual Report Introduction Borders ADP continues to deliver a range of services for people affected by drugs and alcohol throughout Borders as well as deliver on interventions to reduce alcohol and drug related harm in the general population.
3.2 Community Safety and Partnership Work i) Drug related litter campaign Close monitoring of drug related litter identified a problem in areas close to Needle Exchange Services (NEX). A partnership group including Safer Communities Team, Lothian & Borders Police, NHS Borders Pharmacy, SB Wardens, ADP, and the Big River Project delivered the project which included providing key advice on NEX packs relating to safe disposal, posters to deter drug misuse and discarded sharps within public toilets, and advice to toilet users should they find a discarded sharp. In addition, the project provided training to staff responsible for the collection and recording of drug related litter, increased police patrols and increased cleaning in identified problem areas.
The project proved extremely successful with a 57% reduction in discarded sharps across the Scottish Borders. This result was seen to be a testament to how effective the intervention had been through the collaboration of key partners and the involvement of the service users. This was community engagement in its truest form, and involved working with the hardest to reach group within our communities. The hard work and success of the project was rewarded when the project won the ‘Better Outcomes for Communities’ Award at the 2012 Safer Communities Awards. 3.3 ii) Training in new psychoactive substances – previously called ‘Legal Highs’ ‘Legal Highs’ are substances which produce the same, or similar effects, to drugs such as cocaine and ecstasy, but are not controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act. They are however, considered illegal under current medicines legislation to sell, supply or advertise for “human consumption”. In many cases, ‘legal highs’ have been designed to mimic class A drugs, but are structurally different enough to avoid being classified as illegal substances under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
All drugs whether legal or illegal have the potential to harm and this has to be borne in mind particularly when considering using substances branded as legal highs. Just because a drug is legal to possess, it does not mean it is safe. Training was commissioned for frontline and specialist staff on New Psychoactive Substance (‘Legal Highs’) and awareness raising materials were provided within Licensed Premises. Local trainers have been trained within specialist services and Police to cascade this training on to local front line services. 3.4 iii) Delivery on HEAT Targets There are two national HEAT (Health, Efficiency, Access and Treatment) targets to be delivered in relation to alcohol and drugs. Target A11 is set to ensure people do not have to wait for help and support for their drug and alcohol problem and means that services must ensure 90% of their clients who are referred to them start treatment within 3 weeks. Locally, services have exceeded this target and at the end of March 2012, 94% of individuals started treatment within 3 weeks of their referral. Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 3 Target H4 is to deliver 1247 Alcohol Brief Interventions in the year. An Alcohol Brief Intervention (ABI) involves a having a structured conversation with individuals who are identified via a screening tool as potentially being at risk of harm from their drinking with the aim of helping the person understand that their alcohol use is putting them at risk. In Borders, ABI’s have to date been delivered in health settings, in 2011-12 2727 ABI’s were delivered.
3.5 iv) Children Affected by Parental Substance Misuse (CAPSM). ADP has been a key partner in the development of new guidelines for identifying and management of this issue in mainstream services to ensure that when a parent presents to adult services and is identified as having substance misuse issues (whether drugs or alcohol), routine enquiry regarding any children who may be affected is initiated.
ADP Delivery Plan for 2012-15 Introduction
3.6 Whole Population Approach ADP is committed to developing a coherent whole population approach to preventing harm from alcohol and drugs misuse. Examples of partnership work within this approach include: i) Delivering awareness campaigns within the community to promote responsible drinking across Borders, for example, at Festivals/Common Ridings and Rugby Sevens ii) Increasing the reach of ABI’s in to non-health care setting including Social Work iii) Improving data collection mechanisms to gather evidence of the impact of alcohol on communities in order that decision making around licensing is supported by evidence of local harm and impact on services
Treatment and Recovery Services 3.7 Treatment and recovery services in Borders will continue to provide short waiting times for access. An increasing focus on ‘recovery’ will be evidenced by development and implementation of a shared outcome framework for our specialist adult services. Recovery in these terms means that in addition to the aim of treatment to reduce intake of substances, individuals are enabled to move-on from their problem drug use to become an active and contributing member of society.
Review of Investment 3.8 An Investment Review was undertaken by an external consultant and reported to ADP in November 2012. The Review aimed to make recommendations about future investment into resources funded by the ring-fenced alcohol and drugs allocation with the aim of reducing the level of alcohol and drugs problems in the Scottish Borders. The Review included work with key stakeholders including Service Users. Based on this Review further work has been undertaken by the ADP to develop recommendations for a future model of delivery based on: existing needs assessments and data sets, service uptake data, focus groups and individuals interviews with key stakeholders.
This work used an existing model of a ‘recovery oriented system of care’ as a gold standard against which we could assess our existing adult treatment and recovery model against.
The recommendations are presented from a life stages perspective: early Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 4 years; children and young people; and adults. The recommendations cover prevention and early intervention as well as treatment and recovery. We have also given consideration to Criminal Justice settings.
This work will be presented at the ADP meeting on 18 April 2013 and, if approved there, there will then be a period of consultation to further support development of a new model.
4 IMPLICATIONS 4.1 Financial There are no additional costs attached to any of the recommendations contained in this report.
4.2 Risk and Mitigations (a) This should identify the potential side-effects of doing or not doing what is proposed, and evaluate the impact and likelihood of those side-effects, saying what risk mitigation measures are either in place or will be developed to deal with them. If the risks are to be accepted, then the Risk Commentary should say so. Every report is different and so, therefore, are the Risk Commentaries. They need not be long and may simply say “The report fully describes all the elements of risk that have been identified in relation to this project and no specific additional concerns need to be addressed”. More complicated matters warrant a fuller analysis of impact and likelihood and associated management or political responses.
4.3 Equalities (a) An Equalities Impact Assessment has been carried out on this proposal and it is anticipated that there are no adverse equality implications.
(b) If an adverse impact is identified this would warrant a fuller analysis of impact and likelihood and associated management or political response. The summary of this and any mitigating actions should be included within this paragraph.
4.4 Acting Sustainably Adoption of a whole population approach will contribute reduce alcohol and drug related harm both to individual and family circumstances but also social problems in communities such as crime and disorder.
4.5 Carbon Management Not applicable
4.6 Rural Proofing Drugs and Alcohol services are delivered throughout Borders
4.7 Changes to Scheme of Administration or Scheme of Delegation Not applicable.
5 CONSULTATION 5.1 The Annual Report and Delivery Plan have been developed in partnership with ADP Members and Third Sector colleagues. The Review of Investment Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 5 and ARBD Needs Assessment will consult with key stakeholders and Service Users.
Approved by
Joint Director of Public Health Signature …………………………………..
Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number Dr Eric Baijal Joint Director of Public Health, ADP Chair
Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. NHS Borders Public Health can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.
Contact us at Sheila Patterson, Public Health, NHS Borders 01896 825560
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 6
Scottish Borders Alcohol and Drugs Partnership (ADP) Annual Report 2011/12
1 CONTENTS
KEY ACHIEVEMENTS OVER 2011/12...... 3
ACTIONS/ACTIVITIES TO ACHIEVE TARGETS AND DELIVER IMPROVED OUTCOMES ...... 5
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ARRANGEMENTS...... 10
NATIONAL SUPPORT...... 10
CONCLUSIONS ...... 11
APPENDIX 1: 2011/12 DRUG & ALCOHOL EXPENDITURE (INCLUDING ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES FROM PARTNERS) ...... 12
APPENDIX 2: NON-RECURRING FUNDING 2011/12 ...... 13
APPENDIX 3: CORE AND LOCAL INDICATORS...... 14
2 KEY ACHIEVEMENTS OVER 2011/12
Over this last year the Scottish Borders Alcohol and Drugs Partnership (ADP) has continued its excellent work, commissioning high quality services for individuals and families experiencing alcohol and drugs related problems through Action for Children, Addaction, Big River Project, Borders Addiction Services and face2face.
Key achievements for Specialist Services:
The target set to ensure people don’t have to wait for help and support with their drug and alcohol problem means that services must ensure 90% of their clients who are referred to them start treatment within 3 weeks. Locally, services have exceeded this target and at the end of March 2012, 95% of individuals started treatment within 3 weeks of their referral.
Drug and alcohol services have implemented routine enquiry of domestic abuse to help improve identification of women experiencing this either past or present. By doing this, it will ensure the recovery plan for women meets their needs fully and referral onto specialist support for domestic abuse is available where required. As at the end of March 2012, 92% of women attending specialist services had received routine enquiry.
Scottish Borders implemented the Take Home Naloxone Programme from September 2011. 175 individuals attended training either on a one to one basis or in a group setting across the Borders with 147 kits being supplied up to the end of March 12. These training sessions were promoted via the development of a Facebook page and posters. Service users are involved in delivering training to their peers along with nursing staff from NHS Borders Addictions Service and Big River Project.
A review of Needle Exchange Services was carried out over March 2012. Recommendations and actions arising from this review will be taken forward in 2012/13.
The ADP Drug Death Review Group worked in partnership to produce the 2010 Report on Drug Related Deaths.
Independent third sector representation on ADP and ADP Executive Group has also been developed over 2011/12.
The ADP has also strengthened commitment to reduce overall alcohol and drug consumption in the whole population through initiatives including:
Continued delivery of alcohol brief interventions for hazardous and harmful drinkers. The target set by the Scottish Government was exceeded by more than double (target 1247 – delivered 2727), with 86% delivered within Primary Care.
Commissioned training for frontline and specialist staff on New Psychoactive Substance and provided awareness raising materials within Licensed Premises. Local trainers have been trained within specialist services and Police to cascade this training on to local front line services.
3 • Innovative work around managing drug related litter found in public areas was progressed through a partnership group including Safer Communities Team, Lothian & Borders Police, NHS Borders Pharmacy, SB Wardens, ADP, and the Big River Project. This project provided training to staff responsible for the collection and recording of drug related litter, increased police patrols and saw the development of public and service user information. The hard work and success of the project was rewarded when the project won the ‘Better Outcomes for Communities’ Award at the 2012 Safer Communities Awards.
4 ACTIONS/ACTIVITIES TO ACHIEVE TARGETS AND DELIVER IMPROVED OUTCOMES
This section will focus on key actions and activities from last year’s Action Plan relating to each of the core outcomes. We will not report on each individual action in the plan however, Appendix 3 contains key performance indicators progressed over the 2011/12.
Key Actions & Activities from 2011/12 Action Plan: PREVALENCE
Presentations delivered by Police outwith School setting and to parents.
Automatic referral to young people’s specialist service by Police for young people who are in possession or found under the influence of substances.
Lothian & Borders Police continue to be active partners within the Borders ADP. School based presentations are well established and over the last year Police have also reached 125 individuals out with the school settings. This important work supports good community relations which has facilitated the development of improved referral processes from the Police to Specialist Services for young people. This local arrangement ensures that where a young person has been identified with alcohol, it is confiscated and their details are noted and passed on to the Local Integration Officer (LIO). Contact will then be made in person by the LIO with parents who will be offered the opportunity for their child’s details to be passed onto the young person’s service (face2face) and further support delivered.
Key Actions & Activities from 2011/12 Action Plan: HEALTH
Provision of timely information, advice and support for those with high-risk substance misuse problems who are not in touch with services.
Ensure wide range of services available for those with alcohol or drug problems (young people & adults) including:
o Early intervention o Harm reduction o Needle exchange o Prescribing o Detoxification o Rehabilitation o Psychosocial interventions
Information on advice and support services continues to be provided by Scottish Ambulance Service where patients refuse to travel to hospital following an overdose.
As part of developments to support HEAT A11 (Drug & Alcohol Waiting Times Target) and in recognition of the lack of primary care prescribing, NHS Borders Addictions Service received funding to develop the Prescribing and Support Service (PASS). This service is designed to offer recovery based interventions to clients who have demonstrated stability on their prescription and have been on a substitute medications for more than 6 months
5 and in most cases 12 months. This has seen a major impact on reducing waiting times within the service. Within completed waits for January – March 2012, 100% of clients started treatment within 3 weeks.
A Motivational Interviewing Training bid was also successful in receiving non-recurring funding for a period of 12 months to help build capacity within drug and alcohol services. This will see the development over 2012/13 of a self-sustaining framework that will support the delivery of MI training and supervision. Training dates were scheduled for 24 staff across services during March/April 2012 with supervision commencing thereafter.
Key Actions & Activities from 2011/12 Action Plan: RECOVERY
Promote recovery in individuals (young people and adults) from alcohol and drug
problems by:
• Delivering stepped care, recovery-focused, tiered approaches to alcohol and drug
treatment and support.
• Ensuring stronger links with other forms of support that address individuals wider problems and life circumstances including peer support, mutual aid and self-help organisations.
To build capacity within drug and alcohol services Addaction received non-recurring funding to recruit an additional member of staff for 18 months to pilot direct employability work with services users. This post was recruited to and role expanded to include a survey of service users. Developments will include the establishment of an inter-agency steering group which will include representation from Drug and Alcohol Services, Training and Education agencies.
Key Actions & Activities from 2011/12 Action Plan: COMMUNITY SAFETY
• Safer Communities campaigns
• Review impact of pilot project working with woman offenders work (incorporating substance misuse issues) to consider future application
A number of safer communities campaigns have taken place over 2011/12 with support from all partner agencies and council Licensing Staff. Over the festive period local licensees within on-sales were provided with information and posters to increase the awareness of the risks of New Psychoactive Substances (legal highs), safety information and support services available to members of the public. These posters included a QR code which would link individuals through to Crew Website and provided information on how to stay safe. Over 10 days, results showed that there were 56 hits direct to Crew website as a result of the posters in licensed premises.
Evaluation from the woman offender’s pilot showed that bringing women offenders together in a group work model worked for the majority of women who attended. By far the biggest benefit of attending for women was a sense of hope and increase in self-
6 esteem/confidence. Non-recurring funding was provided to deliver a further 6 programmes over 2 years.
Key Actions & Activities from 2011/12 Action Plan: LOCAL ENVIRONMENT
Effective partnerships to implement local licensing legislation
Improve engagement with local communities to raise awareness of the Whole Population Approach and tackle local issues
Over 2011/12 stronger links with the Local Licensing Forum (LLF) were developed. A small working group of the LLF was also established to look at ways to gather alcohol- related data from A&E, Police, Fire and Scottish Ambulance Service. This data will then be turned into a report for Licensing Board members during 12/13 which will inform and strengthen local licensing policy including the over provision statement and allow informed decision making.
The Scottish Government’s Alcohol Behaviour Change campaign was promoted through the workplace via Healthy Working Lives and the two largest employers in the Borders (Scottish Borders Council and NHS Borders). Information and resources from the toolkit was displayed on workplace intranets, staff canteen settings and within Fitness Centres.
Key Actions & Activities from 2011/12 Action Plan: FAMILIES
Agree local policy for interagency risk assessment and referrals
A short-life ADP/Child Protection Committee working group completed agreed actions and is finalising a report to go back to the CPC and ADP setting out recommendations for approval, sign-off and implementation. Actions included: Review of local current child protection guidelines around CAPSM to ensure currency and consistency with developments across Integrated Children’s Services (pending implementation of ‘named person’ arrangements locally and future adoption of Lothian guidelines)
Review of processes around referring into ICS to increase opportunities for earlier identification and intervention across services (involving use of the ‘Keeping Children Safe’ tool)
Identification of further actions to support implementation around workforce development and awareness raising;
7
Key Actions & Activities from 2011/12 Action Plan: SERVICES
Provide and accessible programme of training to meet identified need.
Key activities relating to achieving waiting times targets, health and recovery are highlighted within the Key Achievements 2011/12. This is supported by the delivery of STRADA training for front line services.
STRADA inputs continue to be delivered with courses being identified by services through training needs analysis at the start of the year.
Recruitment of specialist substance misuse pharmacist to provided dedicated support to NHS Borders Addictions Service was funded via non-recurring funding. This post will also support Pharmacy Development Manager in the review and redesign of existing community pharmacy substance misuse services to ensure they continue to meet service user’s needs.
A small working group was established to identify a tool that services can use to report on outcomes following an outcome training event delivered by the Scottish Government’s Drug Policy Unit’s National Support Coordinator. This will continue to develop over 2012/13.
8 Activities not progressed i) Review of Investment A cluster of activities relating to the resource allocation in Borders (including a review of funding investment, improving service user involvement and subsequent training needs analysis) were not delivered in 2011-12 due to discussions locally regarding the scope of the review and also capacity to deliver. This reflects the ambitious agenda the Partnership set out to tackle over the past year.
These activities are now high priority for the ADP during 2012-2013 during which time we will undertake a Review of Investment of ring-fenced monies to make recommendations about future investment into resources funded by the ring-fenced ADP alcohol and drug allocation with the aim of reducing the level of alcohol and drug problems in the Scottish Borders. This will be through a revised strategic model of delivery across the whole population in line with a developed care pathway.
This Review will include consultation with Service Users and will make recommendations about future involvement of Service Users in ongoing review and commissioning of Services. Following the Investment Review and agreement of a model for going forward a Training Needs Analysis will be undertaken to support delivery of strategic priorities.
The Review will take account of findings from local data collection including the Carers’ Needs Assessment.
An external consultant will be commissioned to undertake the Review on behalf of the ADP; this review is scheduled to run from July – October 2012. ii) Substance Misuse Education A second cluster of activities relating to substance misuse education and peer support in schools and youth settings were also not completed. However, funding has been allocated to support the development and pilot of a substance misuse education model in the Eildon West Learning Board catchment area that would conclude with recommendations to the Alcohol and Drug Partnership, Children and Young Peoples Health and Wellbeing Group and the Education and Lifelong Learning Extended Management Team on a model that could be rolled out across the Scottish Borders through the Learning Community Boards.
9 GOVERNANCE AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ARRANGEMENTS
During 2011/12, the ADP Commissioning Group reviewed its role based on the publication of the Audit Scotland Report Drug and Alcohol Services in Scotland (2009). This report acknowledged the lack of considered and consistent evidence-based planning and decision-making on investment, accurate monitoring of spend and impact of delivery. The Commissioning Group outlived its original remit and evolved into a more mature Executive Group that will lead on the implementation of strategic plans. Specific actions completed by the Executive Group for 2011/12 included:
ADP Executive Group Membership Membership strengthened to include independent representation from Third Sector, Health Improvement, Children and Young Peoples Planning Partnership and the Vice Chair of the ADP now chairs this Group.
Governance for partners and partnerships Joint risk assessment completed against key priorities with actions, risk register and management plan in place with regular monitoring through Executive Group.
Accountability Strengthened governance arrangements between CHCP, ADP & partners by developing an ADP Governance Paper that clarifies local decision-making arrangements for the Borders Alcohol and Drugs Partnership
Improved financial monitoring and management of ring fenced allocation with regular updated financial reports to ADP and Executive Group.
Commissioning Drafted and consulted on outcome focused Commissioning Strategy which sets out arrangements for commissioning and developing services involving NHS Borders, SBC and the voluntary sector
Performance Management Improved management and reporting of ADP plans and services through quarterly reporting arrangements between ADP and CHCP Planning & Delivery Group as well as six monthly reporting arrangements in place between service and ADP Executive Group.
These strengthened arrangements are working well locally. The ADP feels that the visibility of the partnership has increased and clarity of roles has allowed the Executive Group to fill its responsibilities with all partners round the table working collaboratively.
NATIONAL SUPPORT Borders ADP have received excellent national support from agencies including Scottish Government Delivery Team, Information Services Division, Alcohol Focus Scotland, Scottish Drugs Forum, STRADA, Scottish Drugs Recovery Consortium and Health Scotland colleagues.
10 CONCLUSIONS 2011-12 was a positive year for Borders ADP in terms of performance on HEAT targets, development of innovative workstreams, patient focussed work in services and strengthening governance arrangements.
Non-recurring monies were used to develop new ways of working, some of which are mentioned above, and which will be delivered over the coming year. In 2012-13 we will finalise our ADP Strategy and Commissioning Strategy and build on this excellent platform, putting into action the findings from our Review of Investment and continuing to ensure that Borders ADP delivers on our National and Local Outcomes.
11 APPENDIX 1: 2011/12 DRUG & ALCOHOL EXPENDITURE (INCLUDING ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES FROM PARTNERS)
RING-FENCED DRUG & ALCOHOL BUDGET 11-12 Alcohol allocation £984,252 Drugs allocation £248,903 ADP Support allocation £109,628 Total Allocation £1,464,454
ADP Expenditure Total Ring- Expenditure to Variance Safer Scottish Lothian & Fenced Budget 31st March Communities Borders Borders Police Allocated 2012 Team Council
TIER 1 Xmas Campaign £500 £500 £0 £1412 Legal Highs Posters £0 £200 -£200 £319 Prevention Conference/Crucial Crew £1000
TIER 2 face2face £40,315 £40,315 £0 £38,252 Action for Children £46,472 £46,472 £0 £15,491 Primary Care £42,220 £55,660 -£13,440 Social Work £10,300 £10,300 £0 £10,300
TIER 3 / 4 Addaction £179,842 £179,842 £0 £19,222 Addaction Family £79,167 £79,167 £0 £38,408 Big River Project (Turning Point Scotland) £112,310 £112,310 £0 £65,602 NHS Borders Addictions Services £578,175 £578,175 £0 DTTO Service £107,556 Residential Rehabilitation £67,156
OTHER NHS Borders Corporate Support £147,637 £147,637 £0 NHS Borders Corporate Support on Carry Forward £112,225 £112,225 £0 ADP Support Team - Pays £115,291 £111,468 £3,823 Other (Slippage from 2010/11 to cover Primary Care £11,142 £0 £11,142 LES) Police Licensing and Drugs Awareness Officers £111,000 Total Expenditure £1,475,596 £1,474,271 £1,325 £2,731 £361,987 £111,000
12 APPENDIX 2: NON-RECURRING FUNDING 2011/12
A carry forward of £590,000 into 2011/12 came about due to the original three year plan (2008-11) having a contingency plan to run at reduced service if funding levels were not maintained. However, as funding was confirmed from Scottish Government for 2011-12 for one year, this resulted in a dramatic change to the overall budget. To inform discussions and decisions around the potential use of this carry forward the ADP invited proposals to be submitted for consideration by the end of June 2011 for short-term (1-2 years) proposals which have clear exit strategies in place. The table below sets out how the funding was allocated.
NON-RECURRING FUNDING / ALCOHOL UNDERSPEND £590,000 ADP Expenditure Total Budget Allocated Expenditure to 31st March 2012 Variance Carry Forward into 12-13
Shortfall in ADP support team budget £15,000 £5,791 £9,209 £0 Take Home Naloxone Initiative £2,000 £2,000 £0 £0 Voluntary sector representative on ADP Executive Group £5,000 £5,000 £0 £0 Social Work Post £57,614 £57,614 £0 £0 Investment Review Contingency £150,000 £0 £150,000 £150,000 Education & Prevention Combined (Various) £56,800 £20,000 £36,800 £36,800 Community Pharmacy Prescribing of Antabuse £7,500 £7,500 £0 £0 Specialist Pharmacy Substance Misuse Support £13,100 £2,183 £10,917 £10,917 Legal Highs Training £1,700 £1,700 £0 £0 Woman Offenders Group Programme £8,960 £8,960 £0 £0 Violence Against Woman Partnership £10,000 £10,000 £0 £0 Strengthening Families Programme £5,470 £5,470 £0 £0 Children affected by Parental Substance Misuse £2,000 £0 £2,000 £2,000 NHS Borders BAS Medication Budget £36,000 £36,000 £0 £0 Employability Capacity in Addiction Services £22,500 £22,500 £0 £0 Addaction staffing support & training £18,000 £18,000 £0 £0 Psychological Therapies capacity across Addiction Services £73,540 £73,540 £0 £0 Motivational Interviewing Training and Supervision £8,700 £0 £8,700 £8,700 IT Equipment for NHS BAS £15,600 £15,600 £0 £0 Recruitment of Occupational Therapist across services £40,000 £0 £40,000 £40,000 Needs assessment (alcohol related brain damage) £15,000 £0 £15,000 £15,000 Star Outcomes Tool £6,860 £0 £6,860 £6,860 Investment Review Needs Assessment £18,656 £0 £18,656 £16,723
Total Expenditure £590,000 £291,858 £298,142 £287,000 Variance £11,142 13 APPENDIX 3: CORE AND LOCAL INDICATORS Core ADP Outcome: Fewer adults and children are drinking or using drugs at levels or patterns that are damaging to themselves or others. PREVALENCE Key Performance Indicators 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
Number of drug and alcohol inputs delivered across all schools and number 134 inputs (5,355 pupils) 200 inputs (4,751 pupils) 153 inputs (3,306 of young people in attendance. Police (2010/11) pupils) (L&B Police/face2face) 24 inputs (756 pupils) f2f (2010/11) 48 inputs (1500 pupils) f2f (2011/12) Percentage of 13 and 15 year olds who had drank alcohol in the last week 13% of 13 year olds 5% of 13 year olds N/A (SALSUS) 42% of 15 year olds 17% of 15 year olds (2006) (2010) Percentage of 13 & 15 years old who had consumed five or more drinks on 16% 7% N/A the same occasion four or more times in the last 30 days (2006) (2010) (SALSUS) Percentage of 15 year old pupils who usually take illicit drugs at least once a 18% 6% N/A month is reduced. (2006) (2010) (SALSUS) Percentage of 15 year old pupils who have taken an illicit drug in the last 27% 11% N/A year (2006) (2010) (SALSUS) Number of inputs delivered by Police out with the school setting and N/A N/A 8 (125 participants) to parents.
Percentage of men drinking above recommended guidelines. 30% Not available at Health (Scottish Health Survey) 2003 (Revised data 2008) Board Level until late 2012 Percentage of women drinking above recommended guidelines. 25% Not available at Health Board Level until late SHeS 2003 (Revised data 2008) 2012 Number of brief interventions delivered. 1005 1999 2727 (NHS Borders)
14
Core ADP Fewer adults and children are drinking or using drugs at levels or patterns that are damaging to themselves or others. Outcome: PREVALENCE continued Key Performance Indicators 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
Prevalence rate of problem drug users (15 – 64 yrs). 0.66% of total population 0.80% of total population N/A (Estimating Prevalence Report – ISD) (2006) (2010)
Number of referrals to face2face. 74 121 95 (Face2face) Number of Blue Tooth messages sent and received at targeted events N/A 13 messages between April 12 (4849 targeted - (L & B Police) – May 2011 1739 received =36%) L & B Police (20010/11) Regular reporting of legal high incidents. N/A N/A 7 (ADP Support Team)
15
Core ADP Outcome: People are healthier and experience fewer risks as a result of alcohol and drug use HEALTH Key Performance Indicators 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
Number of incidents in Borders where naloxone is administered by 25 (2010) 26 (2011) Scottish Ambulance Service (under 50 yrs). (Scottish Ambulance Service) Number of drug-related deaths confirmed. 3 (2009) 10 (2010) 5 (2011) (ISD: National Drug Related Deaths Database Number of training inputs delivered for naloxone. No Baseline No Baseline 175 (NHS BAS) Number of naloxone kits supplies. No Baseline No Baseline 147 (17 resupplies) (NHS BAS) (Aug 2011 – March 2012) Drug alerts reported as and when necessary. No Baseline No Baseline 7 (ADP Support Team) Number of general hospital alcohol related admissions. 656 604 N/A (ISD: Alcohol Related Hospital Statistics Scotland 2011) Number of alcohol related deaths (underlying cause). 8 8 N/A (ISD: Alcohol Statistics Scotland 2011) (2008) (2009) Number of drug-related general hospital admissions. 53 70 N/A (ISD: Drug Related Hospital Statistics Scotland 2011) Rate of drug-related psychiatric hospital admissions per 100,000 56 Borders 69 Borders N/A population. 30 Scotland 30 Scotland (ISD) Reduction in the percentage of clients injecting in the last month Awaiting Scottish Drugs Misuse Report Dec 12
16 Core ADP Outcome: Individuals are improving their health, wellbeing and life-chances by recovering from problematic drug and alcohol use RECOVERY Key Performance Indicators 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
Average reported % of improvements based on STAR Outcomes Tool re: N/A FFR: 2.4% 110 Reviews family and friend relationships (FFR) and community involvement (CI) for CI: 2.3% FFR 2.1% Addaction Direct Service CI 2.6% (Addaction Borders) % drug users completing Big River Project employability programme. 60% 73% 100% (Big River Project, Turning Point Scotland)
% service users receiving prescribed substitute prescription completing N/A 100% 100% education, overdose prevention and take home naloxone training (NHS BAS) % drug users with NHS BAS completing vaccinations for hepatitis <10% 50% 62% accepted (NHS BAS) (2009) % of service users within ‘face2face’ who have sustained change at 6 62% 61% 60% months. (F2F) % of those engaging with ‘face2face’ that have reduced substance use. 70% 58% stopped using 60% (F2F) substances completely. 31% had reduced Percentage of women accessing specialist drug/alcohol services who have N/A N/A 92% (July 11– March received routine enquiry for domestic abuse (amended from Number of 12) women referred to specialist domestic abuse/sexual violence services) (ADP Support Team)
17
Core ADP Outcome: Children and family members of people misusing alcohol and drugs are safe, well-supported and have improved life-chances. FAMILIES Key Performance Indicators 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
% of children on the child protection register as a result of parental 43% 41% (26) 51% (29) substance misuse. (Child Protection Unit) % of children and families referred to Integrated Children’s Services No Baseline 7.5% (158) N/A (Locality Teams) as a result of parental substance misuse. (Business Performance Management, Social Work, SBC) Number of children where parental substance misuse is identified as an N/A N/A 13 area of concern (Action for Children) % of young carers who demonstrate improved emotional wellbeing N/A N/A 25% outcomes. (Action for Children) Number of families referred to Addaction Family Service. 38 58 67 (Addaction Borders) (Sept 09 – March 10) Numbers engaging with Addaction Family Service. 33 (Sept 09 – March10) 30 active, 7 being 71 (Addaction) assessed.
Average reported % of improvements based on STAR Outcomes Tool Home Safety: 2.1% Home Safety: 1.4% evaluations (Addaction Family Service) Parenting: 1.4% Parenting: 1.6% Security: 1.6% Security: 1.5%
Numbers engaging with Action for Children (young carers service). N/A N/A 99
18
Core ADP Outcome: People live in positive, health-promoting local environments where alcohol and drugs are less readily available LOCAL ENVIRONMENT Key Performance Indicators 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
Number of young people who have had alcohol confiscated or found 344 300 386 under the influence of alcohol by Police. L & B Police Number of individuals charged with supplying minors with alcohol. 5 7 16 L & B Police Number of test purchasing visits and the proportion failed. 18 visits – 0 failure 48 visits – 4% failure 65 Test purchases 4.5% L & B Police (1st Sept 09 – 31st March 2010) failures
Reduction in incidents in or attributed to licensed premises. 1072 888 933 L & B Police Number of applications for premises license, and proportion refused 4 Premises Licence – no 19 Premises licence - no 4 Premises Licence – no L & B Police refusals, 190 Personal refusals refusals Licences – no refusals 118 personal licences - no 102 Personal Licences – st st (1 Sept 09 – 31 March 2010) refusals. no refusals Number of licences rejected on the basis of overprovision 0 0 0 L & B Police Number of licences refused for underage drinking. 0 1 license suspended 0 L & B Police Number of substance misuse broadcasts on local radio via Crime 12 18 Busters slot L & B Police Number of police drug seizures 407 312 361 L & B Police Number of individuals charged with specific offences relating to drug 583 381 481 misuse L & B Police Percentage of 15 year olds who have been offered drugs in the last year 57% 40% SALSUS (2006) (2010)
Number of young people (under 18 years) found in possession of 28 11 18 controlled drugs. L & B Police
19 Core ADP Outcome: Alcohol and drugs services are high quality, continually improving, efficient, evidence-based and responsive, ensuring people move SERVICES through treatment into sustained recovery Key Performance Indicators 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
90% of clients will wait no longer than 5 weeks from referral received by 97% of completed waits 100% of completed March 2012. were within 5 weeks waits were within 5 (ADP Support Team) (Jan - March 2011) weeks (Jan – March 2012) No client will wait longer than 10 weeks from referral received to No clients waited longer No clients waited longer treatment by March 2012. than 10 weeks than 10 weeks (ADP Support Team) (March 2011) (March 2012) 100% of tier 3 and 4 drug and alcohol services will submit data to the 100% of services submitted 100% of services Waiting Times Framework. data submitted data (ADP Support Team) (July 2010 – March 2011) (2011/12) Service contracts/SLAs and monitoring processes agreed and All contracts reviewed for All contracts reviewed implemented. 10/11 for 11/12. Programme of training provided and number of people accessing. Programme of 4 Training courses (36 4 Training Courses (STRADA) STRADA training in place for attendees) delivered 2010/11 and 2010/11 delivered locally. Positive evaluations from training providers. 80% of participants stated Over 80% of participants STRADA to provide by that the learning objectives stated that the learning end of June 12 met. outcomes met their STRADA(2009/10) expectations (STRADA 2010/11)
20
Scottish Borders Alcohol and Drugs Partnership Delivery Plan
April 2012 – March 2015
1 Scottish Borders Alcohol and Drugs Partnership Delivery Plan for 2012 – 2015
ADP Partner Organisations
Borders ADP is made up of representatives from the following organisations:
• NHS Borders (Public Health, Mental Health, NHS Borders Addiction Services, Borders General Hospital) • Scottish Borders Council (Elected Members, Education Dept, Social Work Dept, Community Safety Partnership) • Lothian & Borders Police • Lothian & Borders Community Justice Authority • Drug & Alcohol Voluntary Organisations
It is currently chaired by the Joint Director of Public Health for NHS Borders and Scottish Borders Council.
The partnership has made significant progress in addressing alcohol and drug problems, for example we have commissioned new services to work with families, and services for people with alcohol problems are benefiting from increased investment and improved service delivery.
More needs to be done however and we need to change how we do things to deliver real and lasting outcomes for individuals, families and communities. These plans will help to deliver the Alcohol Framework1 and the Road to Recovery2.
1 Changing Scotland’s Relationship with Alcohol: A Framework for Action, March 2009: http://scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/03/04144703/0
2 The Road to Recovery: A New Approach to Tackling Scotland's Drug Problem, May 2008: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/05/22161610/0
2
Summary of Key Changes
We will deliver a whole population approach by;
• Strengthening prevention approaches for young people through schools and parents, ensuring those with special needs aren’t overlooked. • Continuing to work proactively on reducing the availability of alcohol and drugs within our local communities. • Creating stronger links with the wider Community Planning Partnership, and contributing to delivering on our Single Outcome Agreement.
We will, Promote healthier attitudes towards alcohol and drugs by creating positive, health- promoting cultures, for example within organisations for staff and service users, and by reducing the availability of alcohol and illicit drugs.
We will Build on existing work locally and find ways to measure impact and need through: improved data collection and needs assessments, raising awareness; addressing training needs, supporting recovery, and regular communication with local communities through the media.
We will Reduce the impact of alcohol and drug problems on individuals, families and local communities by ensuring equality of access to substance misuse service for alcohol and drug-related offenders, strengthening our response to the more vulnerable groups, such as women offenders and those fleeing violence, and improving supports available for those affected by another’s substance misuse.
We will Work alongside treatment, care and support services to ensure evidenced based recovery interventions aimed at reducing alcohol and drug-related illness and deaths occur as well as ensure testing, advice and immunisation for those at risk from blood-borne viruses. Services will be supported to develop an increased focus on outcome monitoring.
We will Improve the health of those with drug problems by monitoring and reviewing the impact of the Take Home Naloxone programme on reducing drug-related deaths.
3 2012/13 Key Milestones
In this first year, key milestones to achieve will be:
A comprehensive review of investment of ADP ring-fenced funding at local level to achieve strategic priorities
The development of improved mechanisms for service user, carer, and stakeholder involvement on an ongoing basis
Deliver campaigns to promote responsible drinking across Borders Festivals/Common Ridings and Rugby Sevens targeted to adults and underage drinkers
Improve data collection mechanisms to gather evidence of the impact of alcohol on communities that support decision making around licensing
A Training Needs Analysis of the alcohol and drug workforce and development of a Workforce Development Plan
Build on recent work to raise awareness and support the workforce to address New Psychoactive Substances (legal highs)
The completion of a one year pilot to strengthen prevention approaches for young people through schools and parents, ensuring those with additional needs aren’t overlooked
Embed and sustain local delivery of alcohol screening and brief interventions within NHS settings and roll out of delivery in non-health settings such as social care
Develop an agreed framework for monitoring and reporting on outcomes
Strengthen local arrangements for protecting children and young people from the harmful impact of parental alcohol and drug use to improve the screening, identification, communication and early intervention across services
Strengthen strategic links between the ADP, Child Protection and Adult Protection Committees with the aim of co-ordinated action on public protection through key partner agencies to improve joint working and establish mechanisms for reporting developments to the ADP.
4
Core & Local Outcomes
The Borders ADP will deliver the ADP core outcomes as well as those that have been identified at local level to contribute to the Scottish Borders Single Outcome Agreement.
NATIONAL OUTCOMES
HIGH-LEVEL OUTCOMES (SOA) Reduce alcohol and drug problems among young people & adults and the harmful impact on communities in the Scottish Borders.
CORE ADP OUTCOMES
SERVICE DELIVERY OUTCOMES
CORE ADP OUTCOMES Health: People are healthier and experience fewer risks as a result of alcohol and drug use Prevalence Fewer adults and children are drinking or using drugs at levels or patterns that are damaging to themselves or others Recovery: Individuals are improving their health, well-being and life-chances by recovering from problematic alcohol and drug use Families Children and family members of people misusing alcohol and drugs are safe, well-supported and have improved life-chances Community Safety Communities and individuals are safe from alcohol and drug related offending and anti-social behaviour Local Environment People live in positive, health-promoting local environments where alcohol and drugs are less readily available Services: Alcohol and drugs prevention, treatment and support services are high quality, continually improving, efficient, evidence-based and responsive, ensuring people move through treatment into sustained recovery Local Outcomes Prevalence Those people at greatest risk of developing alcohol and drug problems are identified earlier to ensure they do not escalate Prevalence/Services Resources are targeted at populations considered “at risk” or “hard to reach”
5 Financial Investment 2012/13 and Governance Arrangements
NHS Borders holds ring-fenced budgets for alcohol and drugs work on behalf of the Partnership. The Partnership makes its own spending decisions on the basis of delegated authority from each partner organisation. Locally, there is clarity amongst partners as to these budgetary arrangements.
The ADP has developed a joint financial framework between all relevant parties. This formalises processes for an agreed budget and regular reporting arrangements. The tracking system has been extended to include all ADP funded expenditure which enables the ADP to sign off its delivery and budget plans.
Governance arrangements have recently been reviewed and agreed via the local Community Health and Care Partnership Board. See Figure 1.
The ADP provides quarterly monitoring reports and an annual report to the CHCP to monitor implementation of agreed plans.
The ring-fenced allocations from the Scottish Government for 2012/13 are: Alcohol Prevention, Treatment and Support Funding: £1,039,066 Drug Services and Support: £303,724 Each of these allocations contains an amount equivalent to 50% for ADP Support Team
Additional contributions from ADP Partners core budgets (where possible to identify funding): Lothian & Borders Police: £111,000 Scottish Borders Council: £366,789 NHS Borders: £141,671
External Funding: £162,305
The details of how this is allocated locally to support implementation of ADP plans are provided in Appendix 1 and are presented across Tiers 1-4.
The ADP allocated non-recurring funding over 2012/13 to local projects in order to address some of the immediate gaps and inform the impending review of investment based on principles within the ADP Commissioning Strategy.
Figure 1 illustrates how the ADP sits within and is accountable to the Community Health Care Partnership’s Joint Planning & Delivery Group locally and reports to Scottish Government.
6 Figure 1
Public
Scottish Government
Single Outcome Local Delivery Plan Agreement
Scottish Borders Borders Strategic NHS Borders
Council Board
Community Health
Care Partnership
CHCP Joint Planning and Delivery Committee Information Services Division (ISD)
Health Children & Young Alcohol & Drugs Child Protection Pathfinder Lothian & Borders Improvement Peoples Planning Partnership (ADP) Committee (CPC) (Police/Fire/Safer Community Justice Partnership Board Partnership (CYPPP) Communities) Authority
ADP Delivery Plan Input/Activities/Output
7 Priority Actions and Interventions to improve Outcomes
Priority actions for the ADP during 2012-2013 is to undertake a review of investment of ring-fenced monies to make recommendations about future investment into resources funded by the ring-fenced ADP alcohol and drug allocation with the aim of reducing the level of alcohol and drug problems in the Scottish Borders. This will be through a revised strategic model of delivery across the whole population in line with a developed care pathway.
This Review will include consultation with Service Users and will make recommendations about future involvement of Service Users in ongoing review and planning of Services.
Following the Investment Review and agreement of model going forward a Training Needs Analysis of the workforce will be undertaken to ensure our workforce is equipped to deliver strategic and operational outcomes. This work will dovetail with an alignment of outcome reporting for services.
The Review will be informed by existing local data and information as outlined below.
Local needs
Local needs have been identified through a process of needs assessments, reviews of action plans and strategies, monitoring of service delivery and achievement of outcomes, and specific events engaging a broad range of stakeholders. These include:
• Needs Assessment of Drug & Alcohol Problems in the Scottish Borders (2009)3
• Assessing the needs of families affected by substance misuse in the Scottish Borders (2011)4
• Mapping the Road to Recovery Event (2010)5
• Inter-agency seminars on Early and Effective interventions, where alcohol was identified as one of the top 3 priorities
• An interagency Borders wide Child Protection event examining local responses to parental substance misuse.
3 Figure 8 Consultancy. Needs Assessment of Drug & Alcohol Problems in Scottish Borders 2009 http://www.badp.scot.nhs.uk/professionals/publications--guidelines/local-publications
4 Doig, Murray, et al. Assessing the Needs of Families Affected by Substance Misuse in the Scottish Borders (2011) http://www.badp.scot.nhs.uk/professionals/publications--guidelines/local-publications
5 Murray. Mapping the Road to Recovery Event 2010. http://www.badp.scot.nhs.uk/professionals/publications-- guidelines/local-publications
8 Request for National Support
Borders ADP have received excellent national support from agencies including Scottish Government Delivery Team, ISD, AFS, SDF, STRADA and Health Scotland colleagues. Suggestions for additional support are below:
Currently Primary Care ABIs are funded from ring fenced alcohol monies via a Local Enhanced Service. Embedding this as normal practice may be better supported via the Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF).
ADP Chairs events are very useful for networking and developing strategic issues, it may be helpful to consider a similar arrangement for ADP Officers and also for a National Licensing Forum
Representation of Partner Agencies within Working Groups
The ADP Implementation Plan below sets out working groups responsible for activities over 2012-15. Organisation representation on these groups is set out in Appendix 2.
9 ADP Implementation Plan 2012 - 2015
National Outcome 6: We live longer, healthier lives
Core ADP Outcome: Prevalence Fewer adults and children are drinking or using drugs at levels or patterns that are damaging to themselves or others.
Inputs Activities Service Delivery Key Performance Indicators Source Baseline & Trend Target 2015 Outcomes Historical (Year) Tier 1 A model of SME to be piloted and Increased Recommendations on future delivery of SME N/A All schools have Substance Misuse evaluated in Eildon West Learning knowledge and and roll out across Scottish Borders to be adopted revised Education Group Board catchment area. Based on awareness of drugs made by end June 2013. SME education (subgroup of the findings of the pilot and alcohol issues programmes. Children & Young recommendations to be made to including harmful Percentage of schools receiving educational 97% 100% (of schools People’s Health & ADP and CYPPP on roll out of effects. input from Police (2011/12) who have Wellbeing Subgroup) model across the Borders. (L&B Police) P6s/P7s) Increased skills to Number of inputs delivered by Police out with 8 (Police) 10 per year Presentations to be delivered make positive the school setting and to parents relating to (Police) outwith the school setting and to choices around the harms of children & young peoples parents relating to the harms of healthy lifestyles. substance misuse children & young peoples (SCT/face2face) substance misuse Increased Number of inputs delivered by face2face 1500 1800 Tier 2 attitudinal change across all year groups within 9 secondary Alcohol & Drug towards alcohol schools Tasking & and harmful Coordinating Group Raise awareness and support substance. Percentage of 15 year olds drinking on a 17% : 17.4 units No local target set within the workforce by ensuring weekly basis (and their mean weekly level of (2010) ADP to monitor training is available to address Young people with consumption) 39% (2006) New Psychoactive Substances additional support SALSUS (legal highs) needs are not Percentage of 15 year old pupils who usually 6% (2010) No local target set excluded from take illicit drugs at least once a month 18% (2006) ADP to monitor substance misuse SALSUS education.
Improved access to information and Percentage of 15 year old pupils who have 11% (2010) No local target set advice on taken an illicit drug in the last year 27% (2006) ADP to monitor substance misuse SALSUS outwith school via parents & Youth work
10 Core Outcomes: Prevalence Fewer adults and children are drinking or using drugs at levels or patterns that are damaging to themselves or others Continued Inputs Activities Service Delivery Key Performance Indicators Source Baseline Target 2015 Outcomes Tier 1 / 2 Increase police activity at Increased referral Number of referrals to specialist services 80 (2 year average) 84 (2 year L & B Police identified underage drinking rates to specialist (Face2face,Social Work) (2010/11 – 2011/12) average) areas services for young (L&B Police) (2012/13 - people 2013/14) Tier 1 / 2 Strengthen local arrangements Accurate Clear local arrangement agreed by No Baseline - Alcohol & Drugs Tasking & for monitoring new emerging assessment of local September 2012
Coordinating Group trends and psychoactive issues. (ADP Support Team) substances (legal highs) Increased Six monthly review completed No Baseline - Six monthly review of knowledge and (ADP Support Team)
monitoring processes and awareness of front Percentage of workplaces with which No Baseline 50% development of any line staff Workplace Health Services are involved recommendations. which have up to date substance misuse Tier 1 / 2 policies Alcohol & Drugs Tasking & Support national and local Reduction in (Occupational Health Service NHS Borders) Coordinating Group/ campaigns and messages to individual alcohol Number of individuals and employers No Baseline Workplace Health Services responsible drinking and drug consumption. who access Workplace Health Services use. for advice and support on substance Increased misuse issues attitudinal change (Occupational Health Service NHS Borders) towards alcohol Proportion of individuals drinking above Not available at Health No local and harmful daily and/or weekly recommended limits Board Level until Late 2012 target set substances. (ISD) ADP to monitor Tier 1 / 2 Reduction in drug Proportion of individuals drinking above Not available at Health No local Workplace Health Services Support to local businesses to use twice daily (‘binge drinking’) Board Level until Late 2012 target set develop substance misuse recommended limits ADP to policies Workplace (ISD) monitor environment which Proportion of individuals who are alcohol Not available at Health No local Delivery of Alcohol and Drugs supports prevention dependent Board Level until Late 2012 target set Awareness Training For of substance (ISD) ADP to Managers. misuse monitor Estimated prevalence of Problem Drug Total Population: No local Support to individuals Individuals Use Amongst 15-64 year olds, by age 0.8% (2009/10) target set experiencing concerns about experiencing group. 0.7% (2006) ADP to substance misuse as part of substance misuse (ISD, Estimating National & Local Prevalence of monitor Occupational Health Services are provided with Problem Drug Use) appropriate support Estimated prevalence of injecting drug ISD to provide No local use amongst 15 – 64 year olds, by age target set group ADP to (Prevalence Report: University of Glasgow) monitor11 National Outcome 6: We live longer, healthier lives National Outcome 9: We Live Our Lives Safe From Crime, Disorder And Danger Core Outcome: Health People are healthier and experience fewer risks as a result of alcohol and drug use
Inputs Activities Service Delivery Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015 (Source)
Tier 2/ 3 Ensure wide range of services Addaction: Rate of alcohol-related hospital 565 (2007/10) No local target set Specialist Interventions available for those with alcohol Reduced alcohol admissions (three year rolling 611 (2006/09) ADP to monitor Subgroup or drug problems (young people use/harm average) 635 (2005/08) & adults) including: Better Wellbeing (ISD) 614 (2004/07) BAS Early intervention Reduced/ Ceased use of Rate of alcohol related mortality – 9 (2008/10) No local target set Harm reduction illicit drugs. underlying cause (three year rolling 10 (2007/09) ADP to monitor Needle exchange services Stabilised on replacement average over last 5 years) 10 (2006/08) Prescribing prescription. (ISD) 10 (2005/07) Detoxification Reduction/ cease Rehabilitation consuming alcohol. Psychosocial interventions Big River Project Rate of drug-related hospital 74 (2007/10) No local target set Reduction in substance discharges (three year rolling 75 (2006/09) ADP to monitor misuse. average) 73 (2005/08) Reduction in injecting and (ISD) 68 (2004/07) associated risk behaviours Prevalence of hepatitis C among 26.8% (2008/09) No local target set Improvement in physical injecting drug users ADP to monitor (HPS) health. Face2face Increased knowledge Reduced consumption Improved physical & psychological wellbeing Improved capacity to participate Tier 2 To identify and equip wider Increased knowledge and Percentage of targeted frontline N/A 100% Alcohol & Drugs Tasking front-line services to provide awareness of alcohol and services who have received alcohol & Coordinating Group information, advice and sign drug issues and specialist and drug awareness session posting for those who are not in services available touch with specialist alcohol and drug services Tier 3 Develop sustainability model for Reduction in drug-related Number of clients trained on THN 147 (August – March 100% of new clients NHS Borders Addictions Take Home Naloxone (THN) deaths Programme 2012) Service/Big River Project Programme Increased knowledge and awareness of overdose risk within individuals and carers who access THN
12 National Outcome 6: We live longer, healthier lives Core Outcome: Recovery Individuals are improving their health, wellbeing and life-chances by recovering from problematic alcohol and drug use
Inputs Activities Service Delivery Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015
TIER 2/3 Promote recovery in Addaction Annual average reported % of 110 Reviews 125 reviews (2014/15) Specialist individuals (young people and Improved community improvements based on STAR Family & Friend: Family & Friends: Interventions adults) from alcohol and drug involvement Outcomes Tool re: family and 2.1% 2.4% (2014/15) Subgroup problems by: Improved family friend relationships and Community Community Involvement: relationships community involvement and Involvement: 2.9% (2014/15) • Delivering stepped care, number of reviews 2.6% recovery-focused, tiered Big River Project (Addaction) (2011/12) approaches to alcohol Improved capacity to % of those engaging with 60% 65% and drug treatment and participate and be valued ‘face2face’ that have reduced support. in society substance use. (F2F) % of service users within 60% 75% • Ensuring stronger links NHS BAS ‘face2face’ who have sustained with other forms of Increased knowledge of change at 6 months. (F2F) support that address dangers of illicit drug use % of young people who 50% 60% individuals wider and overdose prevention improve school attendance problems and life and take home naloxone following engagement with circumstances including Improved links to BBV face2face treatment services peer support, mutual aid Percentage reduction in daily Not available until No local target set
and self-help drugs spend during treatment December 2012 ADP to monitor organisations. Face2face (SDMD) Sustained changes after Build capacity in addiction 6 months of completing Reduction in the percentage of Not available until No local target set services and pilot direct intervention clients injecting in the last December 2012 ADP to monitor employability work with Increased knowledge of month during treatment service users drugs and alcohol for (SDMD) parents Proportion of clients who Not available until No local target set Development of improved abstain from illicit drugs December 2012 ADP to monitor mechanisms for service between initial assessment and user, carer, and 12 week follow up (SDMD) stakeholder involvement Proportion of clients receiving Not available until No local target set on an ongoing basis drugs treatment experiencing December 2012 ADP to monitor
improvements in
employment/education profile during treatment (SDMD)
13
Core Outcome: Recovery Individuals are improving their health, wellbeing and life-chances by recovering from problematic alcohol and drug use Continued Inputs Activities Service Delivery Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015 2011/12 Tier 3 Embed routine enquiry of Improved identification of Percentage of women 92% (July – March) 92% Violence Against domestic abuse and women experiencing accessing specialist Woman childhood sexual abuse within domestic drug/alcohol services who have Partnership/Specialist alcohol and drug services abuse/childhood sexual received routine enquiry for Interventions abuse. domestic abuse Subgroup (ADP Support Team) Build capacity within domestic Increased knowledge and Percentage of N/A 100% abuse/substance misuse skills of Violence Against addiction/domestic abuse services through skills Women Issues and services received training development, protocol Substance Misuse (VAWP Coordinator) development and partnership Number of women who are N/A 30% of woman engaged working Women are better able to affected by domestic with DACS/DAAS/SBRCC recover from problematic abuse/sexual violence who will engage with specialist substance misuse and engage with specialist alcohol alcohol and drug services domestic abuse and drug services (DACS/DAAS/SBRCC Service Data) Tier 3 Develop pilot of increased Increased access to Development of a clear N/A A clear pathway to be Big River access to psychological therapies pathway between voluntary established and in Project/Addaction/ psychological therapies for for clients presenting to drug and alcohol services and operation by December NHS Community people with substance voluntary alcohol and the local addictions 2012 Alcohol Rehabilitation misuse problems. This drug services psychological therapies team Service (CARS) includes the development of a A staff training needs clear pathway between Identification of addictions assessment to be voluntary alcohol and drug service staff needs in relation to completed by December services and the local Increased capacity the identification of co-morbid 2012 psychological therapies within NHS and voluntary mental health problems and the team, and the provision of alcohol and drug services management of mild co-morbid A programme of staff psychological therapies to support clients mental health problems training to be delivered and training and supervision to all presenting with co- evaluated by December alcohol and drug services morbid mental health Development and delivery of a 2013 (end of pilot period)
problems programme of training and Training workshops ongoing support/supervision to completed with all alcohol meet these needs and drug services
14 Core Outcome: Recovery Individuals are improving their health, wellbeing and life-chances by recovering from problematic alcohol and drug use Continued Inputs Activities Service Delivery Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015
Big River Develop a self-sustaining Improved clinician 2 x 3 day training workshop N/A Two training Project/Addaction/ framework that will support competence in using MI to delivered to all alcohol and drug workshops to NHS Community the delivery of MI training and enhance clinical practice services be completed with all Alcohol Rehabilitation supervision across Borders (CARS) alcohol and drug Service (CARS) addictions services on a long- services by July 2012 term basis
Delivery of 12 x 2 hour monthly N/A Twelve supervision MI supervision group sessions groups to be delivered (CARS) by July 2013
Increased clinician competence in MI to be demonstrated by July 2013
15
National Outcome 5: Our children have the best start in life National Outcome 8: We have improved the life chances for children, young people and families at risk Core Outcome: CAPSM/Families Children and family members of people misusing alcohol and drugs are safe, well-supported and have improved life-chances. Inputs Activities Service Delivery Outcomes Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015
Tier 2 Deliver two cycles per year of Increase in parenting Number of families participating 10 20 Face2face Strengthening Families skills in programme Programme 10-14. Increase in life skills in (Face2face) young person Evaluation completed 8 18 1-1 Parent Support Increase in strength of (Face2face) Programme family bonds Number of parents receiving 20 30 support (Face2face) TIER 3 Complete review and revision Improved identification Number of children where 13 No local target set ADP/CPC Steering of local arrangements around and assessment of parental substance misuse is ADP to monitor Group the prevention, early children affected by identified as an area of concern intervention, and parental substance Action for Children (Young Carers management of parental misuse. Service) substance misuse, that Number of Child Protection Not available until No local target set complements developments Reduction in the number Case Conference where February 2013 ADP to monitor around ‘named persons’ in of children and young parental alcohol and drug Integrated Children’s people at risk. abuse has been identified as a Services; and implement concern/risk (Scottish Government) awareness raising and Increased proportion of Number of families referred to 67 (2011/12) 210 (over three years) training based on local need children in need referred Addaction Family Service. 58 (2010/11) to appropriate support (Addaction Borders) services.
Increased skills of Rate of maternities recording 3.1 (2007/8 – 2009/10) No local target set practitioners and drug use (three year rolling 1.6 (2006/7 – 2008/09) ADP to monitor managers on CAPSM average) 1.0 (2005/6 – 2007/08) 1.0 (2004/5 – 2006/7)
Rate of maternities recording SMR02 ISD: No local target set alcohol use (three year rolling Currently ADP to monitor average) unavailable
16
Core Outcome: CAPSM/Families Children and family members of people misusing alcohol and drugs are safe, well-supported and have improved life-chances. continued Inputs Activities Service Delivery Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015 Outcomes TIER 3 Delivery of support to families Children live in a Numbers engaging with Addaction 71 2011/12 73 (2012/13) ADP Executive and Young Carers to improve safe, protected and Family Service. 75 (2013/14) Group parenting and reduce the stimulated 77 (2014/15) harmful impact on children environment. Annual Average reported % of 53 Reviews 62 reviews (2014/15) and young people: improvements based on STAR Improved Outcomes Tool evaluations Home Safety: 1.4% Home Safety: Addaction Families knowledge, (Addaction Family Service) Parenting: 1.6% 2.4% (2014/15) Action for Children understanding and Security: 1.5% (Young Carers Service) core life skills for (2011/12) Parenting : parents. 1.9% (2014/15)
Improved parenting Security : skills. 1.8% (2014/15) % of individuals referred who 94% 94% Young Carers are actively engage with Action For supported to Children (Young Carers Service). participate in age % of young carers who 25% 35% appropriate activities demonstrate improved emotional and engagement wellbeing outcomes with universal Action for Children (Young Carers Service) services % of young carers who identify as 19% 25% socially isolated who have improved participation in age appropriate activities and engagement with universal services
17 National Outcome 9: We live our lives safe from crime, disorder and danger
ADP Core Outcome: Community Communities and individuals are safe from alcohol and drug related offending and anti-social behaviour Safety Inputs Activities Service Delivery Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015 Outcomes Source Tier 2 Enforcement of drug and Reduction in alcohol Number of police drug seizures 342 (3 year average) 359 (3 year average) L&B Police alcohol related legislation and drug offending (L&B Production Unit) (2009/10 – 2011/12) (2012-15) and re-offending. Number of drink and drug driving 137 (3 year average) 130 (3 year average) Alcohol & Drug Deliver Safer Reduction in alcohol offences (2009/10 – 2011/12 (2012-15) Tasking & Communities campaigns and drug-related anti- (L&B Police) Coordinating Group to raise awareness of social behaviour. Number of Safer Communities 5 6 per year alcohol and drug related Campaigns (2011/12) crime or disorder (SCT) Tier 3 Increased Percentage of women who 72% (2011/12) 72% Criminal Justice Provision of DTTO engagement with complete group work programme Service/face2face services substance misuse One year Reconviction Frequency 116.7 (2008/09) No local target set Borders services for Rate for offenders given a DTTO 66.7 (2007/08) ADP to monitor Provision of 1-1 offenders. (Criminal Justice Social Work Statistics) substance misuse related Number of Community Payback Justice ASD, SG No local target set education programme for Offenders are able to Orders issues where alcohol Currently unavailable ADP to monitor offenders access treatment and/or drug treatment required, programmes and and proportion that are Provision of educational have continuity of successfully completed. programme for offenders care Rate of Anti Social Behaviour 17.4 (2010/11) No local target set on alcohol (Borders offences recorded by the police 20.4 (2009/10) ADP to monitor Alcohol Programme for per 100,000 Offenders Reduce offending behaviour Percentage of crimes where 18% (2010/11) No local target set Tier 3 Extend group work model offender was under influence of 23% (2009/10) ADP to monitor VAWP/Specialist with women offenders to alcohol Interventions cover offending and Improve access to SG, Scottish Crime and Justice Survey Subgroup holistic needs issues, services Percentage of crimes where 14% (2010/11) No local target set health, drug/alcohol, offender was under influence of 23% (2009/10) ADP to monitor safety and relationships. drugs SG, Scottish Crime and Justice Survey Percentage of new clients at 14.3% (2010/11) No local target set specialist drug treatment services 7.4% (2009/10) ADP to monitor who report funding their drug use through crime. ISD, SDMD (SMR25a)
18
National Outcome 9: We Live Our Lives Safe From Crime, Disorder And Danger
Core Outcome: People live in positive, health-promoting local environments where alcohol and drugs are less readily available Local Environment Inputs Activities Service Delivery Key Performance Indicators Baseline 2011/12 Target 2015 Outcomes Tier 1 Reduction of Number of young people who 343 (2 year average) 360 (2 year average) underage drinking have had alcohol confiscated or L&B Police Enforcement of licensing found under the influence of (2010/11-2011/12) (2012/13 – 2013/14) laws Reduction of alcohol alcohol by Police. consumption (L&B Police) Enforcement of Misuse of Percentage of test purchasing 96% 100% Drugs Act. Reduced availability visits to Licensed Premises of alcohol passed (L&B Police) Alcohol & Drug Tasking Deliver targeted Improvement in Number of events targeted with N/A 23 events and Coordinating Group campaigns to promote responsible licensing responsible drinking message responsible drinking across practice Number of premise and Number available later No local target set Borders Festivals and occasional licences in force per 2012. ADP to monitor Rugby Sevens annum and the overall capacity of Increased community premise licences involvement in (Scottish Government) prevention activities Number of new applications for Available later 2012 No local target set Alcohol Data Project Improve data collection premises license or occasional ADP to monitor Group (Subgroup of mechanisms and gather Reduced availability licence Local Licensing Forum) evidence of the impact of of illicit drugs (Scottish Government) alcohol on communities Number of licences refused on Available later 2012 No local target set that support Licensing Licensing Board the basis of overprovision ADP to monitor Board in developing policy decisions are (Scottish Government) on Over-provision. informed by local Percentage of people 2% (2009/10) No local target set data spontaneously reporting 'alcohol 1% (2007/08) ADP to monitor abuse' as a negative aspect of their neighbourhood (Scottish Household Survey) Percentage of people perceiving 7.2% (2009/10) No local target set drug misuse or dealing to be very 7.9% (2007/8) ADP to monitor or fairly common in their neighbourhood (Scottish Household Survey) Percentage of 15 year olds who 40% (2010) No local target set have been offered drugs in the 57% (144) ADP to monitor last year. (2006) (SALSUS)
19
National Outcome 6: We live longer, healthier lives Core Outcome: Services Alcohol and drugs services are high quality, continually improving, efficient, evidence-based and responsive, ensuring people move through treatment into sustained recovery Inputs Activities Service Delivery Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015 Outcomes Tier 1 - 4 Complete review of ADP ADP investment reflects Investment review completed and N/A Reviewed model of ADP Executive Ring-fenced investment to the national and local plan of action agreed investment operational Group achieve a reduction in the outcomes and is from April 2013 level of alcohol and drug evidence based and Service user/family involvement N/A problems in the Scottish incorporates Tiers 1-4 in investment review process Borders through a revised strategic model of delivery Development of model of service N/A across the whole population user involvement based on in line with a developed care review recommendations pathway
Ensure service users and Service users are people in recovery are routinely involved in the represented within the work of the ADP and partnership and that services service delivery. have meaningful service user involvement both in the investment review and ongoing developments Tier 1 - 4 Conduct a Training Needs Al staff working in alcohol Training needs identified and N/A Complete by April 2013 ADP Executive Analysis of the alcohol and and drug services are programme of training Group drug workforce and adequately qualified, developed development of a Workforce trained, supported and Development Plan enabled to deliver their agreed roles Tier 2/ 3 Embed and sustain local Increased knowledge Number of screenings for alcohol N/A 4488 screenings within ADP delivery of alcohol screening and awareness of use disorders delivered and the HEAT settings and brief interventions within staff delivering ABI percentage screening positive NHS settings (HEAT) and roll (with % eligible for ABI and % out of delivery in non-health People identified eligible for referral) settings (non-HEAT) such as earlier who are at risk Number of alcohol brief 2727 Deliver at least 1122 social care, and Police of problems interventions delivered in (90% of H4 Target) within Custody areas. associated with accordance with HEAT Standard HEAT settings and at alcohol Guidance least 124 (10%) in non- HEAT settings by March 2013.
20 Core Outcome: Services Alcohol and drugs services are high quality, continually improving, efficient, evidence-based and responsive, ensuring people move Continued through treatment into sustained recovery
Inputs Activities Service Delivery Key Performance Indicators Baseline Target 2015 Outcomes
Tier 3 Strengthen strategic links Improved interagency ADP active membership in N/A Awaiting Action Plan MAPPA, Adult between the ADP, Child working steering group Protection Protection and Adult Committee, Child Protection Committees with Improved ADP specific actions completed N/A Protection the aim of co-ordinated action identification and Committee, VAWP, on public protection through coordinated ADP key partner agencies to management of improve joint working and contributory factors establish mechanisms for reporting developments to the ADP.
Tier 3 / 4 Undertake needs assessment Informed service planning Needs Assessment Complete Completed by March ADP for Alcohol Related Brain relating to ARBD 2013 Damage (ARBD) in the Scottish Borders, and provide Improve the experiences recommendations to. and reduce the risks for those affected Tier 3 / 4 Develop an agreed Services can evidence Agreed framework in used by all N/A Completed by March ADP Executive framework for monitoring and the impact of their work alcohol and drug services 2013 reporting on service through a common tool outcomes
TIER3/4 Monitor implementation and Service users receive Percentage of clients waiting 7.1% Dec 2011 95% of clients start A11 Steering Group progress of HEAT A11 timely and appropriate more than three weeks between 8% June 2011 treatment within 3 weeks actions for reducing waiting treatment for alcohol and referral to a specialist alcohol and of referral (March 2013) times. drug problems drug service and commencement of treatment (NWTF) Number of treatments drug Available from No local target set service clients receive at 3 month December 12 ADP to monitor and 12 month follow up (and annually after that)
21 Appendix 1: Breakdown of Drug & Alcohol Indicative Funding 2012/13 2012/13 ADP Allocation Ring fenced Alcohol Prevention, Treatment and Support Ring Fenced Drug Services and Support Total Income £1,342,790 1,039,066 303,724 Total Allocated £1,353,112 Tier of Intervention Service Combined Alcohol Drugs Local NHS Other Police Alcohol & Drug Funding Funding Authority Allocation Allocations allocation (G Funding Allocation Allocation Allocation (Lottery/Lloyds Division Allocation Total TSB) Tier 1 Safer Communities 1000 1000 111,000 Team Drug & Alcohol 250 Resources Total Tier 1 ADP Funding £1250 Tier 2 Face to Face 40,315 40,315 38,252 150,305 Action for Children 46,472 46,472 Primary Care 58,960 58,960 Social Work 10,300 10,300 10,300 Total Tier 2 ADP Funding 156,047 Tier 3 / 4 Addaction Borders Direct Access 179,842 179,842 19,222 10,000 Addaction Family
Service 79,167 79,167 38,408 Quest Family
Support Group 1,080 1,080 DTTO Service 112,358 Big River Project 112,310 17,000 95,310 65,602 10,000 2,000 NHS Borders
Addictions Service 567,207 417,207 150,000 116671 Residential 67,156 Rehabilitation Total Tier 3 / 4 ADP Funding £939,606 Other ADP Support Team 99,372 49,686 49,686 Scottish Drugs Forum 5,000 5,000 Outcomes Tool 3,000 3,000 Corporate Support 147,637 147,637 Drug Death Group 1,200 1,200 Total Other ADP Funding Allocated £256,209 Over commitment will be offset by current vacancies and carry forward from 2011/12. 22 Appendix 2
Representation of Partner Agencies on Working Groups
Substance Misuse Education Subgroup: NHS Borders (Health Improvement/School Health) Up2U Lothian & Borders Police Face2face Borders Scottish Borders Council (Education/Community Learning & Development)
Alcohol & Drug Tasking & Coordinating Group: Lothian & Borders Police Safer Communities Team Scottish Borders Council Licensing Officer Addaction Borders Big River Project Face2face Borders ADP Support Team
ADP Executive Group: NHS Borders Scottish Borders Council Third Sector Representation ADP Support Team
Specialist Interventions Subgroup: NHS Borders Addictions Service Big River Project Addaction Borders Face2face Borders Criminal Justice Social Work Services Homeless Services Violence Against Woman Partnership ADP Support Team
ADP/CPC Steering Group: NHS Borders Child Protection Committee Addaction Borders Action For Children Face2face Borders Big River Project NHS Borders Addictions Service Scottish Borders Council ADP Support Team
Alcohol Data Project: Lothian & Borders Police Scottish Borders Council Licensing Officer Scottish Borders Council NHS Borders Scottish Ambulance Service Licensing Board Fire & Rescue Service ADP Support Team
23 ITEM 15
REDESIGNING THE COMMUNITY JUSTICE SYSTEM
Report by Director of Social Work
SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL
25 April 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY 1.1 This report proposes that Committee considers the options and agree a response to the Scottish Government consultation on redesigning the community justice system.
1.2 The Scottish Government is currently consulting with key stakeholders in order to redesign community justice structures. There are three broad options available for consideration: Enhanced Community Justice Authority (CJA); Local Authority Model; and, Single Service Model.
1.3 The clear emergent view from other Scottish Councils and COSLA is that they are keen to adopt a local authority model as detailed in the draft response attached as Appendix 1 to this report, which is considered preferable to either an enhanced Community Justice Authority or national Single Service model.
2 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 I recommend that Council agrees the draft response, as detailed in Appendix 1 to this report, which suggests that Scottish Government adopt a local authority model.
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 1 3 BACKGROUND 3.1 In December 2012, the Scottish Government published a consultation on the options for redesigning community justice structures. The consultation will end on 30 April 2013 and Scottish Government will make an announcement on the way forward in late 2013. Implementation, subject to Parliamentary approval, will be from 2016 onwards.
3.2 The consultation is seeking views from a wide range of stakeholders across the justice sector, partner agencies and local communities. A number of discussions have already taken place with local government and COSLA and their views incorporated in the options available in the consultation paper.
3.3 This is the first time criminal justice has been considered in such detail since the previous review in 2005, at which point the Community Justice Authorities (CJAs) were created to provide the current arrangements.
3.4 The current arrangements have the management of operational criminal justice matters sitting with local authorities, although various strategic decisions and funding matters are the responsibility of 8 CJAs which operate across Scotland.
3.5 Scottish Borders Council sits within the Lothian and Borders CJA area, which includes City of Edinburgh, Midlothian, East Lothian and West Lothian.
4 CONSULTATION OPTIONS 4.1 The consultation sets out three options for redesigning the existing structures. The options are detailed below.
4.2 Option A: Enhanced CJA Model - Under Option A it is proposed that CJAs would continue to be the key strategic body, with the same geographical boundaries, responsible for reducing reoffending but three key changes would be made:-
(a) A chair for each CJA would be appointed by Scottish Ministers and Board membership would be widened to include an appointed member of the Health Board. Registered Social Landlords would become a partner body.
(b) A statutory duty would be placed on all partner bodies to work together to develop a local plan for reducing reoffending and engage in its delivery.
(c) CJA’s statutory functions would be expanded to include strategic commissioning of services and to promote the CJA’s role in the community.
(d) In essence, this option would mean an increase in control for CJAs over operational issues in local teams whilst also giving greater autonomy from Scottish Government.
4.3 Option B: Local Authority Model - Under Option B it is proposed that CJAs are abolished and local authorities assume both strategic and operational responsibility for the planning, designing and delivery of
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 2 services for offenders in their area.
(a) To enable this, a statutory duty would be placed upon local authorities to work in consultation with partner bodies to produce and deliver a strategic plan for reducing reoffending in their area. This duty would be in addition to existing local authority duties to work with offenders in the community as set out under the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968. It would be up to local authorities to decide how best to deliver these duties.
(b) There would be a direct relationship, set out in legislation, between the Scottish Government and local authorities in terms of allocation of funding, and accountability and performance requirements.
(c) It is proposed that the scope of the Risk Management Authority (RMA) is extended to include community justice more broadly. In particular, the RMA would take on responsibility for some of the improvement functions currently undertaken by the Community Justice Division of the Scottish Government. This would include performance management, production of guidance, programme development and workforce development.
(d) In summary, this option would be more of a return to the previous model that existed before the creation of CJAs, whilst placing more responsibility on local authorities to develop clear plans for reducing re-offending. As the lead agency, local authorities would have a statutory duty to work with other partners to develop and deliver the local plan to reduce reoffending. It would be up to the local authority to decide how best to deliver these duties.
4.4 Option C: Single Service Model - Under Option C it is proposed that CJAs are abolished and a national Social Work-led service for community justice is established with strategic and operational responsibility for the planning, managing and delivery of community based offender services. It would be separate to, and sit alongside, the Scottish Prison Service and would incorporate the existing functions of the RMA.
(a) The new service would be a Non-Departmental Public Body (NDPB), headed by a Chief Executive, with appropriate strategic and operational experience in criminal justice, who would be appointed through open recruitment by the Board of the new service. Scottish Ministers would set the strategic framework for the body but the NDPB (and the services it manages and delivers) would be able to take decisions at some distance from Government. Ministers would appoint a Board which could include locally elected members, if appropriate, and the Board would hold the Chief Executive to account.
(b) Local authority criminal justice social workers and other applicable staff, as well as relevant RMA staff, would transfer to the new service although services would continue to be delivered locally. There are important practical issues that would need to be considered in detail if this option was progressed.
(c) In summary, this change would be to a centralised model with less scope for local authorities to implement locally devised arrangements, but would provide a consistent approach across Scotland. Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 3 5 VIEW OF COSLA 5.1 In December 2012, COSLA published a paper seeking support of its members for Option B: the local authority model.
5.2 Councillor Harry McGuigan, COSLA spokesperson for Community Wellbeing, said: “It is clear that we cannot continue with the status quo and that we all need to consider how we as a country get better at reducing reoffending and improve community justice outcomes. These are very complex issues and we need a collective locally driven response if we are to effect real change. It is COSLA’s view that the local authority model would enable flexibility for councils to run with voluntary regional arrangements, as opposed to statutory structures.”
5.3 In discussions with the respective CJA members from within the Lothian and Borders CJA area, it is apparent that they will be agreeing the same decision as that of their respective Councils on this consultation process. Early indications are that this would be a preference for Option B, which is therefore the likely preferred model of Lothian and Borders CJA.
6 OPTIONS FOR SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL TO CONSIDER 6.1 Appendix 1 sets out a draft response from Scottish Borders Council to the Scottish Government consultation on Redesigning the Community Justice System. This response strongly advocates that Scottish Government opt for Option B: the local authority model.
6.2 The further removal of local influence on decisions regarding Community Justice is a concern for the Scottish Borders. The creation of the CJA model has resulted in significant reductions in the funding allocated to the Scottish Borders area and the formulas in use have proven to be a disincentive for the effective prevention of re-offending.
6.3 The extra responsibilities that would be created for the Scottish Borders in a local authority model are to be welcomed. There are specific issues in the area and particular solutions that are effective. The CJA model and any proposed national model would further emphasise a ‘one size fits all’ approach, which has resulted in the centralisation of resources into larger projects and facilities which provide little or no benefits to the Scottish Borders
6.4 There are potential benefits from the CJA model and the national model which should not be lost, even if the local authority model was to be selected. Such opportunities as increased partnership working and sharing of good practice should not be lost regardless of which model is adopted. It may be opportune for Scottish Government to consider the establishment of a national centre of excellence, which can provide advice, research and information and encourage the sharing of good practice. Such a facility could provide support to all local services in a cost effective way, whilst allowing key decisions to be taken locally. 7 IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Financial (a) Funding for option A: Enhanced CJA Model It is proposed that funding continues to be ring fenced for criminal justice social work and allocated directly to CJAs. CJA Chief Officers, as budget holders, would continue to be responsible for the effective financial management of the funds allocated to their Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 4 CJA and for resource allocations across their constituent local authorities.
(b) Funding for option B: Local Authority Model It is proposed that funding for criminal justice social work services remains ring fenced and would be allocated directly to local authorities by the Scottish Government.
(c) Funding for option C: Single Service Model It is not known how funding would operate, however, it’s likely that all decisions around finance would be centralised and the scope for local spending priorities would be minimised.
7.2 Risk and Mitigations The key risks for local government are around the governance of vital local service provision. To mitigate such risks there would need to be clear arrangements for local political and officer influence regardless which model is adopted.
7.3 Equalities There are no direct equalities impacts from the proposals. Although a full impact assessment would need to be undertaken by Scottish Government before any model is adopted. 7.4 Acting Sustainably There are no specific economic, social or environmental effects arising from this report. 7.5 Carbon Management There are no effects on carbon emissions. 7.6 Rural Proofing If a centralised model is adopted this is likely to have a negative impact on access to criminal justice services in remote areas. 7.7 Changes to Scheme of Administration or Scheme of Delegation There are potential changes to the Scheme of Administration and the Scheme of Delegation as a result of the proposals, in that political responsibility for the Criminal Justice Service and representation on the CJA is being considered.
8 CONSULTATION 8.1 The Chief Financial Officer, the Head of Corporate Governance, the Head of Audit and Risk, the Clerk to the Council have been consulted and their comments are incorporated in the report.
8.2 The Social Work and Housing Committee were consulted on a broad approach to drafting the consultation response and the Executive Member for Community Safety had input on the detailed responses to questions.
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 5 Approved by
Director of Social Work Signature …………………………………
Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number Jason McDonald Group Manager, Performance and Improvement Frances Eneide Performance Analyst Officer Tel 01835 825080
Background Papers: Nil Previous Minute Reference: Nil
Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. Diane Brooks can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.
Contact us at Social Work Services, Scottish Borders Council, Council Headquarters, Newtown St. Boswells, Melrose, TD6 OSA. Tel: 01835 825080
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 6 APPENDIX 1
REDESIGNING THE COMMUNITY JUSTICE SYSTEM A CONSULTATION ON PROPOSALS
RESPONDENT INFORMATION FORM
Please Note this form must be returned with your response to ensure that we handle your response appropriately
1. Name/Organisation Organisation Name Scottish Borders Council
Title Mr Ms Mrs Miss Dr Please tick as appropriate
Surname
Forename
2. Postal Address Council Headquarters Newtown St Boswells Melrose
Postcode TD6 0SA Phone 01835 824000 Email
3. Permissions - I am responding as…
Individual / Group/Organisation Please tick as appropriate
(a) Do you agree to your response being made (c) The name and address of your organisation available to the public (in Scottish will be made available to the public (in the Government library and/or on the Scottish Scottish Government library and/or on the Government web site)? Scottish Government web site).
Please tick as appropriate Yes No (b) Where confidentiality is not requested, we will Are you content for your response to be made make your responses available to the public available? on the following basis Please tick ONE of the following boxes Please tick as appropriate Yes No Yes, make my response, name and address all available or Yes, make my response available, but not my name and address or Yes, make my response and name available, but not my address
(d) We will share your response internally with other Scottish Government policy teams who may be addressing the issues you discuss. They may wish to contact you again in the future, but we require your permission to do so. Are you content for Scottish Government to contact you again in relation to this consultation exercise? Please tick as appropriate Yes No CONSULTATION QUESTIONS
The consultation questions are split into two parts, which are:
- applicable to all options; and - specific to either Option A, B or C.
Respondents can reply to all of the questions, or a selection, depending on where their interests lie. General views on the consultation paper are also welcomed.
All options
1. Which option(s) do you think is more likely to meet the key characteristics (set out on pages 15 and 16 of the Consultation) that, if integral to any new community justice system, are more likely to lead to better outcomes?
Key characteristic (pages 15 and 16 of the consultation) Option (please specify A, B or C or a mix of all three) Strategic direction and leadership to drive forward performance B improvements and deliver public services that protect victims and communities and meet the needs of people who offend A focus on prevention and early intervention B Better and more coherent person-centred opportunities for B supporting desistance, which focus on developing the capacities and capabilities of offenders to enable them to make a positive contribution to their families and communities Clearer lines of political, strategic and operational B accountability for performance and mechanisms to support continuous improvement Effective local partnership and collaboration that brings B together public, third and private sector partners, including non-justice services, and local communities to deliver shared outcomes that really matter to people Strategic commissioning of services that are based on a robust B & C analysis of needs, evidence of what supports desistance and (See comments at best value for money end of paper) A strong and united voice that represents community justice B & C interests with the judiciary, public and media (See comments at end of paper) Better data management and evaluation to assess B organisational and management performance, including the impact of services Involvement of service users, their families and the wider B community in the planning, delivery and reviewing of services Provision of an overview of the system as a whole, including B & C consistency and breadth of service provision (See comments at end of paper) Better integration between local partnership structures, B services and organisations working with offenders and their families A more co-ordinated and strategic approach to working with B the third sector A strategic approach to workforce development and leadership B & C for criminal justice social work staff that is based on evidence (See comments at of what supports desistance and builds expertise, capacity and end of paper) resilience and encourages collaborative working with other professionals towards shared outcomes Greater professional identity for community justice staff which B builds on their existing values and provides well defined opportunities for career progression Ability to follow innovation nationally and internationally, as B & C well as develop and share evidence based good practice (See comments at end of paper)
2. Which option(s) will result in the significant cultural change required to redesign services so that they are based on offender needs, evidence of what works and best value for money?
B offers the most scope to do this at a local level. However, if this was supplemented with some resource nationally to develop good practice and explore value for money / consistency / innovation / focus on community alternatives.
3. Which option(s) will result in improvements in engagement with, and quicker access to, non-justice services such as health, housing and education?
B would build upon existing local networks and relationships and ensure that community planning is the basis for such improvements.
4. Do you think a statutory duty on local partners will help promote collective responsibility for reducing reoffending among all the bodies who work with offenders? If not, what would?
It may be helpful to assist with bringing all local partners together. However, greater emphasis of joint targets within the SOA could also encourage this.
5. Under options A and B should funding for criminal justice social work services remain ring-fenced?
No. Scottish Borders Council believe local authorities and their partners should have maximum flexibility to determine spending priorities. However, it would be helpful with any model to give consideration to strategic commissioning across wider areas. 6. Are there specific types of training and development that would be beneficial for practitioners, managers and leaders working in community justice? Who is best placed to provide them?
Yes. There are a range of different training opportunities and these are too numerous to specifically list. Scottish Borders Council believe that core personal development could be linked in with wider local authority training and development opportunities. However, it would also be beneficial if national training for specific Criminal Justice practices was developed and easily accessible for all Criminal Justice staff.
Scottish Borders Council would be particularly pleased to see a focus on leadership development at a local and national level.
7. Is there potential for existing organisations such as Scottish Social Services Council, Institute for Research and Innovation in Social Services and knowledge portal Social Services Knowledge in Scotland to take on a greater role in supporting and developing the skills and expertise of professionals working with offenders?
Yes. Scottish Borders Council would be in favour of some form of a national centre of excellence on Criminal Justice and all of these organisations could have such a role or contribute to its creation.
8. What do you think are the equalities impact of the proposals presented in this paper, and the effect they may have on different sectors of the population?
Scottish Borders Council would strongly advocate that a local authority model would ensure that equalities issues were fully considered in line with local authority duties. This would include equality impact assessments of any key policy decisions. There is a risk with models A & C that specific responsibility for equalities is overlooked or assumed to be the responsibility of other organisations.
9. What are your views regarding the impact that the proposals presented in this paper may have on the important contribution to be made by businesses and the third sector?
In terms of developing local delivery of Criminal Justice services and priorities a local authority model would enable engagement with businesses and the 3rd sector. Option A would not fully allow this engagement whilst option C would be too far removed for meaningful engagement with any organisation other than very large national / international businesses and voluntary organisations.
Adopting option B would further allow local criminal justice work to be closely linked with the ongoing development of local community safety arrangements and relationships with businesses and voluntary sector. 10. Are there other options, or permutations of the options presented in this paper, which should be considered? Please provide details.
Yes - a Local Authority model as the primary approach but with some collective resources saved from the removal of CJAs invested in a national criminal justice centre of excellence for training / practice / innovation. The remainder of these CJA resources should be distributed to local authorities towards frontline delivery of services.
Option A: Enhanced Community Justice Authority (CJA) model
11. What are your overall views on retaining CJAs but changing their membership and functions?
Scottish Borders Council are not in favour of this option and do not believe any added value can be obtained from a CJA model - whether this is enhanced or not.
12. Will appointing a chair and expanding the membership of the CJA Board to include the Health Board help remove any potential conflict of interest and promote collective responsibility for reducing reoffending?
No. This is not the difficulty with the CJA board. In the absence of any added value, the additional cost involved in operating eight CJA’s could be better used in the delivery of frontline services.
13. What do you think of the alternative proposal for all Board members to be recruited through the public appointments system based on skills, knowledge and experience?
Scottish Borders Council would have concerns about accountability of these board members.
14. Do the proposals under Option A give CJAs sufficient levers and powers to reduce reoffending efficiently and effectively?
No. They do not provide sufficient clarity on robust local delivery of criminal justice services.
15. Do you think CJA’s should be given operational responsibility for the delivery of criminal justice social work services? Do CJAs currently have the skills, expertise and knowledge to take on these functions?
No to both parts of this question. 16. Should CJAs geographical boundaries remain the same? If not how should they be redrawn?
No.
17. Do you agree that the Scottish Government should retain the current arrangements for training and development? Should they be reviewed for effectiveness?
No. If they did continue they would need to be reviewed and Scottish Borders Council would strongly advocate the introduction of a centre of excellence, to be led by social work criminal justice practitioners.
18. What could be done differently to build expertise, capacity and resilience in the community justice sector and ensure evidence based good practice is shared widely?
Please see the additional comments regarding the suggestion of a centre of excellence.
Option B: Local authority model
19. What do you think of the proposal to abolish CJAs and give the strategic and operational duties for reducing reoffending to local authorities?
Scottish Borders Council are in favour of this model. This builds upon the roles which are already well established. It would also allow increased capacity to develop partnership arrangements within local community planning structures.
It would also ensure appropriate local solutions are developed by building upon existing local infrastructure, mechanisms and arrangements, e.g. delivery of appropriate services in rural areas.
20. What do you think will be the impact on consistency of service provision, good practice and the potential to plan and commission services across boundaries (and hence value for money) of moving from eight CJAs to 32 local authorities?
There is scope for differences in approach across 32 local authorities. However, this also provides scope for local innovation and solutions. If this model was adopted in conjunction with a centre of excellence, good practice and consistency it could build upon locally developed solutions that work in practice. 21. Do you think there is still a requirement for a regional partnership, provision or co-ordination role (formally or informally) in this model? If so, how would it work?
Local authorities and partners could decide to establish cross boundary / regional arrangements if considered helpful.
These arrangements are already in place across Scotland and local community planning partnerships can best decide when these are appropriate.
22. What do you think would be the impact of reducing reoffending being subsumed within community planning, or other local authority planning structures?
This would have a positive impact on reducing reoffending as local partners would work closely to identify local solutions for individuals.
Such a model would ensure that existing local arrangements would continue to be strengthened with a focus on criminal justice, eg, close links between NHS, Education and Drug and Alcohol services.
23. Do you agree that functions such as programme accreditation, development of good practice, performance management and workforce development should be devolved from the Government to an organisation with the appropriate skills and experience?
Elements of this could be devolved to local community planning partnerships as part of the SOA. Other aspects could be picked up within our suggestions of a centre of excellence.
24. What are your views on the proposal to expand the functions of the Risk Management Authority to take responsibility for improving performance?
Scottish Borders Council would be cautious about this as it could fundamentally divert the focus of the RMA.
25. What are your views on the proposal to set up a national Scottish Government/ Convention of Scottish Local Authorities Leadership Group to provide national leadership and direction?
Scottish Borders Council are strongly in favour of this. Although the Council see this as political direction rather than for developing practice. Option C: Single service model
26. What are your views on the proposal to abolish the eight CJAs and establish a new single social work led service for community justice?
Scottish Borders Council do not support this model. It is too far removed from local delivery and there are unclear management arrangements. It would be another challenge for community planning and require an extra layer of partnership agreements.
27. What do you think of the proposal to incorporate the functions of the Risk Management Authority into a new single service?
Scottish Borders Council would be cautious about this as it could fundamentally divert the focus of the RMA.
28. What do you think about grouping local delivery around the three Federation model currently employed by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and police?
Scottish Borders Council believe this would be unaccountable for local delivery. The Council would like to see greater emphasis on the community planning delivery model for criminal justice.
29. Does the approach to strategic commissioning and procurement provide a good balance between local and national service priorities and needs?
No. The balance is too heavy towards national delivery. Local commissioning options are essential for meaningful client outcomes.
30. Do you think that placing a statutory duty on local partners and a strong Chief Executive negotiating on behalf of the new single service will help facilitate access to mainstream non-justice services?
No. A national model is too far removed to influence the thinking of local non-justice services. Giving such powers to existing local agencies would be more effective.
31. What do you think of the proposal to establish a dedicated community justice unit as part of the new service?
Scottish Borders Council have mixed views on this proposal. It could be helpful in the format of a centre of excellence to develop collaborative good practice. However, it should not have a directing/command role; and, it would not be a replacement for local intelligence and meaningful practical work with offenders. Any additional comments
Whilst a national model would ensure consistency at a national level, we believe this can be achieved to an equal degree through option B operating in conjunction with a national centre of excellence.
Scottish Borders Council have mentioned this centre of excellence throughout this response as a means to providing invaluable support and guidance to all local partnerships in developing and sharing good practice and providing a national forum for criminal justice practitioners to engage with one another.
This model could build upon existing structures in place at a national and local level to support local government and community planning for example under the direction of COSLA, Improvement Service or ADSW.
An electronic copy of this document is also available on request to [email protected] ITEM 16
CHILD PROTECTION COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT 2011-2012
Report by Director of Social Work
SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL
25 APRIL 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
1.1 This report informs Members of the range of activities which took place over the period April 2011–July 2012 aimed at protecting children and young people in the Scottish Borders from abuse and neglect. This information is presented in the Annual Report of the Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee which is included as an addendum to this report.
1.2 The Annual Report covers the activities of the multi-agency Child Protection Committee (CPC) and its Sub Committees. The period of this years report was extended to 16 months to be in line with the change in reporting period of National Child Protection statistics. Future annual reports will cover the 12 month period August to July.
1.3 The CPC business plan which is included in the annual report continues to be the main focus of CPC’s strategic planning for the year.
1.4 CPC welcomed a new Independent Chair, Alan Blackie, in May 2012. Alan was the Chief Executive of East Lothian Council before retiring in 2011. Alan also Chaired the East Lothian CPC.
1.5 CPC supported the relocation of the Child Protection Unit and Adult Protection Unit to a co-located facility in Langlee, Galashiels. The new facility is in close proximity to ‘Eildonview’, the new family friendly assessment, case conference and visual recording suite which opened in August 2011.
1.6 CPC continued its commitment to raising awareness through the delivery of regular child protection training events and the distribution of child protection posters and leaflets. The CPC website and CPC newsletters also provide local and national child protection information for both practitioners and the public.
1.7 CPC commissioned a review of the entire Scottish Borders Child Protection Procedures to ensure local procedures are in line with new National guidance. The revised procedures were launched in September 2012. 2 RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 I recommend Council notes the content of the Child Protection Committee Annual Report (Appendix 1).
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 1 3 BACKGROUND
3.1 Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee (CPC) is an inter-agency group of senior staff which provides leadership in promoting the continual improvement of services in this area of work. This entails ensuring that there is an efficient and effective multi–agency response to reports of abuse through, for instance, reviewing and revising practice guidelines, joint training and reviewing of individual cases – all conducted within a culture of continuous learning. In addition, the Committee has a role to promote the safety of children through raising awareness in communities across the Scottish Borders of the key role which members of the public play. The Child Protection Committee reports directly to the Critical Services Oversight Group (CSOG) consisting of Chief Executive (SBC), Chief Executive (NHS Borders) and Divisional Commander Lothian & Borders (Police).
3.2 The Committee saw the departure of their Independent Chair, John Raine, in April 2012. Stella Everingham, Head of Integrated Children’s Services, Scottish Borders Council, took over the role of Acting Chair until the new Independent Chair, Alan Blackie, was appointed in May 2012.
3.3 Members of CPC remain committed to the protection of children as the focus of the Committee’s work. CPC has met regularly during the year. Much has been achieved by CPC and its Sub Groups through its inter- agency agenda and effective partnership work. More detail of this can be seen within the annual report.
3.4 CPC continues to support the implementation of the ‘Keeping Scottish Borders Children Safe’ tool, a multi agency threshold matrix to improve child protection interventions particularly in cases of neglect. The tool promotes the early intervention model while providing clarity around the identification of risk factors and actions required.
3.5 CPC supported the development and refurbishment of the Eildonview building (previously called Glenview) at Langlee, Galashiels with the building opening in August 2011. Eildonview is used for the provision of child and family friendly assessments, case conferencing and visual recording interviews. The facility is within close proximity to the co-located public protection unit at Langlee so also offers additional meeting facilities for staff.
3.6 The Eildonview building plus 3 mobile recording units provide the facility for visually recorded interviews (VRI) in the Scottish Borders. This was a National requirement as of 1st April 2012 that all child protection joint investigative interviews are visually recorded.
3.7 Various forms of public information have been circulated. This includes child protection posters, internet safety leaflets to parents, child trafficking information to staff and CPC Newsletters.
3.8 Local and national child protection news continues to be available on the CPC website and via the CPC newsletter.
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 2 3.9 There were 45 raising awareness events delivered, training approximately 1600 people. There were also a number of advance training courses provided such as ‘Working with Dangerous, Difficult and Evasive Families’ and ‘Child Trafficking’.
3.10 CPC commissioned an extensive review of the Scottish Borders multi- agency child protection procedures to ensure local practices are in line with the National Child Protection Guidance, launched in December 2010. As a result, some existing sections in the procedures were revised and many new sections added such as ‘children and sexual exploitation’, ‘honour based violence’ and ‘forced marriage’. The revised procedures were launched in September 2012.
3.11 CPC continued to acknowledge the importance of self evaluation and to support the ongoing development of the Self Evaluation Framework by the CPC Quality Improvement Sub Group. CPC continued to review the child protection performance report at each meeting.
4 Joint Inspection of Child Protection Services in the Scottish Borders
4.1 Care Inspectorate carried out an inspection of inter-agency child protection services during September 2011. The inspection team read a number of case files and met with children, parents and staff.
4.2 The Care Inspectorate report published on 15 December 2011 was encouraging with all four HMIe quality indicators evaluated as good or very good. In light of the inspection findings, the Care Inspectorate was confident that services within the Scottish Borders area will make the necessary improvements and as a result they will make no more visits in connection with this inspection.
4.3 In response to the 3 areas for improvement identified in the inspection findings, CPC produced an inspection follow-up report on the activities that services within the Scottish Borders are currently undertaking and will be undertaking in the future with regard to each area. These activities have been endorsed by CPC and the Critical Services Oversight Group (CSOG) and a report was presented to Scottish Borders Council in March 2012.
4.4 The activities in the follow-up report are mainly around prevention and are being actioned by the Children and Young Peoples Planning Partnership (CYPPP). CPC maintains a regular overview of the actions.
5 IMPLICATIONS
5.1 Financial There are no financial implications.
5.2 Risk and Mitigations The Annual Report is an important document for monitoring activity and for identifying areas of improvement. The risk of not collating information in this way would be a reduction in the quality of strategic work relating to Child Protection.
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 3 5.3 Equalities There are no equality implications.
5.4 Acting Sustainably There are no implications identified.
5.5 Carbon Management There are no implications identified.
5.6 Rural Proofing There are no implications identified.
5.7 Changes to Scheme of Administration or Scheme of Delegation There are no implications identified.
6 CONSULTATION
6.1 The Chief Financial Officer, the Head of Corporate Governance, the Head of Audit and Risk and the Clerk to the Council have been consulted and their comments are incorporated in the report.
Approved by
Director of Social Work Signature …………………………………..
Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number Gillian Nicol Child Protection Lead Officer Tel: 01835 825 080
Background Papers: Appendix 1: Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee Annual Report 2011-2012 (including the business plan 2012-2013).
Previous Minute Reference: Scottish Borders Council - 24 November 2011
Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. Susan Cannon can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.
Contact Susan Cannon, Social Work, Scottish Borders Council, Council HQ, Newtown St. Boswells, Melrose, TD6 OSA. Tel: 01835 825080
Scottish Borders Council, 25 April 2013 4
Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee
ANNUAL REPORT (1st April 2011 – 31st July 2012) & BUSINESS PLAN (2012/2013)
CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
CONTENTS
Introduction by the Chair …………………………………………………...... 3
Child Protection Committee ……………………………………………….…. 5
Inspection Activity ……………………………………………………….……. 8
Education Sub Group ………………………………………………….…….. 10
Health Action Sub Group ……………………………………………….……. 11
Practice Development Sub Group …………………………………….…..… 13
Public Information Sub Group …………………………………………...…… 16
Quality Improvement Sub Group ………………………………………..…… 18
Review Sub Group …………………………………………………………….. 20
Training and Development Sub Group……………………………………..… 22
Management Information ……………………………………………………... 29
Conclusion ………………………………………..………………….………… 34
Appendices:
Appendix A: CPC Structure ……………..…………………………………… 35 Appendix B: CPC Vision, Value and Aims ……………..…………….….… 36 Appendix C: CPC Inspection report ……………..……………………….… 37 Appendix D: CPC Business Plan 2012 – 2013 ……………..……………… 39 Appendix E: CPC Expenditure 2011-2012 ……………..…….…………..… 42 Appendix F: CPC Membership / CPC Sub Group Membership ………… 43
2 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Introduction by the CPC Chair
The annual report contains details of the work carried out by the Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee and its sub groups during the period 1st April 2011 to 31st July 2012 and includes the Committee’s business plan for the current year 2012-2013.
The change in this year’s reporting period is to coincide with the new National statistics. Future annual reports will cover the 12 month period August to July.
I commenced my post as Independent Chair of the Committee in May 2012, following John Raine’s retirement. As my predecessor, I strongly believe child protection is everyone’s responsibility, families, friends and neighbours as well as of the statutory agencies: the local authority, social work and education, the health board, police and the voluntary services.
I bring to the Committee 40 years experience working in Community Learning and School Education with recent positions as Director of Education and Children's Services in East Lothian and latterly, before retiring in 2011, East Lothian Chief Executive. I also chaired the East Lothian Child Protection Committee when it was first set up and oversaw 2 successful HMIe Inspections of Child Protection - the most recent of which was reported in the spring of 2011.
Since commencing my post as Chair in May 2012, I have chaired 3 CPC meetings, attended CPC Sub Group meetings and met each of the CPC members individually. I have also attended the National CPC Chairs forum and reported to meetings of the Scottish Borders Critical Services Oversight Group of chief officers.
On the back of the inspection in September 2011 of joint services to protect children in the Borders I believe there is the opportunity to further strengthen child protection where there already exists strong working relationships and a lot of very good practice on the ground. I am looking forward to continuing to work in partnership with all concerned to ensure that children in the Scottish Borders are safe, thriving and getting the best start in life.
The Committee will continue to meet bimonthly next year with its sub groups reporting to it on areas of practice development; raising public awareness; case reviews; self evaluation; performance, training, voluntary sector, health and education.
Through the CPC business plan the Committee will continue to review and evaluate and implement change where appropriate in order to bring about better outcomes for children and to deliver the CPC’s vision that all children in the Scottish Borders have the right to grow up safe from abuse.
3 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
I would like to offer my thanks to all those working to protect vulnerable children and young people in the Scottish Borders.
ALAN J. BLACKIE INDEPENDENT CHAIR SCOTTISH BORDERS CHILD PROTECTION COMMITTEE
4 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Child Protection Committee
The Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee (CPC) believes every child in the Scottish Borders has the right to grow up safe from abuse.
The CPC annual report provides details of the wide variety of work undertaken by the Committee and its seven sub committees over the past year. The annual report also includes the current years CPC Business Plan 2012-2013 (Appendix D).
In line with the new National statistic reporting period, this year’s CPC annual report covers the 16 month period from April 2011 to July 2012. Future reports will cover the 12 month period August to July.
The Scottish Borders CPC meet bi-monthly and is made up of senior representatives from the principal agencies who are concerned with the care and protection of children and young people. CPC is the main forum for inter- agency strategic and operational management of child protection work in the Borders.
CPC saw the departure of some members and the welcoming of others and most significantly was the departure in April 2012 of CPC’s Independent Chair, John Raine. John chaired CPC for 2 years and was committed to the development and improvement of child protection services to families and children in the Scottish Borders. Stella Everingham, Head of Integrated Children’s Services, Scottish Borders Council, took over the role of Acting Chair for a very short period until the new Independent Chair, Alan Blackie, was appointed in May 2012.
CPC also said farewell to Linda Ormiston (Lothian & Borders Police), Morag McLintock (Procurator Fiscal) and Paul Mulvanny / Kirsty McDiarmid (Children’s Reporter) and welcomed their respective counterparts Amanda McGrath, Graham Fraser and Lesley Siewert. CPC also welcomed David Wilson, Assistant Director of Children 1st who represents the Voluntary Services.
CPC has continued to be kept informed of its sub group’s activities, with “feedback from sub groups” a standard agenda item. CPC acknowledges and very much appreciates the time and work of each of its sub groups. Information on the work undertaken by each of the sub groups is detailed in this report.
In addition to the sub groups activities the CPC has undertaken the following work:-
The business plan was the main focus of CPCs strategic planning throughout the period April 2011- July 2012.
5 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
The “Keeping Scottish Borders Children Safe Tool” which was rolled out by CPC in January 2011 is now being monitored and evaluated by the Children and Young People’s Planning Partnership (CYPPP). The tool which has been incorporated into the child protection training program is a guide for staff to highlight concerns to ensure that the cumulative impact of risk is consistently understood and acted upon appropriately.
The Scottish Borders along with another 2 authorities participated in the pilot of the Scottish Government National Risk Assessment Tool. A final version of the tool is expected to be rolled out in the autumn of 2012. The implementation and training on the tool is included in this years CPC business plan.
A Child Trafficking leaflet, commissioned by CPC, was distributed electronically to staff. Education staff received a printed version. The aim of the leaflet is to raise awareness of child trafficking and provide advice for staff should they have concerns. The leaflet is available on the CPC website.
An Internet Safety leaflet for parents was also commissioned and printed copies were distributed to parents in the Borders. The leaflet, which follows the UKCCIS click clever click safe campaign, contains useful information for parents on keeping their children safe when using the internet. The leaflet is available on the CPC website.
CPC launched their independent website in June 2011. The website hosts information on local and national child protection news as well as information on the role and membership of the Committee, child protection training, the child protection procedures and what to do if people have concerns about a child. The website is hosted by Online Borders, a free, accessible website providing local and community information for the people of the Scottish Borders.
In line with National requirements as of 1st April 2012 all Scottish Borders child protection joint investigative interviews are visually recorded. The Eildonview (previously known as Glenview) building at Langlee, Galashiels was adapted in 2011 to accommodate a family focussed visual recording interview (VRI) suite and a new case conference meeting room. Three mobile VRI units will also be available by the autumn of 2012. Recording of interviews helps keep the number of interviews with a child to a minimum and it also provides good quality evidence. A short life VRI working group has been formed to oversee the introduction of VRI and to resolve any difficulties quickly.
The Child Protection Unit and Adult Protection Unit moved from their individual premises in Galashiels and Selkirk to a co-located facility in Langlee, Galashiels. The facility is in close proximity to ‘Eildonview’, the new family friendly case conference and visual recording suite. Also based within the facility are the Police Public Protection Unit and the Domestic Abuse Liaison Officer.
6 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Following the publication of the National Child Protection Guidance in December 2010, the Committee, through the Practice Development Sub Group, completed an extensive review of their entire child protection procedures to ensure they were in line with national requirements. Many of the sections in the procedures were updated and many new sections were introduced. The revised child protection procedures were launched in September 2012. The procedures are available via the CPC website http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
The Committee reviewed and revised their vision, value and aims (Appendix B) in July 2011. A new strapline was created “All children in the Scottish Borders have the right to grow up safe from abuse”.
Updates of the work of the CPC were reported to the Critical Services Oversight Group (CSOG) on a regular basis.
The Committee continued to review the management performance reports throughout the year with no significant issues raised.
The Independent Chair of CPC and the Lead Officer attended National Chair, Lead Officers and Scottish Government meetings. They also attended a variety of seminars and conferences on behalf of the CPC. Feedback from these meetings is provided at each CPC.
The CPC have continued to ensure that all staff and members of the public are aware and have access to child protection training through the work of the Training Sub Group and the CPC training calendar.
7 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Inspection Activity
Care Inspectorate Inspection
The Care Inspectorate visited the Scottish Borders between the 5th and 23rd September 2011 to inspect our joint services to protect children.
Preparation for the inspection – this was carried out by the CPC Inspection Sub Group over the summer of 2011 and a significant part of pre-inspection preparation was to undertake an extensive self evaluation exercise from which a self evaluation report was produced and presented to the Inspection Team on the first day of the inspection.
Case file audits - the Inspection Team conducted an audit of a significant number of inter-agency case files to evaluate the services provided by health, police, social work, the Children’s Reporter and the voluntary / independent organisations.
Meetings - following the case file reading the Inspection Team undertook a range of meetings with parents, carers and children to hear their views on the services they had received plus meetings with practitioners, senior managers and Chief Executives.
Inspection findings – the Care Inspectorate Report (“Joint Inspection of Services to Protect Children and Young People in the Scottish Borders “) was published on 15th December 2011 and is available on the Care Inspectorate website http://www.scswis.com/
. The evaluations for the Scottish Borders are listed below:
Children are Listened to and respected Very good Children are helped to keep safe Good Response to immediate concerns Very good Meeting needs and reducing long term harm Good Self-evaluation Satisfactory Improvements in performance Good
Key strengths – the inspection findings identified that children, parents and carers have positive and respectful relationships with staff. There was evidence that staff listen to their views. The findings also highlighted that staff are alert to the signs that children and/or young people are at risk and respond promptly, contributing to clear, effective and sensitive action plans to keep children safe in the short term.
8 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Good practice examples - prior to the inspection, the Child Protection Committee put forward examples of services / organisations providing good practice in the Scottish Borders area and the Committee were delighted that LGBT Youth Scotland (voluntary organisation for lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender young people) and Addaction (a service aimed at improving the quality of life of vulnerable children who are affected by alcohol/drug use) were acknowledged as areas of good practice.
Areas for improvement - the inspection identified the following 3 areas for improvement:-
1. Continue to develop support to vulnerable children and families at an early stage ensuring they can get appropriate help at times and in ways which meets their needs
2. Improve support to meet children’s longer term health education and care needs.
3. Strengthen approaches to self evaluation ensuring a clearer focus on outcomes for children and families.
CPC Follow up to inspection – following the inspection, the Child Protection Committee produced a report (Appendix C) detailing what services within the Scottish Borders are currently undertaking and will be undertaking in the future with regard to each of the three areas for improvement. The Child Protection Committee regularly monitors and evaluates the activities in the report.
No further inspection - in light of the inspection findings, the Care Inspectorate was confident that services within the Scottish Borders area will make the necessary improvements and as a result they will make no more visits in connection with this inspection.
NHS Borders Internal Audit
As part of a cycle of NHS Internal Audit inspections both Adult and Child Protection were reviewed during June – August 2011. The objective of the audit was to evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of internal controls for protecting children and adults. The audit reassured NHS Borders that overall systems were robust but identified two areas for improvement with regard information sharing between the Child Protection Unit and the Child Health Protection Action Team which have now been addressed.
9 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Education & Life Long Learning Sub Group
The Education and Lifelong Learning (E&LL) sub group held three meetings during this period. The group’s membership continues to ensure that there is appropriate representation from the cross section of Education and Life Long Learning.
Child Protection Co-ordinators - two Business meetings continue to be held each year for all Child Protection Co-ordinators working within Life Long Learning, with a separate Business meeting being held for all Commissioned groups.
The National Risk Assessment Pilot, which is a multi agency tool, was undertaken and involved some schools in Teviot and Eildon.
For the Young Carer’s Strategy, which is a standing item on the agenda for each Business meeting, schools were asked to try to identify all their Young Carers as these children are some of the most vulnerable.
The following were also just some of the topics discussed: Children’s attendance at Case Conference, the ELBEG (Edinburgh Lothian and Borders Executive Group) Guidance on Under Age Sexual Activity, current CME (Children Missing from Education) Procedures, and the NSPCC School Line service delivery.
Training - staff have continued to be trained at Awareness Raising Training Level 1 and Multiagency Training Level 2, Difficult, Dangerous and Evasive Families training and “We Can and Must Do Better” training. Staff also have had the opportunity to attend two multi agency Child Trafficking Seminars. The Newly Qualified Teachers (NQTs) received their discrete child protection training in September.
The Child Protection Officer E&LL was involved in delivering training, along with the Senior Nurse Child Protection, to the Crime Management Division (Detective training) at the Police College, Tulliallan. This is part of their Child Protection Course held at various times throughout the year.
File Auditing - Child Protection Confidential Files continue to be monitored and are also being audited by Child Protection Reviewing Officers, which involves cross referencing files with all other agencies.
Meeting Representation - the Child Protection Officer, E&LL continues to be a member on all the CPC sub groups, the Fostering Panel, the Corporate Parenting Group, the Safe Contact Working Group and the VRI (Visual Recording Interview) steering group.
10 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Health Action group
The role of the Child Protection Health Action Group (HAG) is to ensure that NHS Borders delivers its corporate objectives in relation to child protection.
The HAG meets 2-monthly and in the period April 2011 to July 2012 the group met on 7 occasions.
The main areas of work undertaken were:
NHS Borders Child Protection Action Plan - the action plan identifies the priorities and progress on the key issues for health staff. The plan is updated quarterly and progress is reported to the Health Action Group, Child Protection Steering Group and NHS Clinical Governance Steering Group.
Missing Families Alerts - in response to the concerns from staff about the increasing numbers of Missing Family Alerts circulated by email a policy has been developed. Information is now accessed from a central point via the Children & Young People’s Health Network pages on the NHS Borders intranet. Staff have been directed that they need to check this information if they have concerns about families new to the area or temporary residents.
NHS Borders Child Protection Training Strategy - this strategy has been updated and is available to staff on the Children & Young People’s Health Network pages on the intranet.
NHS Borders Child Protection Supervision Guidance and Child Protection Locality Drop-Ins - the NHS Borders Child Protection Supervision Guideline has been updated and is available to staff on the Children & Young People’s Health Network pages on the intranet.
To further support Child Protection Supervision and consultation across the Scottish Borders and make it more accessible to health staff the Senior Nurse Child Protection and Looked After Children’s Nurse/Child Protection Advisor visit health centres within each locality on a regular basis. They offer supervision, support and consultation in relation to vulnerable children and families; this might involve discussion about complex cases, difficulties in engaging families, interagency communications, issues regarding Child Protection Case Conferences, Looked After Children Reviews, Meetings Around the Child and report writing.
Health assessment - following the child protection inspection it was recognised that the wider health needs of children are not always identified and followed up when a child protection medical examination has not been necessary. A ‘Health Needs Assessment is currently being piloted to identify these needs and ensure support and referral to relevant services.
11 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Awareness raising of the ‘Keeping Scottish Borders Children Safe Tool’, ‘Escalation’ and ‘Dispute Resolution Policies’ - two workshops were delivered in June 2012 and attended by 60 health staff from different disciplines. The workshops provided information about using policies to support practice, making a child protection referral and what to do if you have concerns about a child and the issue is not child protection.
Child Protection Update - the Health Action Group produces a quarterly update and this is circulated widely across NHS Borders and GP practices. Topics have included information about training and articles about child trafficking and forced marriage
Declan Hainey Serious Case Review - the Health Action Group led an initial review of the 16 recommendations in the report and subsequently developed an action plan that was included in the multiagency review undertaken by the CPC Practice Development Group. A priority for NHS Borders is the development of an ‘Unseen Child Policy’. This policy has been developed to assist practitioners in determining the most appropriate course of action to take in situations where the child is ‘unseen’.
Case file audit tool - a case file audit tool has been developed and the next step will be to test the tool and agree the process for audit.
Scottish Borders Underage Sexual Activity Web Resource - Sexual activity during the teenage years is a normal part of adolescent development. Young people in the early teenage years who are sexually active will usually be so by choice. However, a significant minority may be sexually abused. A new web resource has been developed that aims to support professionals in Health, Education, Youth Work and Social Work settings to tell the difference between an abusive and a consensual relationship and to respond appropriately. The aim is to keep young people safe and support them to make informed decisions about their future sexual activity. The link to the web resource is: http://www.nhsborders.org.uk/underage-sexual-activity/underage-sexual- activity
Planned activity for the next year for the Health Action Group includes:
Implementation of the health assessment process Roll-out of the e-learning ‘Basic Knowledge about Child Protection’ module Implementation of the ‘Unseen Child Policy’ Implementation of the Case File Audit
12 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Practice Development Sub Group
Introduction by the new Chair of the Sub Group (Amanda McGrath)
“I am Detective Chief Inspector Amanda McGrath and I am currently head of CID for the Scottish Borders. As part of my portfolio of work, I represent the Police on the Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee (CPC) and also chair one of the CPC sub-groups; the Child Protection Practice Development Group.
In essence, everything we do is geared towards preventing child abuse in our local communities and making sure children have the best possible chance to grow up safely in the Scottish Borders. To do this, we ensure recommendations that come from the CPC are implemented and we also constantly look at how we can improve our practices both pre and post investigations. It is the close partnership working that has been established within the group in particular and within the Scottish Borders in general, that provides the impetus to get things done and adds that ‘special touch’ to improving outcomes for local children”.
Role & Remit - the role of the CPC Practice Development sub group is to enhance multi-agency child protection work through encouraging positive policy development and implementation, thus enabling and examining practice based on sound professional knowledge, research and effective inter-agency working.
The group met on 9 occasions during the 16 month period from 1st April 2011 to 31st July 2012.
The main areas of work of the sub group were as follows:-
Review of child protection case conference practice - following the publication of the National Child Protection Guidance in December 2010, the group undertook a review of case conference practice in the Scottish Borders. The review resulted in several changes to practice and the introduction / development of new protocols. These included:
- Case conference and core group check lists - Auditing of case conference minutes - A suite of online SNAP case conference questionnaires for parents, children and professionals to complete - Guidance on provision of reports for case conferences - Guidance on children’s attendance at case conference - Guidance on convening an early review case conference - Case conference leaflets for parents and children
13 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
- New timescale for the circulation of Interim plans (in line with National Guidance).
Review of child protection procedures – the online multi-agency Scottish Borders Child Protection Procedures (hosted by Reconstruct) are available on the CPC website. These procedures are for all staff (including voluntary workers) working within the Scottish Borders area.
The practice development sub group undertook an extensive review of the entire procedures to ensure compliance with the National Guidance for Child Protection in Scotland (2010). The review, which took several months, resulted in many existing sections being updated and several new sections added.
A new look was also given to the procedures with the main sections numbered for ease of use and reference.
There is also a new intelligent search facility which provides the option to search for a word or phrase and the engine will search not only the Scottish Borders procedures it will search other accredited websites.
The revised procedures were launched on 19th September 2012.
Continual evaluation and Revision of these procedures is essential to ensure best practice and the incorporation of changing policy, legislation and guidance.
Keeping Scottish Borders Children Safe Tool - the implementation of the tool (a staged intervention tool) and the ‘Escalation Policy’ was completed with positive feedback received. The tool is available on the CPC website.
The Dispute Resolution Protocol (previously called disagreement protocol) was updated and is on the Child Protection procedures. Adult Protection now has a protocol which mirrors the chid protection one. The protocol is available on the CPC website.
Missing persons alert procedure – this was improved to ensure there is a clear multi agency response to children missing locally and children who are flagged nationally as ‘missing’.
Underage Sexual Activity Guidance - the Scottish Borders adopted the ELBEG (Edinburgh Lothian & the Borders Executive Group) Underage Sexual Activity Guidance which contains information on the Scottish Borders referral process. A new NHS web resource is available on the Scottish Borders child protection procedures to support professionals to tell the difference between an abusive and a consensual relationship and how to respond appropriately.
14 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
National risk assessment toolkit - the Scottish Borders, plus two other authorities, participated in the pilot of the from November 2011 to May 2012. The Scottish Government will advise the future of the tool in due course. The CPC Practice Development Sub Group will consider whether the National tool will be implemented as a mandatory or optional tool within agencies.
Protocols for accessing health and education records in an emergency during holidays or out of hours have been introduced and are on the child protection procedures.
Declan Hainey Significant Case Review (SCR) - The group considered the recommendations in the Declan Hainey SCR to ensure local practices and procedures reflect learning from these cases. The CPC Practice Development Sub Group monitors the actions from the review at each meeting.
Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) - Following a national campaign on FGM a local protocol was developed and is on the Scottish Borders child protection procedures.
Children affected by parental substance misuse (CAPSM) – the Scottish Borders guidance was reviewed and updated and is available on the child protection procedures under a new section entitled ‘alcohol and substance misuse’. There will be a further review of the guidance once the named person is established in the Scottish Borders.
15 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Public Information Sub Group
The role of the CPC Public Information sub group is to raise public awareness of child protection in the Scottish Borders; ensuring people are appropriately informed and know what to do if they have concerns.
There have been no major National child protection awareness campaigns during 2011-2012 and many ongoing local campaigns came to a close in 2011. There has also been no funding available nationally or within local budgets for public awareness campaigns therefore, CPC made the decision, in July 2012, to form a ‘virtual’ public information sub group as opposed to a ‘face-to-face’ group and members are now asked to comment via email on child protection awareness campaigns / projects. If the business needs change the face to face sub groups will be reformed.
The membership of the group remains unchanged.
The group focussed on the following projects:-
Child trafficking leaflets – the leaflets were was finalised in May 2011 and disseminated to inter-agency staff electronically. Education staff received a paper copy. The leaflet provides details on what child trafficking is, what the key signs are and most importantly what to do and who to contact if they have concerns. The leaflet is available on the CPC website.
Internet safety Leaflets – these leaflets were also finalised in May 2011 and printed copies were distributed to all primary and secondary schools in the Scottish Borders. The leaflet provides useful information for parents to help them understand the risks of the internet and what to do to ensure their child’s safer on-line. The leaflets were also distributed to nurseries, libraries, health centres, contact centres and family support centres. The leaflet is available on the CPC website.
Case conference leaflets for parents – the leaflets were reviewed and updated in 2011. This followed the review of case conference practice by the CPC Practice Development Sub Group. A leaflet for children was also produced.
Child protection posters – the Scottish Borders posters were updated and re-printed with the telephone numbers of the 5 locality offices as the contact details, replacing the child protection unit telephone number. The posters (A4 and A3 size) were distributed along with the internet safety leaflets mentioned above.
Scottish Borders CPC website – the CPC website was launched in June 2011. The website is a free stand alone site hosted by online borders and
16 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
provides information on CPC, child protection training, local and national news and publications and importantly what to do if people have concerns. The new website offers more flexibility and inter-agency scope than the Scottish Borders Council webpage which still exists but people are directed to the CPC website for further information.
Scottish Borders CPC newsletter – these newsletters are aimed at practitioners across all agencies in the Borders who work with children, young people and their families. The newsletters provide up-to-date information on local and national child protection developments and are available on the CPC website.
17 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Quality Improvement Sub Group
The role of the CPC Quality Improvement Sub Group is to take the lead in establishing an interagency process for identifying and evaluating required standards and performance monitoring for Child Protection in the Scottish Borders.
The group met on 8 occasions in the 16 month period 1st April 2011 to 31st July 2012.
Membership of the group remained constant with the exception of a new Chair, Vicky Currie (Integrated Children’s Services Locality Manager) and a new police representative, DS Lisa Dalgliesh.
The main focus of the group’s activity over this period has been:
Self evaluation framework – the sub group continued to develop the Scottish Borders child protection self evaluation framework which provides a clear structure for gathering and evaluating evidence that we are improving outcomes for children and their families.
The indicators in the self evaluation framework are based on the HMIe framework ‘How well do we protect children and meet their needs”.
The group acknowledges that no one source of evidence can provide a true evaluation of services but collectively the self evaluation framework can provide an overall interpretation of our standard of performance.
The content of the self evaluation framework is regularly reviewed and revised by the Quality Improvement Sub group.
Self evaluation questionnaires - to evaluate practice and to ensure children, parents and staff views are routinely considered throughout the child protection process the Quality Improvement Sub Group developed a suite of online ‘SNAP’ questionnaires which ask specific questions relating to peoples experiences. The sub group routinely review the data gathered from each of the questionnaires and proposed actions or recommendations from the group are taken to CPC.
The sub group regularly review and update the content in the questionnaires.
Self evaluation calendar – this was introduced to ensure all indicators / evidence in the self evaluation framework are gathered and evaluated regularly by the Quality Improvement Sub Group. This is the basis for the sub group agenda.
18 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Child protection performance report - The group continued to routinely analyse the child protection performance report with comments and recommendations from the group taken to each CPC. The performance report provides data (in a chart format) on a range of indicators in the self evaluation framework. For example, number of child protection referrals, number of long term registrations, number of case conferences and core groups held within timescale. Each indicator has a tolerance level and the group consider any shortfall in performance and where appropriate recommend to CPC changes in practice to ensure improved outcomes for children and their families.
Case file audit tool - in May 2011 a case file audit tool was developed by the Child Protection & Reviewing Officers (CPROs) on behalf of the CPC Quality Improvement Sub Group. The CPROs select specific cases to be audited and these are cross referenced with social work, health and education files.
The quarterly case file audit reports provide qualitative data on the HMIe Indicators:-
- Impact on Children and Families in Need of Protection - Delivery of Services to Children and Families in need of Protection - Partnership and Resources
Quarterly audit reports – reports are reviewed by the Quality Improvement Sub Group and are designed to highlight areas of strength as well as areas for improvement.
Three audit reports and 35 cases have been reviewed by the group during the period 1st April 2011 to 31st July 2012. The third round of audit highlighted significant improvements in practice. However, there are still areas of improvement around timeous sharing of reports with parents, providing written feedback to referrers and use of the Viewpoint questionnaire by children.
In July 2012 the case file audit tool was adapted to accommodate the ‘meeting around the child’ process and a second audit tool has been developed to accommodate those cases which do not result in a case conference being conducted.
Inter-agency case file audit - the sub group are in the process of developing an inter-agency case file audit process. It is hoped to have this in place by the end of 2012.
19 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Review Sub Group
The role of the CPC Review Sub Group is to take responsibility for all areas of case reviewing both locally and within the Edinburgh, Lothian and the Borders Executive Group (ELBEG) area and to ensure recommendations and points for improvement are identified for action by the Child Protection Committee.
There were some significant changes to the membership with new representatives from Police, Education and the Children’s Reporter as well as a new Chair.
Alan Blackie, the new Chair of the CPC Review Sub Group commented:
“The Review Sub Group continues to monitor and evaluate child protection work in the Scottish Borders with a view to ensuring that we all learn from experience and work together to provide high quality services for the children we are responsible for. The past year is reviewed in total throughout this Annual Report and I hope that you can see our efforts to continually improve the way we work."
During the 16 months from 1st April 2011 to 31st July 2012 the group met on 6 occasions.
The main areas of work undertaken by the CPC Review Sub Group have been:-
Children re-registered within a 2 year period - the group continued to consider all cases where a child goes back on the child protection register within a 2 year period. The sub group decide whether a wider multi-agency review is to be undertaken. There were 5 children reported in the16 month period and 3 case reviews were undertaken. Two of the reviews resulted in no further action and the other resulted in a proposal that the Scottish Borders parental substance misuse guidance be updated. This action will be progressed when the ‘named person’ is introduced in the Borders.
Children remaining on the Register for +15 months – the group also continued to consider all cases where a child remains on the child protection register for 15 months or over. The group decide whether a wider multi-agency case review is required. There were 2 cases reported in the period and 1 case review was undertaken. The review resulted in a full risk assessment being requested and this has been completed.
Appeals - one appeal was received against the decision at case conference to put a child’s name on the register. The Independent Chair of the Child Protection Committee considered the case and the appeal was not upheld.
20 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Inter-agency practice reviews – there was one inter-agency practice review which resulted in the following:
- Social work team leaders were reminded it is their responsibility to ensure appropriate MACs (meetings around the child) and risk assessments are completed for each child and that staff are confident in the analysis of the risk assessment information - The child protection dispute resolution protocol was updated and agencies ensured their staff were aware of the protocol and the escalation policy - Agencies checked that mandatory child / adult protection training is being completed and that they have in place a system for monitoring training attendance. - The CPC Health Action Group are in the process of considering the impact of adult mental health issues and parenting capacity in order to determine whether any further guidance is required - Integrated Children’s Services and Adult Learning Disabilities Team are in discussion about the need for resources to facilitate joint working and assessment of parenting capacity.
New child death process - The group implemented a new child death review process whereby only cases with child protection concerns are brought to the group for consideration. The health representative takes responsibility for gathering information and providing the group with an anonymised summary of any identified issues and recommendations. The group consider each case and decide whether a wider multi-agency review is to be conducted to determine if there are lesson to be learned. During the period there has been no multi-agency child death review conducted.
Cancelled case conferences - the group continued to review child protection case conferences which were cancelled at short-notice (within 7 days of the date of conference). The reasons for cancellation are considered and where appropriate followed up by agencies to avoid repetition. In many cases eg poor weather conditions cancellation is unavoidable but on occasions staffing issues have led to cancellation and these are followed up by managers.
Complaints - the group considered one complaint against a member of staff. The case highlighted the requirement to raise child protection awareness within certain local authority departments who do not routinely deal with child protection issues.
Case conference split decision - one case conference split decision was reviewed by the group and after consideration it was agreed to uphold the Chair’s decision to de-register.
21 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Training Sub Group
Introduction by Training Sub Group Chair (Cathie Fancy)
“In my capacity of the Council’s Senior Manager for Housing, Strategy and Welfare Benefits I have been a member of the Child Protection Committee (CPC) for the past 6 years. I was delighted to take on the role of Chair of the Training Sub Group in November 2011 following on from DI Tony Hodges.
We continue to work closely with representatives from the Police, Education, Health, Social Work, voluntary services and ELBEG Office to ensure that we deliver a wide range of training to Council & NHS staff, our partner agencies and a wide range of stakeholders to ensure that the right training is delivered to the right people in relation to child protection.
Over the past year, the group has expanded its membership and is embarking on its first development day to set out its strategic vision for 2013 and I would like to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of all the members and associate members of the group who have worked hard to ensure that young people living in the Borders are better protected”
Training Sub Group - the Training Sub Group acting on behalf of Scottish Borders CPC is responsible for ascertaining local training needs, developing and implementing an appropriate multi-agency child protection training programme and taking a strategic overview of multi-agency training to promote effective practice in safeguarding and in the protection of children.
The Training Sub Group met on seven occasions between April 2011 and July 2012.
Terms of Reference, Membership and Dissemination Strategy - the ‘Terms of Reference’ document was reviewed and updated by the Training Sub Group in February 2012. This document includes information on the Aims, Objectives and Processes for the group as well as the Roles and Responsibilities of Training Sub Group Members. It also includes an up to date membership list and an agreed dissemination strategy to ensure that information sent out on behalf of the group is disseminated as widely as possible.
Training and Development Officers – the full time CPC Training and Development Officer Post is now filled by two part time workers who job share.
22 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Training Calendar and Flyers – the training calendar and flyers for each course are available on the CPC Website. These are updated throughout the year.
Training Evaluation Strategy - training Evaluation Forms continue to be sent out electronically to participants for the majority of our training courses. Questionnaires are sent out as Pre-Course Evaluation (2 weeks prior to course), End of Course Evaluation (1 day after course) and Post- Course Evaluation (3 months after course).
The Training Evaluation Forms were revised further in April 2012, with a view to improving the content and layout and increasing the response rate of the forms. The number of people completing the online questionnaires is continuing to rise as a result of the developments made in this area.
Training Evaluation Reports are now sent more regularly to the relevant trainers and members of the Training Sub Group now receive a one page summary for each course, incorporating key results from each of the three questionnaires. The evaluations are used to update and make changes to the training methods, styles and materials used on a regular basis.
Level 1 – Child Protection Awareness Raising Training - these are half day training events offered both during the day and in the evenings. Between April 2011 and July 2012, 45 Level 1 courses were delivered across the Scottish Borders, training approximately 1556 people. Participants from various agencies and services attended and included staff and volunteers from statutory services, the voluntary sector and also interested members of the public.
The course equips participants to: - Be aware of their own attitudes to abuse - Understand the areas of concern re abuse - Be aware of local child protection procedures - Understand their role and what to do and what not to do - Know who to speak to about concerns - Know how and when to make a referral - Understand the process following a referral
The training materials for the course are constantly updated, reflecting the feedback received, changes to practice, national guidance and legislation.
Comments from Evaluations: - “The course was delivered very professionally with the right amount of detail and information. Many thanks”
- “Excellent Training course, trainers were extremely knowledgeable, very interesting and thought provoking”
Level 2 – Multi - Agency Child Protection Training - this is a one day multi-agency training course designed to raise awareness of different
23 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
professional’s responsibilities and the need for collaboration in child protection issues. The training provides an opportunity for people from varying agencies to learn together and explore professional dilemmas. It also uses a fictitious case study which involves participation in group work.
The level 2 Training Programme was revamped significantly in February 2012 following feedback from attendees. The training enhances participant knowledge and skills in the following areas:
• Roles and Responsibilities • Information Sharing • Assessment and Intervention • Child Protection Case Conferences • Core Group Meetings • Child Protection Plans
This training was delivered on 6 occasions between April 2011 and July 2012, training approximately 230 people. The agencies represented were Police, Education, Health, Social work and staff and volunteers from the Voluntary Sector.
Comments from Evaluations: - “Thank you for a very useful course and well planned and delivered day. Very worthwhile” - “Really informative, enjoyable day, beneficial working with other agencies, exploring dilemmas gets those brain cells working”
Level 1 Refresher Training - this training is available to all professionals and members of the public who were trained on the standard Level 1 between 3 and 4 years ago. The course covers a brief re-cap of the key points from the Level 1 training, an update on National and Local Guidance which includes any changes in knowledge, research, policies and practices in child protection and some group work with a particular focus on the use of Scottish Borders Keeping Our Children Safe Tool.
This training was delivered on 2 occasions between April 2011 and July 2012, training 37 people in total.
Comments from Evaluations: • “Informative handouts sent prior to course” • “Very informative course with lots of useful information”
Working with Difficult, Dangerous and Evasive Families - this two day training course was delivered by an external national training provider (Reconstruct) and was made available to professionals from all agencies who, as part of their day to day work may be required to deal with anxiety provoking and frightening situations with families deemed as being dangerous, difficult or evasive.
24 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
This training was delivered on 1 occasion between April 2011 and July 2012, training 21 professionals in total.
Although the training was very well received, commissioning the trainers and actors required for each training course was very expensive and the feedback from managers was that they were finding it difficult to release staff for two full days.
In April 2012, an alternative training provider who came highly recommended by other Scottish CPC areas was contacted. This training which is a half day training course and considerably lower in cost than the two day course previously offered again focuses on working with difficult, dangerous and evasive families (including non-engaging families), includes experiential learning and has been described by former delegates as powerful and memorable.
Each training session can accommodate up to 25 people – we have four sessions scheduled to run in November 2012. These sessions are over subscribed so if evaluated well we would aim to run it again in the Spring of 2013.
Child Trafficking Seminars - this seminar is for practitioners, volunteers and managers from all agencies and has been designed to raise awareness of the issues which surround child trafficking. The seminars encourage active participation, in the form of group activities and discussion. This training seminar was delivered on 2 occasions between April 2011 and July 2012, training 74 people in total.
Comments from evaluations: - “Practical examples are really helpful to clarify the issue” - “Very interesting to hear the multi-agency perspective and how different agencies would respond to such issues (as well as how this may skip attention)”
Joint Investigative Interview Training (JIIT) - Basic JII Training course - Between April 2011 and July 2012 there were 2 basic five day JIIT courses delivered across the ELBEG area. 2 social workers from Scottish Borders Integrated Children Services and 4 Police officers from ‘G’ Division of Lothian & Borders Police attended these courses.
Comments from evaluations: - “Best course attended - very enjoyable, well run and everyone teaching and taking part worked well together”. - “Very worthwhile course – not a willing participant to begin with, but converted to the course over the past 5 days. I’ll be hoping to be used for JII in the Borders”.
JIIT Refresher Course - Between April 2011 and July 2012 there was 1 JIIT Refresher course provided to trained interviewers who had undertaken their basic JII Training over 2 years previously. 8 Social workers and 15
25 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Police officers from the Scottish Borders area attended over three one- day sessions.
Comments from evaluations: - “Good to have the opportunity to think about what we are doing” - “A good reminder of the model”
VRI and New National Guidance - 6 half-day sessions were delivered on the new national guidance and the introduction of visual recording equipment. 38 social workers and 25 police officers from the Scottish Borders area attended the training.
Comments from evaluations: - “Very good, well explained and a user friendly system” - “Appears straightforward but needs practice”
NHS Borders Child Protection Training - the aim of all learning and development within NHS Borders is to enable every member of staff to contribute to the delivery of effective and efficient patient care. The outcome will be to improve capability, capacity, succession planning and recruitment and retention by equipping staff with the skills, knowledge and behaviours they require to deliver service objectives, achieve personal and professional goals and respond flexibly to change.
Effective arrangements are in place for staff appraisal through E-KSF and other processes for medical staff. NHS Borders has a performance management framework to support staff to develop essential skills and competencies. The NHS Borders Child Protection Training Strategy provides information about the levels and provision of child protection training for staff. ‘Child Protection Basic Knowledge and Understanding’ training is available to all staff at induction and an e-learning resource is in development, which will be mandatory for all staff to complete every 2 years. Staff who work with children and young people are encouraged to attend the whole range of public protection training provided on a multi- agency basis based on their personal development plan and identified learning needs (e.g. Levels 1-4 child protection, adult protection, domestic violence).
Education - the Child Protection Officer E&LL has continued to take a lead, along with colleagues in the child protection unit (CPU) in delivering Awareness Raising Training Level 1, Multi Agency Level 2 child protection training and also the Child Trafficking Seminars. Further information can be found in the Education and Life Long Learning section of this report.
Police Training - Probationary Training (Within initial 2 years of service) - All probationary officers complete a basic 15-week course at the Scottish Police College which includes inputs on child protection. On returning to Lothian & Borders Police, irrespective of divisional postings, all Force probationer officers receive a further input on child protection following several months’ operational service.
26 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Probationary Constables attending at the Scottish Police College receive seven 45 minute inputs during week 7 of Module 2 on Protecting Children / Compulsory Measure of Care and Child Offenders, and during Module 5 Probationary Constables attending at Force HQ, Fettes Avenue, Edinburgh also receive a full day of inputs on a range of Child Protection issues under the title of Public Protection.
Child Protection Course (Scottish Police College) - this course aims to promote an understanding of key issues, which are prevalent in children who have been abused, to develop appropriate and professional investigative strategies based on known patterns and cycles of abuse and to equip those officers involved in child protection duties with the skills and knowledge required to carry out and cope with such enquiries and investigations.
During the period 1st April 2011 to 31st March 2012 the Borders LPA (Local Policing Area) have trained 11 officers (not Probationary Constables) in Child Protection (Case to Conference) and 1 officer (not a Probationary Constable) in Child Protection (Scottish Police College Course).
Violence Against Women Partnership - this is a local multi-agency body by which the national Safer Lives: Changed Lives Strategy (Scottish Government 2009) to address violence against women is implemented. With representatives from various Scottish Borders agencies and groups, the partnership provides strategic direction for the activities of operational groups providing prevention, protection, provision and participation. There are direct links to child protection through the CPC Training Sub Group and Practice Development Sub Group. There are links through joint training events with child protection, adult protection, and public protection, but all domestic abuse basic awareness courses cover child protection as a core element of the course outcomes. Any courses specifically on children's experiences of domestic abuse cover child protection responsibilities and the Scottish Borders child protection procedures are referred to.
Adult Support and Protection Training - a short input on Child protection continues to form part of all Adult Support and Protection Training events.
Public Protection Trainers Group - This is a small group representing child protection, adult protection, MAPPA and VAWP, and aims to ensure a more coordinated approach is made to all aspects of Public Protection training in the Scottish Borders. During the reporting period, the number of meetings decreased and the remit of the group was unclear which subsequently meant the group was disbanded. However, there is enthusiasm and drive from all relevant parties to re-energise this group, and get it up and running again in the near future.
27 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Developments during 2012 - Integrated Child and Adult Protection half day Briefings continue to be made available to groups of staff at their request. These briefings do not replace the standard Level 1 Child Protection or Level 2 Adult Protection Training but can provide a staff group with tailored, role specific training which, if required, can act as a platform for staff going on to complete the full Level 1 Child Protection and full Adult Support and Protection training programmes.
Similarly, single agency requests for Level 1 child protection training within the workplace are increasingly being met. Although the advantages of multi-agency training are well documented, the benefits for staff receiving training (Level 1 and below) on a single agency/staff group basis within their place of work where examples and scenarios can be tailored to suit the groups experiences is also of significant benefit and the feedback from these session have reflected this view. Examples of such training have included the training of Registered Social Landlords (RSL’s), the Private Landlord Sector and Scottish Borders Council Passenger Transport Services. This type of training will continue to be offered and provided when requested.
28 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Management Information
The Child Protection Committee continued to review the child protection performance report at each meeting during 2011-2012. Further scrutiny of management information is completed by both the Quality Improvement and Review Sub Groups, for example, the Review Sub Group consider all long term registrations 15 months or over.
The Scottish Borders management information is detailed below.
(A) Investigations by Age/Gender (Aug-Jul 11/12)
90 80 80 70 70 60 36 20 50 40 36 Age Bracket Age 30 28 20 08 10 16 14 8 0 Female Male Unknow n Gender
Unborn 0-4 years 5-10 years 11-15 years
(B) Investigations resulting in Case Conference (Aug-Jul 11/12)
29 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
41%
59%
Case Conference No Cas e Conf erenc e
(C) Initial Case Conferences leading to registration
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 5 / 5 3 / 3 1 / 1 2 / 2 3 / 3 6 / 6 7 / 7 2 / 2 2 / 2 4 / 4 6 / 6 1 / 1 6 / 6
92% 11 / 12 88% 7 / 8
78% 75% 7 / 9 75% 9 / 12 71% 3 / 4 5 / 7 67% 2 / 3 60% 3 / 5
50% 2 / 4
40% 2 / 5
0% 0% 0 / 2 0 / 0
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 2010 2011 2012
This dataset shows that in the majority of cases children are being placed on the Child Protection Register following an Initial Case Conference. In 2012 all cases lead to registration. This demonstrates the referrals which are investigated are appropriate.
(D) Concerns identified at Case Conference (Aug-Jul 11/12) % of cases with concern
30 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
70 64
60
49 50
40 34
30
19 19 20 17 14 10 10 5 2 0 0 0
(E) Case conferences held within 10 working days of referral
Case Conferences not held within 10 working days of referral
11 11 1 1 1 4 Late (20+)
51221 Late (15-20)
Late (10-15) 4313 2 3 41 3 2
On Time
412 4 221 514566 1 16
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
2010 2011 2012
The number shown represents the number of children / case conferences and does not show family groups. For example, in May 2011, the 4 late case conferences were 2 family groups.
On some occasions case conferences were not held within the timescale. Reasons for this are: - Unavoidable circumstances such as bad weather eg in December 2011 - The parent / carer is unable to attend and it is thought essential they do - Further information is to be gathered eg risk assessment before a decision can be made whether a case conference is to be called. - There is no agency representation –a system is now in place whereby individual agency managers are notified so they can follow up.
31 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
(F) Repeat registrations (episodes)
90
84 80
76 74 70 69 67
60
57 54 52 50 51 47 Total 43 40 41 41 42 Episodes 40 40 11 38 37 37 36 9 6 34 30 33 4 Not 6 previously 8 29 progressed 27 25 6 20 27 Previously 3 23 6 25 27 Progressed 3 2 21 (Other) 2 2 2 4 7 7 5 21 10 1 12 16 6 1 2 3 11 13 Previously 5 11 12 12 9 4 11 9 Progressed 8 8 4 8 7 8 8 (Substance 5 6 6 5 4 4 3 3 4 3 Misuse) 0 1 22 2 2 1 2 1 222 1 222 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 2010 2011 2012
2010 and 2011 figures identified a number of surges in repeat referrals which had been previously progressed through child protection and it was suggested these surges could be due to uncontrollable factors eg children living in substance misuse environments. In 2012 the data presented in this graph was amended to show cases involving substance misuse. The new case file audit tool includes repeat referral cases and this source of information is useful to identify cases to be audited. (G) Children registered for a second or subsequent time
Proportion of Child Protection registrations that are repeat registrations (children previously registered within 2 years)
35% 33% 33% 33%
(1) (1) (1)
30%
25% 25% (1)
20% 18%
(2) 17% (1) 15% 13%
(1) 10% 8% 8%
(1) (1)
5%
0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 2010 2011 2012 % Running Average (Financial Year)
The CPC Review Sub Group considers all cases where a child has come back on the Child Protection Register within a 2 year period. The group decide whether a wider inter-agency case review is to be undertaken. There were 5 cases identified in the period:- 3 case reviews were undertaken 1 case was a transfer-in from another authority so not applicable and no review completed 1 case appeared twice
32 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
(H) De-Registrations by time on register (Aug-Jul 11/12)
30
28 25
20
15 15 10 12
5 10 0 < 6 months 6 months - < 1 1 year - < 18 18 months - < 2 2 years or more year months years
The CPC Review Sub Group considers all cases where a child has remained on the Child Protection Register for 15 months or over. The group decide whether a wider inter-agency case review is to be undertaken. There were 2 cases identified in the period. 1 case review was undertaken and as a result a risk assessment was completed. 1 case the child was de-registered at 16 months and no review was completed.
(I) Children on the Child Protection register (Aug-Jul 11/12)
60
(52) (51) (49) 50 (47) (46) (46) 10 (45) (45) (43) 10 (44) (43) 13 10 11 40 (37) 11 10 16 13 13 16
10 30
20 42 41 36 34 36 34 36 30 30 30 27 29 10
0 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 SBC Children on Register Temporary ( ) TOTAL
This CPC Quality Improvement Sub Group considers the number of children in families (family groups) when reviewing this dataset. This is helpful when analysing why there may be a surge/drop in the number of children on the Register.
33 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Conclusion
During 2011 and 2012 the Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee and its various sub committees have continued to review, revise and update their inter-agency protocols, practice and training to ensure staff are supported and guided in their work with children and families.
The past year has presented many challenges for the CPC in respect to the current economic climate and the ever increasing requirement to evaluate services in order to continually develop and improve outcomes for children and their families involved in the child protection system.
The Committee acknowledges the work of all concerned in protecting children in the Scottish Borders and is committed through its Business Plan to building on the progress that has been made.
34 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
35 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Appendix A
Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee Structure
Scottish Borders Council NHS Borders Lothian & Borders Police
Scottish Borders Critical Services Oversight Group (CSOG) Chief Officers
Edinburgh, Lothian & Borders Edinburgh, Lothian & Borders Public Executive Group (ELBEG) Protection Office (ELBPPO)
Alcohol and Drugs Multi-Agency Violence Adult Protection Child Protection Partnership Public Protection Against Women Committee Committee (ADP) Arrangement Partnership (APC) (CPC) (MAPPA) (VAWP) Practice Development Sub Group
Quality Improvement Sub Group
Training Sub Group CPC Support Team
CP Lead Officer Public Information Sub Group CPC Admin CPC Training Officers Education Sub Group
Health Action Sub Group
Review Sub Group 36 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Appendix B
Child Protection Committee Vision, Value and Aims
Our Vision: All children in the Scottish Borders have the right to grow up safe from abuse.
Our Values: (Beliefs) • Everyone in the Scottish Borders must take responsibility for keeping children safe from abuse • Children must be listened to and respected • Children must get the help they need when they need it • Children must be protected by timely and effective action • Communities and staff must work together to protect children
Our Corporate Objectives (through which we seek to achieve our vision) • To develop and keep under review clear and robust inter-agency child protection policies, procedures, protocols and guidelines • To continuously seek improvements in service delivery and outcomes for children through effective multi-agency self evaluation, performance management and quality assurance processes • To embrace multi agency training needs; developing training programmes that complement and build upon the work of individual agencies • To work strategically ensuring the Child Protection Committee plans and priorities are clearly linked to other local and national plans and that key objectives are progressed through operational business planning • To communicate effectively about the work of the Child Protection Committee with staff in constituent services and agencies actively promoting effective communication, collaboration and co-operation • To raise public awareness of child protection issues within communities including among children and young people, regularly reviewing public information and communications strategy
How do we know we’ve done it? • Children are protected from abuse • Public understand their responsibilities and know who to contact if they have concerns • Our staff are trained and competent • Effective information sharing takes place • Communication • Polices and procedures are clear and understood
37 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Appendix C
Joint Inspection of Services to Protect Children and Young People in the Scottish Borders
Child Protection Committee Report on current and future activities in respect to the 3 areas for improvement highlighted in the Care Inspectorate report published Dec 2011.
1. Continue to develop support to vulnerable children and families at an early stage, ensuring they can get appropriate help at times and in ways which meets their needs. a) Continue to develop the locality model Agencies continue to work together to further develop the locality model through the five office bases in Hawick, Innerleithen, Galashiels, Duns and Kelso. A continual review of the model is undertaken via the multi-agency Central Support Forum and actions from here form part of the business planning process and assist in developing service priorities and key actions for the coming year. b) Children & Young Peoples Services Plan 2012-2015 The Children and Young Peoples Planning Partnership (CYPPP) seeks to improve outcomes for children, young people and their families within the Scottish Borders through the implementation of “Getting it right for every child” (GIRFEC). The GIRFEC principles underpin everything the CYPPP do.
The Early Years Strategy, through the work of the CYPPP, strives to break the cycle of poverty, inequalities and poor outcomes in and beyond the early years for children and families within the Scottish Borders. The strategy aims to continue this throughout their childhood and ensure support is available for their transition to adulthood.
The CYPPP will implement a robust performance and outcomes framework to ensure the priorities of the children and young peoples service plan can be achieved and the impact for children and families is measured and progress against outcomes reported. c) Development of named person role In line with GIRFEC, Health and Education are in the process of developing the named person role within the Scottish Borders. The named person is critical for supporting early intervention and strengthening the child centred approach. It will be the named person’s role to take initial action if the child or young person needs extra help. Guidance, training and support will be required to ensure the appointed named persons can develop and strengthen their roles within Health and Education. d) Review of Advocacy Support for Children The Children and Young People’s Planning Partnership (CYPPP) are in the process of considering advocacy services for children in the Scottish Borders.
38 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
There is only limited funding available for the scoping exercise. This may needs to be addressed in the future.
2. Improve support to meet children’s longer term health, education and care needs a) Health will develop a process for health assessments to support information sharing, decision making and planning investigations during inter-agency referral Discussions. This will emphasise the continuing responsibility and support from universal health services. This forms part of the NHS Borders Child Protection Action Plan which is reviewed by senior management on a regular basis. b) Over the past 3 months there has been a Councillor led initiative looking at the 'Management of the Increase in Looked After Children'. As a result of this work, proposals have been put forward to substantially increase foster carer remuneration, with recommended increases in foster carer fees and allowances.
The Members / Officers working group has also looked at supporting and improving foster carer recruitment. A Foster Carer Recruitment Campaign for 2012 has been drafted by the Communications Team (in consultation with the Family Placement Team). The overall aims of the campaign and the various vents and activities are to: highlight the urgent need for more foster families to come forward; encourage potential foster carers to come forward for more information; and, raise the profile of fostering. The campaign also details the target audience, key messages and methods to improve recruitment. c) The Child Protection Level 2 training has been reviewed and now includes a focus on outcome based care plans to help meet children’s longer term needs. d) The current review of Community Learning Development (CLD) will lead to a redeployment of staff to focus on locality-based work around the priority issues of support to young people, the early years, parenting support and building capacity in communities
3. Strengthen approaches to self evaluation, ensuring a clearer focus on outcomes for children and families. a) The inspection reported evaluated our child protection self evaluation practice as satisfactory. The Inspection Team advised what we have at present is a good appropriate foundation but it is at an early stage. Further development is required to progress from auditing / gathering information to reviewing information to improve services to children and families. b) CPC will strengthen the governance on self evaluation reporting / reviewing process in order to ensure timescales are met. c) CPC will utilise the Care Inspectorate Link Inspector to develop self evaluation processes.
39 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Appendix D
SCOTTISH BORDERS CHILD PROTECTION COMMITTEE - BUSINESS PLAN 2012-2013
What needs to be achieved Who is going to Resources Measure / AIM How is it going to be achieved When by Outcome and why do it required Target
A) Improving WHAT – ensure the self 1. Ensure links with the outcome 1. CPC QI Sub Dec 2012 • QI Sub Group Evaluating & Report on outcomes evaluation framework is fully based work of CYPPP reflects Group (Vicky (time/meeting/ improving the changes to through self- embedded the child protection issues and is Currie) support time) service by practice as a evaluation feedback • CPRO time using a result of the WHY - to monitor, evaluate • Training – robust self self evaluation and ensure the quality of child 2. Gathering Views 2. CPC QI Sub Dec 2012 Viewpoint evaluation framework protection work and the (a) ensure staff are completing Group (Vicky • IT - Viewpoint process effectiveness of multi-agency questionnaires Currie) analysis working in promoting positive, (b) identify how frontline staff can safe outcomes for children and be involved in the self evaluation families process (c) improve use of Viewpoint
3. Direct Observations 3 CPC QI Sub Dec 2012 (a) Use a consistent case file audit Group & CPROs tool across agencies (Vicky Currie)
B) Agencies to WHAT – develop and introduce 1. agencies to develop a inter- Stella Aug 2012 • Training There is a • Measure - work together to an inter-agency chronology agency chronology system Everingham • Staff multi-agency CP case file assess need / chronology in audit reported risk development WHY – to improve information 2. agencies to ensure staff are place to by CP to Stella. plan for assessment and planning trained on the chronology improve • Target - system information 100% of for children have assessment an inter-agency and planning chronology
40 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
C) Agencies and WHAT – put in place a multi 1. Agree whether there are 1. Practice Dec 12 • Single agency Children’s • Measure - All professionals agency risk assessment tool situations in which the risk Development sub groups needs are CP work together to assessment tool will always be group (Amanda contribution to met through assessments assess needs WHY – To develop a more used or whether it is introduced McGrath) discussion. an undertaken in and risks and rigorous and consistent as a tool available to staff to use appropriate accordance develop effective approach to assessment and if they wish. multi-agency with agreed toll plans. planning for children. risk • Target – 2. Ensure staff are trained on the 2. CPC Training Jun 2013 • CPC Training assessment 100% tool Sub Group Officers / approach / (Cathie Fancy) Admin tool. • Inter-agency staff
D) Professionals WHAT – arrangement are in 1. Provide information about • CPC Practice Dec 2012 • CPC Practice Parents and • Measure – ensure children place for an advocacy service number of children who may Dev Sub group Dev Sub children are scoping are listened to for children in the Scottish require advocacy during the CP (Amanda group listened to & exercise is and respected. Borders process to inform CYPPP McGrath) understood complete and scoping exercise • CPC paper WHY – To ensure children and submitted to parents are listened to. CPC
Target – 100% E) Agencies WHAT – Increase public 1. Use local communication Gillian Nicol / Ongoing all agencies Children are Measure - work in awareness of child protection networks to raise awareness of Susan safer Increase in CP partnership with and what do should people child protection issues eg Cannon because the referrals by the members of the have concerns. newsletters, intranets, CPC public are public community to website, training, CP Virtual Public more aware protect children WHY – To keep children safe. Procedures Info Group of child Target – protection 100%
41 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
F) Agencies and WHAT – Review and improve 1. Develop or update protocols for 1. CPC Practice End 2012 Practice Dev Staff are Measure - professionals protocols around specific risk each risk factor. Dev Sub Group sub group aware of the Protocols are work together to factors to children eg (Amanda Training sub risk and developed assess needs substance misuse, domestic McGrath) group know what and on the CP and risks and abuse and mental health PPU Trainers to do. procedures develop 2. Add protocols to CP procedures 2. CPC Practice Group effective plans WHY – To provide staff with Dev Sub Group appropriate tools to identify (Amanda these risk factor and guidance McGrath) on how to deal with them. 3. Staff training where required and 3. CPC Training finance available Sub Group (Cathie Fancy) G) Professionals WHAT – Maintain, evaluate 1. Analyse training evaluation CPC Training ongoing Training Sub Improved Measure – are competent and update Inter-agency CP reports and adapt or introduce Sub Group Group performance Review all and confident training courses as required (Cathie Fancy) Training and public evaluation Officer awareness forms and WHY – to raise awareness and 2. Ensure training reflects new as result of update improve CP Training national practice eg children’s CP training training as hearings act activity required.
Target – 100% H) Agencies and WHAT – review all child 1. review the child protection CPC Practice Ongoing Practice Dev Children and Measure – professionals protection policies and adapt procedures once the named person Dev Sub Group (once Sub Group families CP work together to as required to reflect the is established (Amanda named receive early procedures assess needs introduction of the named McGrath) person in intervention are updated and risks and person place) develop Target – effective plans WHY – to ensure children and 100% families are provided with intervention at the earliest possible stage.
42 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Appendix E
Child Protection Committee Expenditure 1st April 2011 to 31st July 2012
£
Child Protection Training (eg hiring of venues, catering) 1,575.88
Transport (car allowance) 1,154.70
Advertising (eg case conference leaflets for parents / children) 706.00
Supplies (eg office supplies, refurbishment of Eildonview facility) 714.90
Subscription/Memberships (eg Child Protection Procedures) 2,150.00
Hospitality (eg meetings, conferences, accommodation costs) 402.92
Salary and related costs (eg mobile phones, training, conferences) 159,389.77
Advert for new CPC Chair 3,218.98
Visual Recording Equipment (Lothian & Borders Police) 6,677.00
TOTAL SPEND £175,990.15
43 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Appendix F
Scottish Borders CPC and CPC Sub Group Membership
The membership of CPC and the CPC Sub Groups has changed over the period April 2011 to July 2012 and the work of all involved is recognised and appreciated.
The information to follow is the current membership of CPC and CPC sub groups.
Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee Name Title Agency
Alan Blackie (Chair) Independent Chair of CPC Independent Head of Integrated Children Stella Everingham Scottish Borders Council Services Director of Education and Lifelong Glenn Rodger Scottish Borders Council Learning
Amanda McGrath Detective Chief Inspector Lothian & Borders Police
Evelyn Fleck Director of Nursing & Midwifery NHS Borders
Dr Clare Ketteridge Consultant Paediatrician NHS Borders
Head of Children’s Services/ Child Mandy Brotherstone NHS Borders Health Commissioner Group Manager, Housing Strategy Cathie Fancy Scottish Borders Council & Services
Marian Gray Group Manager, Criminal Justice Scottish Borders Council
Assistant Director of Children & Children 1st Linda Jardine Family Services (Voluntary Sector)
Lesley Siewert Locality Reporter Manager SCRA
Graham Fraser Procurator Fiscal Procurator Fiscal
CPC support team
Gillian Nicol CP Lead Officer
Beverley Thompson / Jim Terras CPC Training & Development Officers
Susan Cannon CPC Senior Administrator
Vikki Hall CPC Clerical Assistant
44 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Scottish Borders CPC Sub Group Members
Review Sub Group Name Title Agency
Alan Blackie (Chair) Independent Chair of the CPC Independent
Head of Integrated Children’s Stella Everingham Scottish Borders Council Services
Gillian Nicol Child Protection Lead Officer Scottish Borders Council
Nurse Consultant Vulnerable Dawn Moss NHS Borders Children
Amanda McGrath Detective Chief Inspector Lothian & Borders Police
Lesley Siewert Authority Reporter SCRA
Alana Notman Adult Protection Co-ordinator Scottish Borders Council
Ken Gray Senior Education Officer Scottish Borders Council
Public Information Sub Group Name Title Agency
Gillian Nicol (Chair) Child Protection Lead Officer Scottish Borders Council
Fiona Morrison Centre Manager Borders Carers Centre
Rachel Watt Adult Protection Scottish Borders Council
Child Protection Officer - Rosemary Robertson Scottish Borders Council Education & Life Long Learning Child Protection & Reviewing Jenny Rankine Scottish Borders Council Officer – Social Work
Ann Scott Community Nurse Manager NHS Borders
James Morrison Detective Inspector Lothian & Borders Police
Tracey Graham Communications Manager Scottish Borders Council
Public Involvement and Shona Cameron NHS Borders Communications Manager
45 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Practice Development Sub Group Name Title Agency
Amanda McGrath (Chair) Detective Chief Inspector Lothian & Borders Police
Gillian Nicol Child Protection Lead Officer Scottish Borders Council
Lesley Siewert Children’s Reporter SCRA
Managing Solicitor - Community Christina Donald Scottish Borders Council Services Team Leader – Child Protection Gordon McLaren Scottish Borders Council Unit Child Protection & Reviewing Lesley Watson Scottish Borders Council Officer
Ishbel McKenzie Team Leader, Criminal Justice Scottish Borders Council
Jean Wilson Locality Manager- Social Work Scottish Borders Council
Fiona Doig Strategic Co-ordinator Alcohol & Drug Partnership
Nurse Consultant Vulnerable Dawn Moss NHS Borders Children
Mike Kehoe Consultant Psychiatrist NHS Borders
Eleanor Kerr Senior Nurse Child Protection NHS Borders
Lesley Horsburgh Senior Nurse Child Health NHS Borders
Child Protection Officer – Rosemary Robertson Scottish Borders Council Education & Life Long Learning
David Kemp Homelessness Services Manager Scottish Borders Council
Violence Against Woman & Andrea Beavon Scottish Borders Council Domestic Abuse Coordinator
46 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Quality Improvement Sub Group Name Title Agency
Vicky Currie (Chair) Locality Services Manager (ICS) Scottish Borders Council
Gillian Nicol Child Protection Lead Officer Scottish Borders Council
Nurse Consultant Vulnerable Dawn Moss NHS Borders Children
Eleanor Kerr Senior Nurse – Child Protection NHS Borders
Lisa Dalgliesh Detective Sergeant Lothian & Borders Police
Team Leader, Child Protection Gordon McLaren Scottish Borders Council Unit
Child Protection Officer – Rosemary Robertson Scottish Borders Council Education & Life Long Learning
Lesley Siewert Authority Reporter SCRA
Face2Face Borders Michelle Ballantyne Head of Service (Voluntary sector)
Susan Yates Planning Performance Officer NHS Borders
Business Performance Officer James Chiles Scottish Borders Council Scottish Borders Council
47 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Training Sub Group Name Title Agency Group Manager – Housing Cathie Fancy (Chair) Scottish Borders Council Strategy and Services
Beverley Thompson (Vice CPC Training & Development Scottish Borders Council Chair) Officer
CPC Training & Development Jim Terras Scottish Borders Council Officer
Eleanor Kerr Senior Nurse – Child Protection NHS Borders
Child Protection & Reviewing Susan Robson / Jenny Rankine Scottish Borders Council Officer
Child Protection & LAC Officer – Rosemary Robertson Scottish Borders Council Education & Life Long Learning
Violence Against Women & Andrea Beavon / Penny Burns Scottish Borders Council Domestic Abuse Coordinator
Strategic Development Officer for ELBEG Public Protection Anne Mitchell Child Protection Partnership Office
Detective Sergeant, Public Scott Anderson Lothian & Borders Police Protection Unit
Adult Protection Training Officer / Rachael Watt / Alana Notman Scottish Borders Council Co-ordinator
Domestic Abuse Training Penny Burns NHS Borders Facilitator
Ceri Hunter Development Co-ordinator Youth Borders
Acting Team Leader, Emergency Roy Ledsham Scottish Borders Council Duty Team
Locality Team Leader – Social Stuart Easingwood Scottish Borders Council Work Community Learning & Kevin McCall Development Team Leader Scottish Borders Council (Youth Work)
Fiona Wain GIRFEC Project Worker Scottish Borders Council
Gareth Stott Resources Team Leader Scottish Borders Council
David Kemp Homelessness Services Manager Scottish Borders Council
Gillian Nicol Child Protection Lead Officer Scottish Borders Council
48 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Health Action Group – NHS Borders (single agency sub group) Name Title Agency Nurse Consultant Vulnerable Dawn Moss (Chair) NHS Borders Children
Eleanor Kerr Senior Nurse – Child Protection NHS Borders
Head of Childrens Services/ Child Mandy Brotherstone NHS Borders Health Commissioner
Dr Clare Ketteridge Consultant Paediatrician NHS Borders
Elaine Peace Associate Director of Nursing NHS Borders
Gilly Waite Operational Manager - CAMHS NHS Borders
Lesley Horsburgh Senior Nurse - Child Health NHS Borders
Elaine Cockburn Head of Midwifery NHS Borders
Looked After Children’s Rachel Pulman NHS Borders Nurse/Child Protection Advisor
Brian Patterson Acute Clinical Service Manager NHS Borders
Perry Purgess Community Dietician NHS Borders
Gillian Nicol Child Protection Lead Officer Scottish Borders Council
49 CPC Website - http://onlineborders.org.uk/community/cpc
Education Sub Group (single agency sub group) Name Title Agency Director, Education & Lifelong Glenn Rodger (CHAIR) Scottish Borders Council Learning Child Protection & LAC Officer - Rosemary Robertson Scottish Borders Council Education & Lifelong Learning Young People's Services Co- Gill Swales Scottish Borders Council ordinator (libraries) Principal Educational Roger Barrow Scottish Borders Council Psychologist
David Killean Vice Principal. Borders College Scottish Borders Council
Depute Head Teacher, Burnfoot Lynn Hodgins Scottish Borders Council Primary School Deputy Head Teacher, Jedburgh Laura Howie Scottish Borders Council Grammar School
Gilly Innes Head Teacher, Melrose Grammar Scottish Borders Council
Depute Head Teacher, Chirnside Scott Brodie Scottish Borders Council Primary School Deputy Head Teacher, Galashiels Iain Anderson Scottish Borders Council Academy Team Leader, Integrated Jean Wilson Scottish Borders Council Children’s Services Depute Head Teacher , Kelso Alison Wilson Scottish Borders Council High School
Shona Sinclair Curator, Hawick Museum Scottish Borders Council
Gillian Nicol Child Protection Lead Officer Scottish Borders Council
50
Scottish Borders Child Protection Committee
“All children in the Scottish Borders have the right to grow up safe from abuse”
SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
Introduction
This is the seventh annual report of the Scottish Borders Adult Protection Committee, covering the period from 1st April 2011 – 31st March 2012. It is hoped that this annual report will help to provide a summary of the work done during the past year by the Committee, its subcommittees and the Adult Protection Unit.
The Adult Protection Committee
In order to meet the statutory requirements of the Adult Support & Protection (Scotland) Act 2007 the Adult Protection Committee implemented its agreed ‘Interagency Strategy and Plan for Protection of Adults at Risk (2009-2011)’. The Interagency Strategies are informed by the legislative requirements that were made on Adult Protection Committees under the Act (sections 42 - 46), as well as local issues that the Committee is aware need to be actioned in order to maximise the safeguarding measures for adults at risk in the Scottish Borders. The Interagency Strategies are regularly reviewed and updated at the Committee’s bi-monthly meeting in order to make sure that there is progress towards achieving the objectives.
The Committee held a Seminar in October 2011 in order to review the objectives that have been achieved and to inform the Interagency Strategy for 2012-2015. The majority of the Interagency Strategy was completed, but some issues have been taken forward into the new Interagency Strategy due the development of further actions. The new Interagency Strategy will go ‘live’ from April 2012.
The Committee has four standing subcommittees set up in order to achieve some of the priorities in the Interagency Strategy. The Committee delegates appropriate tasks to the subcommittees, as well as to the Adult Protection Unit, which provides support for the business processes and steers the implementation of the Interagency Strategy. Members of the Adult Protection Unit attend the Committee and its subcommittees in an ex-officio role.
1 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
The Adult Protection Interagency Operational Group
A working group on service user participation in Adult Protection/Case Conference process was established in order to help improve in this area.
As a result of a practice issue raised, the group established a pro-forma letter to send to consultants/wards when there are adult protection concerns that could impact on a person being discharged into a potentially harmful situation.
A report was submitted regarding the local pilot which was held to see how suitable it was to implement the Joint Improvement Team’s Risk Assessment Tool in relation to adult protection. It was agreed that this would be taken forward as it was suitable for all complex cases (not just adult protection cases).
The Adult Protection NHS Operational Group
It had been discussed about having a strategic joint Adult/Child Protection group within NHS Borders which links to MAPPA. NHS Borders are reviewing all meetings and are considering having a Public Protection Steering Group. The agenda for NHS Borders is always large with few personnel to drive actions forward but priority for adults at risk remains high.
The Adult Protection Audit Subgroup
The Audit Subgroup continues to meet every two months. Terms of reference and membership will be reviewed in 2012, (as part of the 2012 review of APC and sub committees).
Regular attendance by all members has been difficult. It is rare for the whole group to attend. Several times in the last twelve months due to the absence of a police representative, meetings have been technically inquorate. This is thought to be another reflection of the relatively small group of staff at the appropriate level within agencies in Scottish Borders who can serve on this kind of group. Also, the nature of the agenda means that it has been difficult to complete all the business within the two hours allocated, and items have had to be deferred. It may be necessary to allocate more time to meetings to prevent this happening. It is not thought sensible or practicable to change the frequency of meetings.
2 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
An audit strategy was approved in March 2011, and progress towards completion of the tasks is reviewed at each subgroup meeting. The position at March 2012 can be summarised as follows: z Audit of quality of adult protection as evidenced in a sample of case files – this has been completed, and an action plan for implementing the recommendations has also been implemented. z Audit of views and opinions of people who have experienced adult protection in Scottish Borders – this has been completed; after some delay, a summary has been made available, and an action plan for implementing the recommendations has been promised for late 2012. z An audit of the availability of, awareness of, and access to the Multi- agency Guidelines for adult protection within statutory agencies in Scottish Borders has been completed, and the findings reported to the agency representatives. z An audit of the quality of informed risk assessment was not commissioned. This was because, , the outcome of the Care Inspectorate inspection of adult services within SBC Social Work service provided sufficient evidence (along with the outcomes from the pilot project to evaluate the JIT Risk Assessment Tool in Scottish Borders) of the limitations in practice in this area. The subcommittee agreed that rather than a further audit, a plan for introducing the JIT tool should be the priority (by the APC). This has now been developed and actioned (by the Interagency Operational Group). z An examination of data and trends in relation to attendance of adults at risk and their carers at AP case conferences was carried out. This confirmed that attendance at case conferences by service users is very low; reasons for this should be recorded in the minute. The standard is that adults at risk and their carers should be enabled and facilitated in every possible way to attend meetings which are about them. Advocacy services have been commissioned specifically to support this standard. A literature review of evidence relevant to this was undertaken by Erica Duncan and proved very helpful to the subgroup in planning for improvement in this area. The outcome of the examination prompted the establishment of a Council Officers Forum, which considers all aspects of practice by Council Officers, and the development of a good practice aide memoir for chairs of Case Conferences, whose responsibility it is to ensure that the standard is met. z An audit of the extent of financial harm to adults at risk in Scottish Borders was included in the audit strategy. However, a preliminary scan of available evidence, and some discussion with relevant services confirmed that there is a serious problem, and that an audit was not necessary. Instead, specific actions to address the issue have been
3 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
included in the Interagency Strategy for adult protection 2012-15. z An audit of recurring themes emerging from Large Scale Investigations (LSIs) was also proposed. A specific audit has not been commissioned. Instead, a log of all referrals for and actual LSIs is on the agenda of each subgroup meeting. This enables the group to alert relevant services if an establishment or group of establishments, recurs in the log (i.e. there appear to be continuing concerns in that establishment which care management, contracting services, and reviewing staff should be alert to, as well as the Care Inspectorate). It has also led to a review of the LSI procedure, to make sure it is up to date and reflects experience and best practice. z An audit to ensure clarity of thresholds in relation to logging and reporting medication errors in non NHS establishments has been completed. Procedures will be altered and improved as a result.
As can be seen the Strategy for 2011/12 was quite demanding. The new Plan, currently in draft, will be less so. The major task will be to undertake a self evaluation of some key aspects of adult protection using the University of Dundee 'tool kit'. A decision should be made in 2012 as to exactly what aspects, and how this is to be resourced.
A procedure has been in place for over a year to enable Significant & Critical Incident Reviews (SCIR) and practice reviews. In the period October 2012- July 2012, there have been 19 referrals or requests for SCIRs. 7 of these required a review, resulting in an Action Plan. Action Plans from completed reviews are progressed and reviewed at each audit subgroup, and at the moment all actions resulting from completed reviews have been actioned.
There is one SCIR where preliminary information is still being gathered, and, given that it concerns a fatality, it is likely that a review will result. This case is a good example of how much time and effort a SCIR, including the gathering of preliminary information, requires. Requests and referrals for SCIRs will need to be increasingly carefully evaluated to ensure that only the most serious cases, where there is likely to be greatest potential for learning, should proceed to the full review stage.
Within the AP SCIR procedure a process for managing the interface between this procedure and comparable processes in the other protection partnerships, and internal single agency case reviews, is explained. Effective management of this interface in reality can be quite challenging.
The Audit subgroup has established a procedure for reviewing external reports of Adult Protection Inquiries and reviews, to ensure that any recommendations
4 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012 which are relevant to Scottish Borders are disseminated and taken forward if appropriate. The procedure is mainly used to process reports from the Mental Welfare Commission in Scotland, but has also considered reports of Inquiries in England and Wales, including those produced within the NHS in England (where these have been published).
An index has been established which has the report title, the person or group which has reviewed it for relevance, and any relevant actions which are to be taken forward. These are kept under review by the audit subgroup until there is evidence that they have all been completed.
This procedure, though simple in concept, has proved difficult to implement fully. One problem is that if a group is established to review a report and its relevance to Scottish Borders, it has been very difficult to resource it - staff on the group find that they cannot give this task priority over immediate operational issues.. If the report is allocated to one person for review, the review is completed but there is a significant loss of ownership of any recommendations. The audit subgroup has only been in existence for two years. During that time it has developed procedures to cover both individual case reviews, and Inquiries published elsewhere; it has agreed an audit plan and commissioned a series of audits. The group has struggled to cope with its workload, and needs to prioritise and manage its work better if it is to provide the service and support to the Adult Protection Committee in 2012/13.
The Learning & Development Subgroup
A new Training Strategy for 2011 – 2012 was implemented, and it will be updated on an annual basis to include all the training that is available in relation to adult protection matters. This includes the access to an e-learning module for NHS Borders staff to complement the multi-agency training sessions. There is ongoing discussion around extending access to this for staff within Social Work and the voluntary/independent sectors. Lothian & Borders Police currently have access to their own e-learning module.
It has been reported that financial harm of adults at risk has increased, and the group has been focusing on this matter. In order to raise awareness of the occurrence and to prevent financial harm, the Adult Protection Unit hosted a stall at a Community Safety event in September and developed an accessible financial harm workshop designed for service users and carers. Workshops for staff will be developed later in 2012.
5 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
A report was submitted to the Alcohol and Drug Partnership about the complex matters which were raised previously in adult protection workshops regarding the Mental Welfare Commission’s Inquiry Report into the care and treatment of ‘Mr H’ (a man who had alcohol related brain damage). As a result of this, a multi-agency group was set up to take matters forward locally to help support people who have this condition.
The subgroup has taken on responsibility for the implementation of the Public Awareness Strategy 2011 -2014. Its purpose is to achieve and maintain awareness of the Adult Support & Protection (Scotland) Act 2007 amongst the public (which includes adults at risk of harm, service users, families and carers, communities, general public, professional agencies (public services and voluntary/independent sector services)). Money from the Scottish Government was received and in order to help support this Strategy it was agreed to use this for awareness raising publications.
The Scottish Borders Adult Protection Unit
The Unit continues to oversee and support the operational arrangements for dealing with adult protection cases, as well as implement the agreed training programme.
The Adult Protection Officers continue to link operationally with the local social work offices, which are responsible for progressing inquiries and investigations under the Adult Support & Protection (Scotland) Act 2007. Staff continue to be reminded by the Unit to invite and support service users to attend their case conferences.
They also link with BIAS and will continue to progress trying to get advocacy into care homes for those residents who don’t have close links with family/friends. This has a primary prevention aspect, and links in with the other adult protection primary prevention work going on in other areas.
A Council Officer forum was established in order to provide a supportive arena for designated Council Officers (spread over a large rural area) to come together with the Unit to help to discuss and improve practice. There will be a mixture of case reviews, debate and discussion of general issues that the Council Officers are coming across in adult protection.
In November 2011, the Adult Protection Unit moved to the Langlee Complex (Marigold Drive, Galashiels) along with child and public protection colleagues.
6 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
Scottish Borders Adult Protection Activity (2011 – 2012)
The Adult Protection Unit continues to monitor the statistics from the Social Work Information Management System (Framework-i). The Act was implemented on 31 October 2008 and from this time the Unit have been collecting the adult protection data sets requested by the Scottish Government. Unless otherwise stated, the figures below were collected in the period 1st April 2011 – 31st March 2012.
[Please note for ease of reading pie charts: all charts start at the 12 o’clock position and follow in a clockwise direction in relation to the key on the right hand side.]
Adult Protection Concerns
x Advice given by the Adult Protection Unit (Table 1) Since implementation of the Act the APU has been recording how many times they are contacted for advice about a specific person, and how many of these contacts proceed to an Adult Protection Concern, on a quarterly basis.
Adult Protection Unit Contacts Proceeding to Adult Protection Concerns by Quarter since implementation of ASPA (Oct 08 - Mar 12) 120 104 109 100 86 75 70 80 62 56 54 59 60 43 41 47 33 33 39 40 29 18 17 19 17 10 12 12 13 20 7 2 6 6 0 Oct 08 Jan 09 - Apr 09 Jul 09 - Oct 09 Jan 10 - Apr 10 Jul 10 - Oct 10 Jan 11 - Apr 11 Jul 11 - Oct 11 Jan 12 - - Dec Mar 09 - Jun Sep 09 - Dec Mar 10 - Jun Sep 10 - Dec Mar 11 - Jun Sep 11 - Dec Mar 12 08 09 09 10 10 11 11
Quarter APU Contacted Resulted in AP Referrral
The chart shows that the majority of the concerns that professional people are raising for advice are being screened and do not meet the criteria for referring as an Adult Protection Concern. There has been a significant increase in workload for the Unit this year and the team continues to support and guide those who are involved in the adult protection process. The Social Care & Health Team Leaders were offered additional support with the Framework process if required as they are still responsible for receiving Adult Protection referrals. A national data set was agreed with the Scottish Government.
7 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
x Adult Protection Concerns (Table 2) An Adult Protection Concern is where someone has reported to, or it is suspected by, Social Work that an adult is at risk of harm as defined in the Adult Support & Protection (Scotland) Act 2007.
Adult Protection Concerns per Year (2005-2012)
300 250 292 s
l 200 a r r
e 150 f e
R 100 133 113 113 96 50 76 69 0 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 Year
Adult Protection referrals invariably lead to initial inquiries being undertaken by Council Officers within the appropriate Social Care & Health Team, supported by their responsible managers and the Adult Protection Unit where required. . The table shows that overall there has been a steady increase in the number of Adult Protection Concerns being made. There were more than double the concerns raised in 2011 – 2012 when compared to 2010 – 2011 but care should be taken when reading this figure as there were some medication errors being reported inappropriately (see Types of Harm for more information).
x Age Group and Gender of Service User (Tables 3 & 4)
Percentage Concerns by Age Percentage Concerns by Group (2011-12) Gender (2011-12) 10% 11% 8% 16-30 16% 31-40 34% 41-50 Male 51-60 15% Female 61-70 71-80 66% 19% 81-90 10% 11% 91+
Table 3 shows that the highest percentage of Adult Protection Concerns was raised in relation to service users aged between 71 – 80 years old (19%). This is an increase from the previous year. There is also an increase in the age groups: 31-40, 51-60, and 91+. There were decreases in the other age groups. Table 4 shows that it was mostly females that
8 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
were referred. This is a continuation of the trend of females being predominately referred.
x Primary Service User Group (Tables 5 & 6)
Concerns by Primary Service User Group (2011-12) 100
80
60 100 40 73
20 32 21 14 0 3 26 0 1 7 12 3 0 l t r s y y l y e y e a e n g r h d a l i l t r t r a e c a d t i t i e t n s a i l p b w l l e k i o c u r h n t i s i n i d e j n l a s a s t s o A o l e n a i s b e o b e r n e / u r e H t u n n I h O L y O R a a e s a t d e P b V k H m s M s h I n e i i b S l A n A e O P L H u D D u D U S V
Percentage Concerns by Primary Service User Group (2011- 12) Learning Disability 2% Mental Health
0% 4% 1% Sensory Loss 9% Physical Disability 35% 1% Older People
Substance Abuse
Dementia
25% Other Vulnerable
Adult at Risk 7% Other 5% 11% Unknown
These tables show that the majority of the concerns were in relation to service users who had their primary service user group recorded as ‘Learning Disability’ (35%), followed by ‘Older People’ (25%). This is a continuation of the trend that the majority of people referred are in these Service User Groups, although last year ‘Older People’ had the highest number. The category of ‘Other’ was used when the adult did not have a service user group already listed in the adult protection data set, such as: Person Seeking Financial Advice, Offender, Palliative Care, Acute
9 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
Illness, and Non SBC Client. Compared to the previous year there were decreases in the Service User Groups: Substance Abuse, Other Vulnerable. Once again, there were no referrals received for clients who had a Head Injury or HIV/AIDS.
x Types of Harm Reported (Tables 7 & 8)
Types of Harm Reported (2011-12) 120 100 80 60 112 36 96 40 91 53 20 22 0 5 4 3 25 13 0 l l l l t / s / c s y n l i a a n a a c t r l n t a o r c c t e o u n i h i r i i A a o s i m c s e i r x t t s g o e g r s e / c i i e u h e e a a c y l s a o t t t i n R l t S b n g m n h u a i m H c a O o e A t o o P n r m e i f n h l l i m a C M o t N D O i c f g e F s r y f m e n S c n I s I o u s N i P H D
Percentage Types of Harm Reported (2011-12) Physical
8% Psychological 3% 24% Neglect / Act of Omission 5% Financial / Material 1%1% Sexual 5% Human Rights
Information
12% Self Harm / Neglect
21% Domestic Abuse
Other Concerns
20%
These tables show that physical harm was reported the most (24%), followed by financial / material (21%) and neglect / act of omission (20%). This is a continuation of the trend that physical harm and financial / material harm are the most reported concerns, although last year financial / material harm was more commonly reported. Medication errors where no physical harm has occurred are included within the neglect / act of omission category. The category of ‘Other Concern’ was used to highlight when the harm was recorded
10 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012 as a medication error. Compared to the previous year there were decreases in reported concerns regarding the Discriminatory Type of Harm category.
x Source of Referrals (Table 9 & 10)
Source of Referral (2011-12) 100
80
60 95 40 16 20 7 36 0 6 7 2 5 5 5 1 15 4 3 0 20 11 6 22 26 0 l r r r r r c c c c e e T e y y e e e P d i i i i a t e e r e e e s c c l c r r e r r O i r G r i a a m m g k t b t l t l h n n b r l r a r l t u a y a C a a a o o e e o e u i i i o C t m f o A n n g g O N i t P H H P t e h h h e e a r o c n n A A t c c c f r W i e e - m e c t o a u y y y M s t r o r l f i g M t l s o s s p n s r e l a a a n e r n y i m e s t k P s p a e P i l H s u e C C e c i - f r s r t S s n r - s i l d I m y b o o e n y o u u u l t n m u D r n t t o S i o e i a o N s m a o N e a P W r C r / n t N e F n i C H v - p l a o u i h y - p o l e a r C t h t M i l s l i C a m d t P c a t a o n i n u t o I m e i u H p A S o p s H l m s C o a o c m H H o o L C
Source of Referral (2011-12) Carer Family Member
Community / District Nurse
Hospital Professional
Community OT 9% 2% 5% 1% 2% Community Psychiatric Nurse 7% 2% GP 12% 2% Home Care
2% Housing Agency
1% Independent Agency 8% Member of Public
2% Police 4% Private Care Home
7% Self-referral 33% 2% Social Work Manager
Social Worker
Other
These charts show that the majority of Concerns were reported by the Independent Agencies. This is a continuation of the trend, and will also be linked to the high number of medication errors that were being reported by Independent Agencies who were supporting the adult at risk with this care
11 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
task. This year there was also an increase in referrals from community district nurses, community occupational therapists (OTs), community psychiatric nurses, family members, GPs, hospital consultants (non psychiatric and psychiatric), hospital nurses/allied professionals, social work managers and social workers. The category of ‘Other’ was used when the referral source was not already listed in the data set, such as: Community Care Assessor, Other Local Authority, Local Area Co-ordinator, Day Care Officer, Care Resource Team, Fraud Investigator, and Contracts Officer.
x Setting of adult at time of Referral (Table 11)
Setting of Service User at Time of Referral (11-12) 7% 2% Private Address Sheltered Housing 26% Care Home
55% NHS Ward Other
10%
This graph refers to where the Service User was residing at the time an Adult Protection Concern was reported. This may not be the place where suspected harm actually took place. Compared to the previous year there were increases in the following settings: Care Home, Sheltered Housing, NHS Ward, and Other.
Adult Protection Inquiries
When an Adult Protection Concern is recorded the Team Leader responsible is required to discuss the concern with other agencies involved with the adult at risk, such as Health or a service provider. If there is thought to be criminality involved they are required to have an Interagency Referral Discussion (IRD) with the Police. Consultation with the Adult Protection Unit on any aspect of the concern is available. These discussions, and consequent decisions, are recorded on Framework-i. Where the decision is taken to proceed under Adult Protection Guidelines, the Team Leader is required to record this as an Adult Protection Inquiry / Investigation, which would include any Council Officer visit or any external agency Investigation.
12 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
x Agencies involved in Inquiries (Tables 12 & 13)
Agencies Involved in Inquiries 300 250 200
150 289 100 141 166 44 50 90 28 21 0 r rk ce th o g n er o li al ct in io h W o e e us ss t l P H S o i O ia t H m c n m o e o S d C en p re e a d C In
Agencies Involved in Adult Protection Inquiries (2011-2012) 3% 6% 4%
Social Work 12% 36% Police Health Independent Sector Housing Care Commission 21% Other
18%
These tables show that Health representatives (21%) were the most involved in inquiries that were held, followed by the Police (18%). As the Social Work Department is responsible for conducting inquiries under the Adult Support & Protection (Scotland) Act 2007, they will be involved in all inquiries held. The category of ‘Other’ was used when the agency was not already listed in the data set, such as: the Office of the Public Guardian, Other Local Authority, Bank, Solicitor, Department of Work and Pensions.
13 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
x Outcomes of concerns (Table 14)
Decision to consult Police Outcomes of Concerns (11-12) Proceed to Investigation/Inquiry
Proceed to AP Case Conference
Large Scale Investigation 6% No further action under AP Guidelines/ASPA 1%1% 13% Allegations unsubstantiated
14% Adult at risk did not want further action or police investigation / Adult is able to safeguard self 11% Change in care arrangements
0% Ongoing Social Work involvement/Reviews 2% 0% 5% Criminal Proceedings
Statutory Intervention 4% 14% Continue under ASPA
Continue under Care Management
Protection Plan 5% 21% 1% Care Programme Approach 1.6% Other
This table refers to Outcomes from all Concerns received, both those that did and those that did not proceed to the Inquiry stage. Since last year, some Outcomes have been altered and new ones added to be in line with the National Data Set for the Annual Return. The category of ‘Other’ was used when the outcome was not already listed in the data set, such as: Investigated by other Local Authority, Investigated by the Office of the Public Guardian, Ongoing NHS Investigation, Client Moved Area, Client Died, Large Scale Investigation.
x Orders and Warrants granted under ASPA legislation There was one temporary banning order granted, which lead to a banning order being applied for and granted. There were no applications made for warrants for entry for a visit, assessment orders or removal orders under the Adult Support & Protection (Scotland) Act 2007. .
x Offences committed under ASPA legislation There was one incident recorded where an adult at risk was being unduly pressurised. There were no obstruction offences in regards to Protection Orders and no offences by bodies corporate in breach of the Adult Support & Protection (Scotland) Act 2007.
14 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
Case Conferences
x Referrals proceeding to Case Conference (Table 15)
Percentage Referrals Proceeding to Case Conference by Year (2005-2012) 100% 75% 80% 60% 39% 34% 29% 22% 40% 19% 14% 20% 0% 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Year
x Case Conferences held (Table 16)
Adult Protection Case Conferences Held (2011- 2012) 50 40 30 20 41 28 30 10 18 0 Initial Case Review Case Large Scale AWIA Case Conferences Conferences Investigation Conferences Planning Meeting
x Attendance at Case Conferences (Table 17) The Adult Protection Committee monitors attendance levels at Case Conferences as it is important for involved professionals to send apologies and reports in their absence. This is also a useful way to monitor involvement of Service Users in the Adult Protection process.
Percentage Attendance at Case Conferences (2011-12) 6%
21% Present Apologies Absent 73%
Compared to the previous year there was an increase (by 2%) in the number of people attending Case Conferences.
15 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
Large Scale Investigations
There were 19 potential Large Scale Investigations (LSI) in this period, possibly involving at least 50 people, 33 of whom were recorded as Concerns. These were in relation to 10 Residential Care Homes, 4 Residential Nursing Homes, 4 Supported Living, 1 Home Care Provider, and 1 various locations. The types of harm involved were 6 physical, 6 neglect/acts of omission, 3 financial harm, 1 psychological and 1 sexual.
Significant Case & Incident Reviews
The APC Audit Subgroup received 2 requests for Significant Case & Incident Reviews…
Advocacy
Borders Independent Advocacy Service (BIAS) reports to APC on a quarterly basis regarding service users involved in the Adult Protection process referred to them for support. During this period BIAS received 9 referrals. In the future BIAS will be involved in evaluating service users' experience of adult protection processes.
Commentary on annual activity This has been a very busy year with many Authorities requesting information and a new National Adult Protection Co-ordinator coming in to post. One area which has been of interest to the Unit is the large percentage of Health personnel involved in the Adult Protection process, this year it is 21% which is far higher than any other Authority which has submitted the data. This is a testimony to the good working relationships within the Partnership especially at operational level where the outcome for the adult at risk is paramount. We continue to gather relevant data which we use to highlight issues and to share information with Scottish Government and other Authorities.
16 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
Learning & Development Programme (2011-2012)
The Learning & Development programme adopted by the Scottish Borders attempts to deliver a blended approach to learning. The content of the standard training sessions available (Level 1 – 3) in the rolling programme is based on the national training programme outcomes developed on behalf of the Scottish Government.
(Table 15) 2011 - 2012 Numbers of People Attended by sector represented Session & Number of times delivered SBC NHS Police Independent/ Other/ Voluntary sector Unknown Level 1: NHS Borders ‘Protecting People’ - 101 - - - Basic Corporate Induction Workshop Knowledge & ( 11 ) Understanding NHS Borders Adult Support & - 1173 - - - Protection e-learning module Lothian & Borders Police Adult - - 191 - - Support & Protection e=learning Module Level 2: ‘Supporting & Protecting Adults 353 146 66 349 7 Knowledge & at Risk’ – Full Day Awareness Understanding Raising ( 37 ) ‘Supporting & Protecting Adults 47 0 0 29 0 at Risk’ – Half Day Refresher ( 6 ) Level 3: ‘Supporting & Protecting Adults 26 12 4 3 0 Detailed at Risk’ – 2 Day Detailed Knowledge, Knowledge ( 4 ) Understanding Skills based Workshop for 32 - - - - & Skills Council Officers ( 3 ) Total number of People attended for all Adult 458 1432 261 381 7 Protection Sessions Delivered
17 SUMMARY ANNUAL REPORT – APRIL 2011 – MARCH 2012
(Table 16)
Evaluation Scores (2011 - 2012)
100% 94% 90% 90%
80% 76%
70% e r
o 60% c S
e 50% g a r e
v 40% A 30%
20%
10%
0% ASPA Level 2 - Half Day Refresher ASPA Level 2 - Full Day Total ASPA Level 3 - Council Officers Total workshop Total Session Delivered
(Table 17)
Evaluation Scores (2011 - 2012)
100% 95%
90% 87% 85% 85% e r
o 80% c S
e 75% g a r
e 70% v A 65% 60% 55% 50% Day 1 Day 2 Level 3 - 2 day session
Commentary/analysis of annual activity (if appropriate) The next year we plan to hold more skills based half day refreshers for all Level 3 staff. We will concentrate on Preventing Financial Harm, Protection Orders within ASPA and AWIA and Case Conference attendance.
18 ITEM 18
Equality Mainstreaming Report and Equality Outcomes
Report by the Chief Executive
SCOTTISH BORDERS COUNCIL
25th April 2013
1 PURPOSE AND SUMMARY 1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek approval of the Equality Mainstreaming Report in order to meet our legal obligation to publish this document before the 30th April 2013.
1.2 Under the public sector general equality duty, created by the Equality Act 2010, the Council must have due regard to eliminating discrimination, advancing equality of opportunity and fostering good relations in the exercise of its functions. The Equality Mainstreaming report and Outcomes, build on the Council’s Equality Scheme and Equality Outcomes that were approved at its meeting on the 25th October 2012, and previous work on advancing equality and diversity.
1.3 The Council has a statutory requirement to produce and publish an Equality Mainstreaming Report and Equality Employee information no later than 30th April 2013.
2 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 I recommend that the Council approves the Equality Mainstreaming Report as set out in Appendix 1, and notes the supplementary Appendices 2, 3 and 4.
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 1 3 BACKGROUND 3.1 Under the public sector general equality duty, created by the Equality Act 2010, the Council must have due regard to eliminating discrimination, advancing equality of opportunity and fostering good relations in the exercise of its functions.
3.2 In May 2012 the Scottish Government published specific duties to assist listed public authorities such as the Council to meet the general duty. These are a requirement to :-
x Report on mainstreaming the equality duty, x Publish equality outcomes and report progress, x Assess and review policies and practices, x Gather and use employee information, x Publish gender pay gap information, x Publish statements on equal pay, x Consider award criteria and conditions in relation to public procurement.
3.3 The Council has made considerable progress in the last few years to refining and improving our approach to equality and diversity which includes imbedding Equality Impact Assessments within our functions and processes. This Mainstreaming Report provides the opportunity to present an overview of the Council’s work on equality whilst focusing on compliance and accountability.
3.4 The Equality Mainstreaming report and Outcomes, builds on the Council’s Equality Scheme, Equality Outcomes and support for the equalities mainstreaming approach that were approved by the Council at its meeting on the 25th October 2012. The Report and Outcomes are based on a robust analysis of national and local data, as well as extensive local consultation, in line with guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
3.5 As agreed in the commitments set out within the Council’s Equality Scheme and as required by current legislation, the work has been aligned to and embedded within both the Single Outcome Agreement and Scottish Border Council strategic planning processes.
3.6 The report sets out our approach to mainstreaming equality and diversity, in line with the Council’s Equality Scheme. It also contains our Equality Outcomes and Employee policies and data as required under the Act.
3.7 The Council has a statutory requirement to produce and publish our Equality Mainstreaming Report and Equality Employee information no later than the 30th April 2013.
4 IMPLICATIONS 4.1 Financial
(a) The successful publication of the Equality Mainstreaming Report and Equality Outcomes will assist in reducing the corporate risk of successful litigation against the Council as we meet our legal obligation.
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 1 4.2 Risk and Mitigations
(a) The risks of not publishing the report include: x Risk of Legal challenge x Risk to Organisational Reputation
4.3 Equalities
(a) If the Equality Mainstreaming Report and Equality Outcomes are successfully implemented there will be a strong and sustained positive impact on equality of opportunity, fostering good relations and eliminating discrimination, victimisation and harassment.
4.4 Acting Sustainably
(a) The mainstreaming of equalities will have a positive impact on reducing social barriers and should help ensure that the Council is able to take a sustainable approach to public service delivery where resources are targeted to the areas with the greatest need.
4.5 Carbon Management
(a) There are no effects on carbon emissions.
4.6 Rural Proofing
(a) The mainstreaming of equalities will have a positive impact on improving access to services.
4.7 Changes to Scheme of Administration or Scheme of Delegation
(a) There are no changes to be made.
5 CONSULTATION 5.1 The Corporate Management Team has been consulted on the report. The Chief Financial Officer, the Head of Corporate Governance, the Head of Audit and Risk, the Clerk to the Council, and Corporate Communications are being consulted in respect of this report and its recommendations. Any further comments will be reported at the meeting.
Approved by Author(s) Name Designation and Contact Number Douglas Scott Senior Consultant, Chief Executive’s Department
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 2 Background Papers: nil Previous Minute Reference: 25th October 2012
Note – You can get this document on tape, in Braille, large print and various computer formats by contacting the address below. Douglas Scott can also give information on other language translations as well as providing additional copies.
Contact: Douglas Scott, Senior Consultant Business Consultancy Unit, Borders Council, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel: 01835 825155
Scottish Borders Council - April 2013 3 Appendix 1
Scottish Borders Council Mainstreaming Report and Equality Outcomes
2013 - 2017
March 2013
You can get this document on tape, in large print, on disc and in various other formats. We can also provide information on language translations and on how to get more copies. To arrange for an officer to meet with you to explain any parts of this document that may be unclear, please contact us as follows:
Equality and Diversity Officer Chief Executives Department Scottish Borders Council Head Quarters Newtown St Boswells Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel: 01835 824 000 1 Content
Page 1) Introduction 3 2) Scottish Borders Council Vision and Equality Vision 3 3) The Legal Context 4 4) Building on Previous Work 5 5) The Importance of Mainstreaming Equality 5 6) SBC’s Mainstreaming Approach 5 7) Mainstreaming Equality and Diversity in Education 13 8) Equality Outcomes 2013-2017 14 Employment Policies: x Equal Pay 9) 20 x Occupational Segregation
Appendix 1: Employment Data Appendix 2: Scottish Borders Council Equality Data Appendix 3: Scottish Borders Council’s Equality Evidence for Indicators Appendix 4: Scottish Borders Council Outcomes and Indicators
2 1. Introduction
Scottish Borders Council is fully committed to the values and ethos of the duties placed upon it by the Equality Act 2010. Equality and diversity relates to all of the Scottish Borders community, all staff and members of the Council and so is integral to the work we do and the services we deliver.
This is the first Equality Mainstreaming report Scottish Borders Council has produced. The report gives us the opportunity to present the progress we have made in mainstreaming Equality and Diversity work across our organisation. In this report we will look at the approach the Council is taking to progressing our equality duties through reducing inequality, promoting equality of opportunity and fostering good relations.
This report also contains our equality outcomes which the Council has set and will be working towards over the next four years. Our equality outcomes are designed to help us achieve our vision and meet our general duty to eliminate discrimination and harassment; promote equality of opportunity and foster good relations.
It maybe useful to read this report in conjunction with our Equality Scheme 2012- 2016 which sets out our commitment to equality, diversity and developing a human rights based approach.
You can find our Equality Scheme 2012-2013 here: http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/info/751/equality_diversity_and_citizenship/99/equality_a nd_diversity
2. Scottish Borders Council Vision and Equality Vision 2.1 Vision, Values and Standards Our vision, our values and our standards will guide the way we work and will inform everything from our strategies and policies, through to the work plans of individuals within the organisation.
Our Vision We seek the best quality of life for all the people in the Scottish Borders, prosperity for our business and good health and resilience for all our communities
Our Values Our Standards x Public Service x Putting our customers and staff at the heart of what we do x Respect for all x Being fair, equal and open x Courage x Continually improving our services x Integrity x Working with partners and stakeholders x Honesty x Delivering value for money in the use of our resources x Commitment
Equality and Diversity is essential to achieving our overall vision; helping shape our values and guide our standards.
3 2.2 Vision for Equality and Diversity
Our Equality & Diversity Vision We seek to embed equality, diversity and human rights into all Scottish Borders Council services, functions and business, enabling the organisation to demonstrate its explicit commitment to equality, diversity and human rights and the positive actions associated.
3. The Legal Context
3.1 The Equality Act 2010 and the General Equality Duty
The Act brings together the areas of race, disability, sex, sexual orientation, religion and belief, age and gender reassignment in one legislative entity.
At the same time the Act clarifies the approach that should be taken on issues around ensuring fair treatment with regards to marriage/civil partnership and pregnancy and maternity. The Council in the exercise of its functions must:
x Eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation. x Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. x Foster good relations between people who share a protected. characteristic and those who do not, by tackling prejudice and promoting understanding.
(Only the first duty applies in the case of marriage/civil partnership.) These are the three fundamental elements of the general duty.
3.2 The Specific Equality Duties
The Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) (Scotland) Regulations 2012 came into force on 27th May 2012. These specific duties are designed to help public sector organisations meet the general duty effectively.
The key legal duties are that the Council must;-
x Report on mainstreaming the equality duty, x Publish equality outcomes and report progress, x Assess and review policies and practices, x Gather and use employee information, x Publish gender pay gap information, x Publish statements on equal pay, x Consider award criteria and conditions in relation to public procurement.
4 4. Building on Previous Work
Scottish Borders Council’s approach to mainstreaming Equality and Diversity work is underpinned by our current Equality Scheme 2012 – 2016 and draws upon the approach we had taken previously in our equality schemes (Race Equality Scheme 2008-20011, Disability Equality Scheme 2009-2012 and our previous Gender Equality Scheme 2007-2010).
For a number of years Scottish Borders Council has placed a priority on meeting our equality duties through our work, policies and attitude. The Council looks to continually improve and extend this work through our mainstreaming approach to ensure that not only are we fully compliant with current legislation but that we meet the needs of our diverse community and workforce.
5. The Importance of Mainstreaming Equality Mainstreaming equality simply means integrating equality and diversity into the day-to-day workings of our organisation. We aim to do this by taking equality into account as we exercise our functions and deliver our services.
Mainstreaming equality has a number of benefits including:
x It helps us to ensure that our services are fit for purpose and meet the needs of our community.
x It helps us attract and retain a productive workforce, rich in diverse skills and talents.
x It helps us work toward social inclusion and allows us to support the communities we serve to improve the lives of everyone who lives in the Borders.
x It helps us to continually improve and better perform through growing knowledge and understanding.
6. Scottish Borders Council’s Approach to Mainstreaming
Our approach addresses all the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 and also goes further to encompass, human rights, poverty and social exclusion.
This is in line with our vision and current legislation. The ‘equality strands or protected characteristics’ (as set out in the Equality Act 2010) are:
x Age, x Disability, x Gender, x Marriage and Civil Partnership, x Pregnancy and Maternity, x Race, x Religion or Belief, and
5 x Sexual Orientation.
The reasons we have taken this approach are: x A recognition that inequalities are rarely experienced in isolation, but are often interdependent. x A requirement to focus on the ‘whole picture’ when planning and delivering services. x A determination to treat all service users, clients and staff with dignity and respect. x A commitment to making the most of resources and investment. x A recognition that the principles of human rights apply to equality is an important factor in the production of this scheme and is vital to achieving our aims and objectives which are outlined in our outcome plan.
Addressing things in this way can only make for a better service for everyone, with service users’ and employees’ experiences reflecting the core human rights principles of:
x Fairness x Respect x Equality x Dignity & x Autonomy.
6.1 Leadership
Corporate Commitment
The corporate commitment to mainstreaming equality has been vital in ensuring Scottish Borders Council continues to deliver high standards of services and functions effectively and efficiently. Our Members have responsibility for championing and promoting equality and diversity within the Council and externally.
They engage and listen to the views of our local communities via the committees they sit on, strategic partners and others, to allow them to take a more collective approach to addressing inequalities in the Scottish Borders.
There are also a number of existing arrangements that help deliver the Council’s vision and promote equality and diversity, they are: x Equality Impact Assessments are an integral part of our decision making work x The Corporate Equality and Diversity Group has responsibility for driving the equality and diversity agenda throughout the organisation. x The Chief Executive leads the Council Corporate Management Team (CMT) that has the collective responsibility for ensuring accountability of the whole organisation in delivering our equality duties.
Scottish Borders Council will continue to ensure strong and consistent leadership for equality and diversity. We are committed to ensuring that equality and diversity is embedded within the work of the organisation.
6 6.2 Reporting and Monitoring
Corporate Management Team
This is chaired by the Chief Executive and is comprised of all the Service Directors. This Group provides leadership and takes corporate responsibility for ensuring that the Council not only complies fully with all the equalities legislation, but that equality and diversity is mainstreamed into everything that the Council does. The Group is regularly updated on new policies and initiatives as well as on progress being made.
Corporate Equality and Diversity Group
Our Corporate Equality and Diversity Group is responsible for driving equality and diversity forward on behalf of Scottish Borders Council and to respond to the evolving and changing agenda on a regional and national level. The Group is made up of senior lead officers from each of the service areas. This group works closely with the Equality and Diversity Officer to ensure that equality and diversity is embedded into all service areas.
Reporting
The progress towards our equality outcomes and mainstreaming equality and diversity as well as our employee information will be reported to Council on a bi-annual basis and published on our website starting in April 2013.
You will be able to find it at: http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/info/751/equality_diversity_and_citizenship/99/equality _and_diversity
6.3 Partnership Working - Community Planning
Equality and Diversity is seen as an integral component within our new community planning structure. Our Community Planning Partners include NHS Borders, Lothian & Borders Police Service, Lothian and Borders Fire and Rescue Service, Borders College and the Third Sector.
Equality Leads from across the partners have come together to form a Community Planning Partnership Equality Group. Under the new structure the Equality Group support and scrutinise the work of the Programme Boards within the community planning structure. This will ensure that equalities work is being mainstreamed, progress towards equality outcomes is being made and equalities best practice is being shared across the programme boards. The Group will also raise equality and diversity issues to the programme boards as appropriate.
The Community Planning partners have agreed to share a mutual set of Equality Outcomes. This is in recognition that we share common, issues and aims and that through working together to achieve our outcomes we are more likely to make a greater difference for the communities we serve.
7 6.4 Community Working
Community working is centred on people and communities. Our work enables residents to have a greater stake in the community in which they live. This is about the Council and its partners working together with the community to improve the quality of life for everyone in the Scottish Borders
Through our mainstreaming approach we will continue to support community development and regeneration and works closely with communities, groups and people to address local issues, to promote equality and diversity, to help establish groups and projects that raise awareness of equality and diversity and support local partnership initiatives.
We aim to ensure that the ‘seldom heard’ groups are also supported and presented with opportunities to help Scottish Borders Council to develop and manage its services. We will work with different equality and diversity communities to help identify and meet any specific needs and requirements.
6.5 Policy and Practice
Council Communication and Engagement
Good communication is key to providing high quality, responsive Council services. It is essential to understand the needs of local people, to provide and communicate details of accessible and responsive services, to develop strategies for improving life in the Scottish Borders, and to ensure that we play an effective role in community leadership. Two way communication gives a voice to local people and helps them shape the services delivered in their communities.
Access to Information
Scottish Borders Council recognises that the provision of appropriate information is an important factor in the promotion of equality and diversity. The Council is committed to ensuring that all information it produces is available and accessible to all members of the community.
We acknowledge that some sections of the public may not enjoy equality of opportunity in access to information and we will continue to review our methods of communication to improve this. We seek to raise awareness of services available to residents and to improve communication with a range of diverse communities, including those that we have traditionally found hard to reach.
To make accessing the Council and our services easier for customers, part of the Customer First Programme has been to rationalise the number of service access points that we have.
The Customer Service Advisors at each of the access points and the telephone call centre have had customer service training as well as equality and diversity training. The training requirements of these staff were specifically identified and used in the content of the training.
8 Staff are encouraged to seek feedback from customers and the results of this are held within the Customer Relationships Management system which is then used in the development of our services.
Council news and information is publicised regularly in local and national media through media releases, events and ongoing public relations activities.
The Council also produces a newspaper for Borders residents called SBConnect. There are three editions every year in Spring, Summer and Winter. The newspaper is delivered to every household in the Borders and aims to deliver free, useful information about the Council and its services. An online version of the newspaper is also produced and is available from the SBC website. The newspaper is also available on request in other formats such as CD, braille, large print, various computer formats and in other languages. The Council asks for residents' feedback in every issue of the newspaper.
Interpretation and Translation
The Council has a policy of offering both Interpretation and Translation services to anyone who may require them to access the organisation, our services and information.
To make sure our information is accessible and that we communicate effectively with all our customers, all our documents are available in different formats, for example, Braille, large print, British Sign Language, audio tape or CD, Easy Read on request and in different languages on request.
We also offer that an officer can be made available to explain any parts of our information that may be unclear.
Community Engagement
Scottish Borders Council strives to ensure our community engagement processes are inclusive and promote equal opportunities for all. We base our work around the National Standards for Community Engagement and believe that equality is a fundamental principle of community engagement.
We understand that people may face recognised barriers1 to their participation and have very diverse needs and circumstances. A ‘one size fits all’ approach to engaging equalities groups will not work. It is important for us to think through the different characteristics of the equalities groups and the specific implications for community engagement practice, particularly to include people who share more than one protected characteristic, e.g. young people with a disability, older people who are gay or lesbian.
Considerable efforts are being made to support and engage with equalities groups that relate to the main strands of equality and diversity. These include the Borders Equality Forum, Disability Organisations including the Borders Disability Forum, Scottish Borders LGBT Forum, Elder Voice and Young People’s groups.
Equality Impact Assessment
1 Scottish Executive Good Practice Guidance: Consultation With Equalities Groups
9 An Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) is a tool aimed at improving the quality of public services by ensuring that individuals and teams think carefully about the likely impact of their work on different communities or groups. It involves anticipating the consequences of policies and services on different communities and making sure that any negative consequences are eliminated or minimised and that opportunities for promoting equality are maximised.
The Council has a specific Equality Impact Assessment policy and toolkit which has been updated to meet the requirements of current legislation. All Council departments regularly undertake equality impact assessments on appropriate policies and practices. The findings of our impact assessments are made available to all decision makers in order that we can fulfil our equality duty to take account of the findings of our assessments.
The findings of our impact assessments can be found within the Equality Section of all relevant Council reports. We also publish our impact assessments on our website.
You can find our impact assessments here: http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/info/751/equality_diversity_and_citizenship/1188/equali ty_impact_assessment
6.6 Service Delivery
All Council services are delivered in accordance with the above policies and practices. As many service areas have unique equality and diversity requirements many have their own policy and practices in place to ensure they meet the requirements of our diverse service users.
Service Monitoring
To ensure that the Council is delivering our services fairly and effectively we are working to improve our approach to equality data gathering and monitoring. We have produced a standard set of equality data monitoring questions and have started to introduce them to service areas across the Council.
By gathering data in a standardised way we will be able to monitor, assess and report much more easily this in turn will assist us in our aim of continual improvement and also help us ensure we meet our equality duties.
Services Provided by a Third Party
Where the Council provides public services through a third party, that organisation also has responsibility to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations, were it provides a public function.
The Council support organisations as appropriate to meet the equality duties through sharing our policy and practises. We also build requirements where appropriate into contracts to ensure that we are able to monitor and report on the organisations progress to meeting the Equality Duties.
10 All appropriate proposals to outsource Council functions and services will be subject to a full equality impact assessment.
6.7 Procurement
Scottish Borders Council’s Corporate Procurement Strategy recognises the Councils Corporate Social Responsibility, most notably equalities, ethical procurement, non- discrimination, governance, prompt payment, supporting local small and medium enterprises, sustainability and environmental aspects of goods, services or works we procure.
European Union procurement legislation permits us to ask suppliers questions that have a direct bearing on the goods, services and works being tendered. Where equality and diversity is applicable or relevant to a particular commission being tendered we will ask standard questions. Accordingly, this will include a requirement for procurement professionals to seek evidence to support the suppliers’ own Corporate Social Responsibility strategies to be included in those firms’ Expressions of Interest and Tenders.
6.8 Scottish Borders Council as an Employer
Scottish Borders Council is one of the largest employers within the region. We recognise the vast impact our employment practices can have on promoting equality and diversity. We are committed to valuing and supporting our employees to realise their full potential and creating a diverse workforce that broadly reflects the community in which we operate.
Commitment and Expectations
Our commitment to Members and employees is one of continuous development through training and awareness raising to ensure that we meet our Equality Duties. Our Human Resources policies set out our commitment to fair employment, equal opportunities, learning and development and valuing diversity. We will continue to work hard to ensure we attract, recruit and retain staff from diverse backgrounds. We expect our staff to:
x Provide a high standard of service to local people, and to those they come into contact with. x Respect others regardless of who they are. x Undertake training and self development as identified to help improve our services to users, including equality and diversity training. x Promote equality of opportunity and help build cohesive community relations. x Adhere to all appropriate Council policies, procedures and codes of practice and demonstrate these values in the way they work. x Challenge behaviour or attitudes which are contrary to this policy.
Some departments within the Council have been awarded the Investors in People award and work to the Investors in People framework. The framework focuses on equality of opportunity, the culture of the organisation, recruitment and selection, and how an organisation promotes and values equality and diversity.
11 We have also been awarded the Job Centre Plus two tick symbol for being positive about employing people with disabilities. To be awarded this symbol we must:
x Interview all disabled applicants who meet the minimum criteria for a job vacancy and to consider them on their abilities. x Discuss with disabled employees, at any time but at least once a year, what both parties can do to make sure disabled employees can develop and use their abilities. x Make every effort when employees become disabled to make sure they stay in employment. x Take action to ensure that all employees develop the appropriate level of disability awareness needed to make these commitments work. x Review these commitments each year and assess what has been achieved, plan ways to improve on them and let employees and Jobcentre Plus know about progress and future plans.
Staff Accessibility Forum
Scottish Borders Council recognised that we had very low levels of Staff declaration rates around disability. So in 2011 we set up the staff accessibility forum. The Forum is made up of staff members who have a disability and is supported by officers from appropriate areas across the Council. The role of the Forum is:
x To give the Council expert advice and insight on disability issues. x To promote a culture of disability awareness at Scottish Borders Council. x To provide mutual support for staff with disabilities at Scottish Borders Council. x To share good practice.
With the aim of:
x Increase knowledge and understanding of Disability issues. x Increase employee declaration of disabilities rates. x Increase opportunities for people with disabilities. x Promotion of an inclusive working environment.
The forum reports into the Employee Council and Corporate Equality Group on appropriate issues, progress and work.
Training and Development
The Council recognises the value and importance of training our staff appropriately about Equality and Diversity. We have mainstreamed our provision of equality and diversity training which now includes:
• Recruitment, selection and interviewing training • First line managers programme (for new and existing managers) • E-induction programme (for all new employees) • SVQ management (for line managers)
An Equality and Diversity staff training programme started in spring 2009 which includes: • Engagement sessions for senior managers outlining their responsibilities under current legislation and guidance
12 • Equality impact assessment training • Equality and diversity training for all Council staff
Equality Duties and Employment
Please see page 19 and Appendix 1 for details on our Equal Pay Statement, Occupational Segregation Policy and our employee data.
7. Mainstreaming Equality in Education
In learning settings across Scottish Borders Council Curriculum for Excellence is being implemented. This aims to achieve a transformation in education by providing a coherent, flexible and enriched curriculum for young people from 3-18.
In conjunction with this, the Council and local partners are developing staff understanding of Getting It Right for Every Child (GIRFEC), in particular training will be provided to Education staff in relation to the implementation of the Named Person. The implementation of the Named Person will provide additional support for those children and young people who may require some extra help that can be provided from universal services. The Named Person is about early and effective intervention, good communication and management to ensure that the Named Person, child and family are working together to ensure a timely, appropriate and proportionate response to the worries and concerns being raised in relation to the child.
The principles of GIRFEC builds on the universal services of education and health and it recognises the continuing need for these services to be involved in the support the child or young person receives, no matter the scale of that support.
Through GIRFEC we will ensure that all staff working with children, young people and their families in the Scottish Borders know what to do, when to do it, and who else to get involved. Additionally it will promote appropriate, proportionate and timely action.
Scottish Borders Council is a member of the local Children and Young People’s Planning Partnership (CYPPP). The CYPPP has responsibility for GIRFEC across Scottish Borders and have recently published their 2012-2015 Children and Young People’s Services Plan. This Plan sets out the key priorities for the CYPPP which includes for example: x Promoting Children’s Rights x Keeping Children Safe x Improved attainment and achievement for all our children and young people x Improved health and wellbeing for children and young people x Developing a broader range of opportunities for young people in transition (16+)
The approach supports the achievement of improved outcomes for all children and young people, demonstrated through the priorities outlined within the Children and Young People’s Services Plan.
The Rights Respecting Schools programme is available to both primary and secondary schools in the Scottish Borders. Priorsford Primary Schools in Peebles have achieved this
13 status and are regarded as a local model of best practice. The Rights Respecting Schools Award (RRSA) recognises achievement in putting the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) at the heart of a school’s planning, policies, practice and ethos.
Participation and involvement of young people and pupils is developed through the Involved Strategy of the CYPPP. “Involved” gives clear aims and commitments to involving young people in decision-making on matters that affect their lives. Secondly it promotes the UNCRC and supports Scottish Borders Council and its partners to achieve improved outcomes around participation of service-users. Scottish Borders Council Education and Lifelong Learning lead on behalf of the CYPPP a survey of 2000 secondary school pupils gathering their views and opinions on a range of matters with the results informing planning, policies and service delivery. Scottish Borders Youth Voice provides a youth work opportunity to young people who are interested in developing youth-led campaigns on local or national issues, or who wish to represent their peers or community regionally or nationally.
Scottish Borders Council approved the Respectful Relationships: anti-bullying policy in November 2012. This policy recognises bullying behaviour within the context of equalities and diversity. The policy introduces enhanced and more accurate reporting and recording of prejudiced based bullying. This will lead to better responses by professionals and better outcomes for young people. A more accurate data collection system is currently being developed by Educational Services to improve understanding and target priority needs in all areas.
8. Scottish Borders Council Equality Outcomes
Under the Equality Act in Scotland, Scottish Borders Council has a specific duty to produce a set of equality outcomes which are informed by engagement with different equality groups and stakeholders. Our outcomes are designed to help us achieve our vision and meet our general duty to eliminate discrimination and harassment; promote equality of opportunity and promote good relations.
8.1 What is an Equality Outcome
An equality outcome is a result which we as an authority aim to achieve in order to further one or more of our general equality duties. In other words, an equality outcome should further one or more of the following needs: eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations.
Outcomes are the changes that result for individuals, communities, organisations or society as a consequence of the action we have taken. Outcomes include short-term benefits such as changes in awareness, knowledge, skills and attitudes, and longer-term benefits such as changes in behaviours, decision-making, or social and environmental conditions.
8.2 Our Equality Outcomes
Scottish Borders Council started work to develop our Equality outcomes through evidence gathering and engagement work which began in May 2011 (See Appendix 2 & 3). The result of this work is the following set of equality outcomes which cover all protected characteristic.
14 No. Outcome Lead Council Department/s 1. We are seen as an inclusive and equal opportunities Chief Executive employer where all members of staff feel valued and respected and our workforce reflects our community.
2. Our services meet the needs of and are accessible to Chief Executive all members of our community and our staff treat all service users, clients and colleagues with dignity and respect. 3. Everyone has the opportunity to participate in public Chief Executive life and the democratic process.
4. We work in partnership with other agencies and Chief Executive and stakeholders to ensure that our communities are Environment and cohesive and there are fewer people living in poverty. Infrastructure
5. Our citizens have the freedom to make their own Chief Executive Environment choices and are able to lead independent, healthy and Infrastructure/ Public lives as responsible citizens. Health/ Social Work
6. The difference in rates of employment between the Chief Executive & Education general population and those from under & Lifelong Learning represented groups is improved.
7. The difference in educational attainment between Education & Life Long those who are from an equality group and those Learning who are not is improved.
8. We have appropriate accommodation which meets Chief Executive/ the requirements of our diverse community. Environment and Infrastructure
Education and Life Long Learning will play a contributory role to all of Scottish Borders Council’s Equality Outcomes and will lead on delivering Outcomes 6 and 7 (highlighted in bold)
15 8.3 Aligning Equality Outcomes with Other Work
In order that we mainstream our Equality work Scottish Borders Council will seek to embed our equality outcomes within our draft Corporate Priorities. This move will assist all areas of the Council in fulfilling our equality duties and enable us to demonstrate an explicit commitment to our equality work.
The Council has also paid consideration to the development of our priorities within the Single Outcome Agreement and our Community Planning Partnership (CPP) Structure in order that we seek to collaborate and maximise our efforts in terms of Equality Work.
Our Partner Agencies have agreed to share our equality outcomes within the work of the CPP as we seek to work towards mutual goals in achieving our identified equality outcomes.
The Table below demonstrates how our equality outcomes fit with; the Scottish Governments National Outcomes and our draft Corporate Priorities.
SBC Equality Outcome SG National Outcome/s Draft SBC Corporate Priority 1. We are seen as an inclusive and equal O16: Our public services are high quality, continually P6. Developing Our Workforce opportunities employer where all improving, efficient and responsive to local people’s members of staff feel valued and needs respected and our workforce reflects our community.
2. Our services meet the needs of and O16: Our public services are high quality, continually P6: Developing our workforce are accessible to all members of our improving, efficient and responsive to local people’s community and our staff treat all service needs P7: Developing our assets and resources users, clients and colleagues with dignity and respect. O10: We live in well-designed, sustainable places P8: Ensuring excellent, adaptable, collaborative & accessible where we are able to access the amenities and public services services we need P5: Maintaining and improving our high quality environment
16 3. Everyone has the opportunity to O11: We have strong, resilient and supportive P4.Building the capacity and resilience of our communities participate in public life and the communities where people take responsibility for and voluntary sector democratic process. their own actions and how they affect others.
O13: We take pride in a strong, fair and inclusive national identity.
O7: We have tackled the significant inequalities in Scottish society
4. We work in partnership with other O13: We take pride in a strong, fair and inclusive P8. Ensuring excellent, adaptable, collaborative and agencies and stakeholders to ensure national identity accessible public services. that our communities are cohesive and there are fewer people living in poverty. O11: We have strong, resilient and supportive P4.Building the capacity and resilience of our communities communities where people take responsibility for and voluntary sector their own actions and how they affect others.
O9: We live our lies safe from crime, disorder and danger
O7: We have tackled the significant inequalities in Scottish society
O8: We have improved the life chances for children, young people and families at risk
5. Our citizens have the freedom to O6: We live longer, healthier lives P3: Providing high quality support, care and protection to make their own choices and are able to children, young people, adults, families, and older people. lead independent, healthy lives as O7: We have tackled the significant inequalities in responsible citizens. Scottish society P4: Building the capacity and resilience of our communities
17 and voluntary sector O8: We have improved the life chances for children, young people and families at risk P5: Maintaining and improving our high quality environment
O15: Our people are able to maintain their independence as they get older and are able to access appropriate support when they need it
O11: We have strong, resilient and supportive communities where people take responsibility for their own actions and how they affect others
6. The difference in rates of employment O2: We realise our full economic potential with more 1: Encouraging sustainable economic growth, creating a between the general population and and better employment opportunities for our people strong, varied and innovative business base those from under represented groups is improved. P3: Providing high quality support, care and protection to O7: We have tackled the significant inequalities in children, young people, adults, families, and older people Scottish society
7. The difference in educational O3: We are better educated, more skilled and more P2: Improving attainment and achievement levels for all our attainment between those who are from successful, renowned for our research and innovation children and young people, both within and out with the an equality group and those who are not formal curriculum is improved. O4: Our young people are successful learners, confident individuals, effective contributors and P3: Providing high quality support, care and protection to responsible citizens children, young people, adults, families, and older people
O5: Our children have the best start in life and are ready to succeed
18 O7: We have tackled the significant inequalities in Scottish society
8. We have appropriate accommodation O7: We have tackled the significant inequalities in P5: Maintaining and improving our high quality environment. which meets the requirements of our Scottish society diverse community. O10: We live in well-designed, sustainable places where we are able to access the amenities and services we need
O12: We value and enjoy our built and natural environment and protect it and enhance it for future generations
O15: Our people are able to maintain their independence as they get older and are able to access appropriate support when they need it
19 8.4 Achieving Our Equality Outcomes
Scottish Borders Council recognises that the equality outcomes we have set are long term and it may well take longer than a four year period to achieve them. None the less we are committed and believe that we should make every effort to move towards achieving them. In order that we can measure the progress we are making we have identified a set of indicators (Appendix 4). We will use these indicators to measure the success of the actions we are taking and will use the information within our future mainstreaming reports and within our corporate planning process to help shape and define our work going forward. The Council will publish a review of progress towards our Equality Outcomes and mainstreaming approach in April 2015.
9. Employment Policies
9.1 Equal Pay Statement Scottish Borders Council is committed to equal pay for all its employees including those in education and aims to eliminate any bias in relation to pay systems on grounds of age, disability, race, religion or belief, sexual orientation and /or gender.
As part of this principle all employees should receive equal pay for the same or broadly similar work, for work rated as equivalent, and for work of equal value. Scottish Borders Council will continue to operate a pay and benefits system which is transparent, based on objective criteria, and free from bias in order to comply with legislation.
Scottish Borders Council believes that in eliminating bias in its pay systems, it is sending a positive message to its employees and the Scottish Borders community. It makes good business sense to have fair and transparent reward systems and it also helps the Council to control costs.
Scottish Borders Council will identify and eliminate any unfair, unjust or unlawful practices that impact on pay as well as being committed to taking the appropriate remedial action.
Scottish Borders Council in supporting this commitment to equality in pay will:
x examine existing and future pay practices for all employees to ensure that they comply with best equal pay practice and most current legislation x carry out regular monitoring of the impact of these practices x consult on all changes to pay policy with employees trade union representatives x inform employees of how these practices work and how their pay and benefits are arrived at x provide training and guidance for those involved in making decisions about pay and benefits x Review progress every four years in line with Equality Act Duty and monitor pay statistics extending our equal pay commitment to include disability and race.
20 9.2 Gender Pay Gap
The gender pay gap is the difference between men and women’s full-time hourly earnings. Using guidance and the standard calculation that is set out by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the Council’s equal pay gap was calculated using data as at March 2013.
The Standard Calculation is (a)/(b) x 100 = Total 100 – Total = (c) (a)/(b) = (c)
Where; (a) Average Hourly Rate for Women (b) Average Hourly Rate Men (c) Pay Gap
The average basic hourly pay (excluding overtime) between male and female employees has been calculated and further details have been outlined below:
x The average hourly rate for women is £13.46 (a) x The average hourly rate for men is £14.51 (b) x The difference in hourly pay is £1.05 x This mean that on average women earn 7.24% (c) less than men
The Council also reviewed pay for men and women in Education & Lifelong Learning Department.
Further details have been outline below: x The average hourly rate for females is £16.77 (a) x The average hourly rate for males is £18.47 (b) x The difference in hourly pay is £1.70 x This means that on average women in Education earn 9.22% (c) less than men.
The reasons for this difference include: x Substantially more females than males working part time in our Education & Lifelong Learning Department x There are more female probationary teachers than male probationary teachers. The salary for these new entrants is lower than that for experienced teachers. x The General Teaching Council Scotland states that 76.92% of teachers and associated professionals are female and 23.08% are male (General Teaching Council Scotland Statistical Digest Spring 2011), these statistics are reflective of our Council.
Whilst we believe our gender pay gap is related to the high number of female employees in lower pay grades, our gender pay gap is better than Scotland’s pay gap of 13.9% (Close the Gap, Working Paper 9, 2012).
21 It can be argued that there are three main causes of the pay gap between men and women: x Occupational segregation. x A lack of flexible working opportunities. x Discrimination in pay and grading structures.
The Council’s job evaluation scheme provides a robust means of achieving a fair and transparent grading structure which is free from gender-bias and which satisfies the principles of equal pay for work of equal value. The Council believes we offer and provide flexible working practices to employees at all levels, and that we advertise our vacancies in a way that attracts the best person for the job, regardless of gender.
It is anticipated that going forward the Council will be able to compare our pay gap with other public bodies in an effort to work towards addressing the gap through focusing on occupational segregation by assessing the different impacts on women and men of employment policy and practice.
9.3 Occupational Segregation
The Council recognises that occupational segregation is one of the key barriers which prevents women and men from fulfilling their potential, and consequently contributes to the pay gap. The Council recognises that by proactively addressing gender equality issues there is the potential to drive excellence in service delivery through more productive, loyal, motivated and innovated employees who appreciate the needs of service users.
There are a number of factors which influence and affect occupational segregation, including the career choices made by individuals where people will typically prefer those occupations in which they see their own gender represented. Working towards Equality Outcome 1 where the Council want to be seen as an inclusive and equal opportunities employer we will focus on encouraging and improving access to training courses and apprenticeships which could help achieve support the Council in breaking down areas of occupational segregation given the overall gender split in the Council is 70% female, 30% male. A review of the information in the table below shows that;
x More females than males are in the lower grades. In Grades 1-5, 74% of employees are women. x More females than males are in the supervisory and technical grades, 64% of grades 6-10 are female. x More females than males are in senior management grades with over 68% of grades 11, 12 and Chief Officers are female. x The Council has significantly more teachers that are female than male teachers. 77% of our teachers are female. x Over 85% of newly qualified teachers to join the Council since August 2012 (probationary teachers) were female.
The challenge for the Council is therefore to address the inherent issues relating to horizontal segregation in services areas where they are currently dominated by male or female employees. There are further details of the Council’s data on occupational segregation outlined below;
22 Scottish Borders Council Occupational Segregation by Gender as at March 2013
Department/Grade Chief Executives Education and Lifelong Environment & Social Work Learning Infrastructure
Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male 1 258 63 115 9 3 3 27 6 2 14 3 5 15 52 125 13 13 3 10 7 22 48 96 4 1
4 96 13 239 27 44 127 796 47 5 80 13 56 9 3 57 148 15 6 43 11 141 30 25 48 39 12 7 63 32 33 3 10 40 111 24 8 58 31 30 5 24 59 43 17 9 30 33 26 12 21 37 134 40 10 10 11 10 2 8 23 26 22 11 4 16 3 2 17 5 2 12 3 2 3 4 7 3 Chief Officers 7 6 2 1 5 2 2 Teachers 933 296 122 10 Total 676 241 1615 464 192 644 1473 211
23 Appendix 1 – Employment Data As a Council and public sector employer, we have a statutory duty to publish employment monitoring statistics by age, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief and sexual orientation. However in line with the Council’s vision and values, the aim is that continued analysis of monitoring information will support the work we are taking to progress our equality duties.
Information Sources
We have been able to draw on two key sources for gathering up to date equality information for monitoring purposes,
i) Information held on our HR system, Resource link . ii) An equality monitoring exercise where a questionnaire was issued to all Council employees including Education and Lifelong Learning employees in January 2013.
All questions asked in the monitoring exercise were based on good practice guidance from Equality and Human Rights Commission and Scottish Government. The monitoring exercise was issued to employees across all council services including those in Education and Lifelong Learning Department (ELL), with a total employee population of approximately 5516 which includes 2079 for ELL. The survey received a response rate of just over 46% and it is those responses that the narratives below comment on with total employee population shown in each of the data tables.
It was acknowledged that through this monitoring exercise, up to date information of the Council’s employee’s population was gathered in all of the protected characteristics with specific increases in disclosure around the following protected characteristics;
x Religion or Belief. x Caring Responsibility. x Sexual Orientation. x Disability.
This information was added to that already held on Resource Link. It was acknowledged that more data is held on gender and age than on other strands. Going forward, following increased capability being put in place for accessing and updating Resource Link through self service, more employees will have access to update their personal information including equality monitoring details and this will support this information being accurate and allow for continued analysis. Employees will be encouraged to do this at various stages of employment with the Council and of course to update their information at any time where their details or personal circumstances change, particularly in relation to the protected characteristics e.g. disability, pregnancy & maternity, caring responsibilities.
24 Employees in post by Age Information on age profile was gathered through the monitoring exercise to confirm that the data held on file from the time of appointment was indeed accurate. The Council will continue to gather this information from date of appointment for all staff and there is not considered to be any requirement to change this method. The age demographic within the Council has not changed in a number of years, with the highest percentage of employees being between 26 and 49 as well as over 50 in both full Council and Education and Lifelong learning. Further details are shown for the full Council as well as a breakdown for Education and Lifelong learning in Table 1.1.
Employees in post by Disability Referring to the definition in the Equality Act 2010, 5% of respondents to our Monitoring Questionnaire considered themselves to have a disability (proportionality just under 2.5% of the full Council including Education and Lifelong Learning), whilst just under 95% did not. Further details and a breakdown of Education and Lifelong Learning are shown in Table 1.2.
We are encouraged at the increase of employees who consider themselves to have a disability as previously this was just 1.13% of the full Council. Employees will continue to be encouraged to update their disability status during employment through Resource Link. This positive example of employees declaring that they have a disability is representative that reasonable adjustments have been implemented, which have resulted in improved performance, job satisfaction and attendance at work. We also have had a staff accessibility forum in place since 2011 as a ways and means of improving policy and practice.
The re launch of the Ways to Work programme starting in April 2013, specifically supporting adults with a disability into work will enable the Council to increase these opportunities and promote the practice of social inclusive as well as working with managers and employees to be more aware of the needs of colleagues with disabilities.
Disability by Type We asked employees to identify the type of disability they have. The majority of those that considered themselves to have a disability responded to this supplementary question. The largest percentages highlighted were those with a physical impairment, a mental health condition and a longstanding illness or other health condition. A small percentage of respondents did not answer and further details as well as a breakdown of Education and Lifelong Learning department are available in Table 1.3.
Alongside improving on the percentage of employees disclosing themselves to have a disability, they will also be encouraged to update their personal information around the type of disability they have during their employment with us so that we can work with them and our occupational health providers to put reasonable adjustments in place to support continued and valued employment with the Council.
Employees in Post by Ethnicity The majority of our employees identify themselves as White Scottish or White British, with less than 1% of full council preferring not to reply to this question. The Council will continue to gather this information from date of appointment for all staff and there is not considered to be any requirement to change this method. There is a further breakdown as well as information specifically relating to our Education and Lifelong Learning department available in Table 1.4
25 Religion or Belief Protestant was the single largest religion amongst respondents (36%). The second largest category was respondents who identified themselves as having no religion or belief (35%). Less than 10% of respondents identified themselves as being Catholic or Other Christian with even smaller percentages of identifying with other religions or beliefs such as Hinduism, Judaism, Muslim or Buddhism. Whilst this information has been collected at applicant stage, this was the first time data has been requested amongst current employees. A further breakdown and summary by full Council and Education and Lifelong Learning department is available in Table 1.5
Employees in post by Gender Information on gender was gathered through the monitoring exercise to confirm that data held on resource link from the date of appointment was indeed accurate. The Council will continue to gather this information from date of appointment and there is not considered to be any requirement to change this method. The gender split remains largely unchanged to previous years with a significantly higher proportion of women working for the Council than men 70% female and 30% male. This is the first time the Council has included transgender when asking employees about their gender status. We are pleased that we had a positive response with employees disclosing information in relation to this. We aim to support all employees to feel comfortable to disclose this information in the future.
Further details on gender can be seen for both full Council as well as Education and Lifelong Learning department in Table 1.6.
Sexual Orientation From the monitoring responses the overwhelming majority of Council employees have identified as Heterosexual (94%), with less than 2% identifying themselves as Bisexual and Lesbian/Gay. A small percentage of respondents (5%) have preferred not to say.
The small percentage of employees who do not identify themselves as heterosexual is not representative of the community we operate in. As a Council we need to look at ways of providing a safe and supportive working environment through our policies and practices to encourage employees to be comfortable in identifying their sexuality both at home and in the workplace. Information relating to Education and Lifelong Learning department and full Council is available in Table 1.7.
Pregnancy and Maternity The Public Sector Equality duty extended the positive duty on public bodies to promote equality, bringing issues related to pregnancy and maternity into that duty for the first time.
Using existing information around maternity and pregnancy from May 2011 until March 2013 we are able to monitor the number of women who have returned to work following a period of maternity leave. During this time over 60% of women working for Scottish Borders Council returned to work following a period of maternity leave with less than 2% choosing not to return to work. A further breakdown is available in Table 1.8
The high return rate is a positive sign that for those employees who are pregnant, on maternity leave or breast feeding, they are encouraged alongside their line managers to ensure the appropriate risk assessments are completed; they have the right to reasonable time off, with pay, for antenatal care and appointments. During maternity leave they are
26 also encouraged to take part in ‘Keeping in Touch days’ as well as line managers agreeing ways and means of keeping them up to date with any changes in their workplace or role.
In order that we can assess what additional support, policies or awareness raising may be necessary we recognise the need to survey women in relation to pregnancy and maternity to understand what further work the Council can do to sustain these high return rates as well as continuing to improve the working environment/arrangements for women going on or returning from maternity leave. Going forward we can examine these responses in order to inform development in policy and practice within our Council and in relation to this area.
Employees in post with Caring Responsibility Fewer than 19% of respondents to the monitoring questionnaire consider themselves to have caring responsibilities with the majority of respondents, 81% declaring that they do not view themselves as carers. There is a similar response in Education and Lifelong Learning department. A full and further breakdown is available in Table 1.9
Whilst we provide a range of flexible working practices, including part-time working, job sharing and term-time working and that this is available to employees at all levels across the Council, including education we do not believe the responses are reflective of the community in which our employees live and work in as well as the number of women we employ. Both local and national research shows that in the majority of cases it is women that have the responsibility for caring for young children and/or elderly relatives.
Going forward we believe it would be advantageous to provide further definition and examples so that information we are able to gather is accurate and therefore fully informs policy and practice to support those with caring responsibilities build and maintain a work life balance.
Marital Status Information on marital status tells us that over 60% of respondents to our monitoring questionnaire are married (61%) and 12% have classified themselves as partnered or single with similar responses in Education and Lifelong Learning department. A full and further breakdown is available in Table 1.10
Table 1.1 Employees in Post by Age
Full Council Age Profile Responses Percentage Under 25 229 4.15% 26-49 3027 54.88% Over 50 2260 40.97% Total Employee Population 5516 100%
Education and Lifelong Learning Age Profile Responses Percentage Under 25 79 3.80% 26-49 1200 57.72% Over 50 800 38.48% ELL Total Population 2079 100.00%
27 Table 1.2 Employees in Post by Disability
Monitoring Results Disability Percentage No 94.95% Yes 5.05% Total Responses 100.00%
Education and Lifelong Learning Disability Percentage No 47.96% Yes 2.12% Total ELL Responses 100.00%
Full Council Disability Percentage No 45.34% No Response 52.25% Yes 2.41% Total Employee Population 100.00%
Table 1.3 Employees in Post by Disability Type
Monitoring Results Disability Type Percentage Learning Disability 12.78% Longstanding illness or other health condition 21.05% Mental Health condition 21.05% Not answered 3.76% Other 0.75% Physical Impairment 24.06% Sensory Impairment 16.54% Grand Total 100.00%
Education and Lifelong Learning Disability Type Percentage Learning Disability 9.09% Longstanding illness or health condition 25.00% Mental Health condition 22.73% Not Answered 2.27% Physical Impairment 20.45% Sensory Impairment 20.45% Total ELL Responses 100.00%
Full Council Disability Type Percentage Learning Disability 0.31% Longstanding illness or health condition 0.51% Mental Health condition 0.51% No Response 97.59%
28 Not answered 0.09% Other 0.02% Physical Impairment 0.58% Sensory Impairment 0.40% Total Employee Population 100.00%
Table 1.4 Employee in post by Ethnicity
Monitoring Results Ethnic Group Percentage African, Caribbean or Black 0.08% Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British 0.19% Mixed or Multiple Ethnic Group 0.42% Northern Irish 0.04% Prefer not to say 1.18% White British 27.40% White English 3.71% White Gypsy/Traveller 0.11% White Irish 0.61% White Northern Irish 0.46% White Other 1.45% White Polish 0.31% White Scottish 63.62% White Welsh 0.42% Total 100.00%
Education and Lifelong Learning Ethnic Group Percentage Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British 0.05% Mixed or Multiple Ethnic Group 0.24% No Response 49.88% Prefer not to say 0.87% White British 15.58% White English 1.44% White Irish 0.34% White Northern Irish 0.29% White Other 0.72% White Polish 0.05% White Scottish 30.40% White Welsh 0.14% Total ELL Population 100.00%
Full Council Ethnic Group Percentage African, Caribbean or Black 0.04% Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British 0.09% Mixed or Multiple Ethnic Group 0.20% No Response 52.56% Northern Irish 0.02%
29 Prefer not to say 0.56% White British 13.00% White English 1.76% White Gypsy/Traveller 0.05% White Irish 0.29% White Northern Irish 0.22% White Other 0.69% White Polish 0.15% White Scottish 30.18% White Welsh 0.20% Total Employee Population 100.00%
Table 1.5 Employee in post by Religion or Belief
Monitoring Results Religion or Belief Percentage Agnostic 2.82% Atheist 6.47% Buddhist 0.42% Catholic 6.55% Hindu 0.04% Jewish 0.11% Muslim 0.08% No religious group 35.52% Other Christian 5.94% Prefer not to say 4.53% Protestant 36.32% Other Religion or Belief 1.22% Total Employee Population 100.00%
Education and Lifelong Learning Religion or Belief Percentage Agnostic 1.30% Atheist 3.13% Buddhist 0.24% Catholic 3.66% Jewish 0.05% No religious group 16.35% No Response 49.78% Other Christian 3.08% Other Religion or Belief 0.58% Prefer not to say 2.45% Protestant 19.38% Total ELL Population 100.00%
Full Council Religion or Belief Percentage Agnostic 1.34% Atheist 3.08%
30 Buddhist 0.20% Catholic 3.12% Hindu 0.02% Jewish 0.05% Muslim 0.04% No religious group 16.91% No Response 52.37% Other Christian 2.83% Prefer not to say 2.16% Protestant 17.30% Other Religion or Belief 0.58% Total Employee Population 100.00%
Table 1.6 Employees in Post by Gender
Full Council Gender Responses Percentage Female 3956 71.72% Male 1560 28.28% Total Employee Population 5516 100.00%
Education and Lifelong Learning Gender Responses Percentage F 1615 77.68% M 464 22.32% Total ELL Population 2079 100.00%
Table 1.7 Employees in post by Sexual Orientation
Monitoring Results Sexual Orientation Percentage Bisexual 0.81% Heterosexual 93.71% Lesbian/Gay 0.85% Prefer not to say 4.63% Total Employee Population 100.00%
Education and Lifelong Learning Sexual Orientation Percentage Bisexual 0.19% Heterosexual 46.85% Lesbian/Gay 0.38% No Response 50.17% Prefer not to say 2.41% Total ELL Population 100.00%
Full Council Sexual Orientation Percentage Bisexual 0.38%
31 Heterosexual 44.04% Lesbian/Gay 0.40% No Response 53.01% Prefer not to say 2.18% Total Employee Population 100.00%
Table 1.8 Pregnancy & Maternity
Monitoring Results Pregnancy & Maternity Percentage Returned following maternity leave 62.57% Did not return 1.60% Expected to return 35.83% Total Employee Population 100.00%
Table 1.9 Employee in post with Caring Responsibility
Monitoring Results Caring Responsibility Percentage No 81.00% Yes 19.00% Total 100.00%
Education and Lifelong Learning Caring Responsibility Percentage No 42.42% No Response 50.26% Yes 7.31% Total ELL Population 100.00%
Full Council Caring Responsibility Percentage No 38.34% No Response 52.66% Yes 8.99% Total 100.00%
Table 1.10 Marital Status
Monitoring Results Marital Status Percentage Civilly Partnered 0.98% Divorced 10.16% Married 61.87% Partnered 12.61% Prefer not to say 1.99% Single 11.37% Widowed 1.02%
32 Total Employee Population 100.00%
Education and Lifelong Learning Marital Status Percentage Civilly Partnered 0.14% Divorced 4.91% Married 33.24% No Response 49.45% Partnered 5.05% Prefer not to say 0.96% Single 5.77% Widowed 0.48% Total ELL Population 100.00%
Full Council Marital Status Percentage Civilly Partnered 0.47% Divorced 4.89% Married 29.80% No Response 51.83% Partnered 6.07% Prefer not to say 0.96% Single 5.47% Widowed 0.49% Total Employee Population 100.00%
33 Appendix 2
Scottish Borders Council’s Equality Data Profile
July/August 2012 - Update
You can get this document on tape, in large print, on disc and in various other formats. We can also provide information on language translations and on how to get more copies. To arrange for an officer to meet with you to explain any parts of this document that may be unclear, please contact us as follows:
Equality and Diversity Service Chief Executive’s Department Scottish Borders Council Head Quarters Newtown St Boswells Melrose, TD6 0SA Tel: 01835 824 000
Content
Age 3 ...... Older people 5 …………Younger people 6 Disability 7 Gender 12 …………Income, Wealth and the Labour Market 12 …………Benefit Claimants 16 …………Health 19 …………Education and Training 20 …………Crime and Justice 23 …………Gender Based Violence 23 Gender Reassignment 24 Pregnancy and Maternity 24 Marriage and Civil Partnership 27 Race and Ethnicity 27 ………….Gypsies/Travellers 32 …………..Hate Crime 32 Religious Belief 33 Sexual Orientation 33 Poverty and Social Exclusion 35 Workforce Demographics 38 ………….Age 38 ………….Disability 39 ………….Gender 40 ………….Race 41 ………….Sexual Orientation 42
2 Scottish Borders Community
The Scottish Borders is located in the south east of Scotland covering an area of 1,827 square miles. It has an estimated population of 113,1501 people and is essentially rural in character. The rural character is illustrated by the population density; 24 persons per sq km compared to 67 for Scotland. The largest towns are Galashiels and Hawick, both have populations of more than 10,000 people.
As is the case in many other rural areas, diversity in the Scottish Borders is not as immediately apparent as it is in larger towns and cities. In this respect, the ‘hidden’ nature of diversity in the Borders can make it difficult to evaluate variations in the needs that we cater for. This section sets out the information available to us relating to each of the strands identified in the introduction. We will continue to improve our evidence base throughout the life of this Equality Scheme so that we can continue to refine our expertise in planning, allocating and delivering services and functions appropriately and fairly.
Age
Age Profile of the Scottish Borders: 2011 Mid Year Estimates
30,000 25,874 25,000 21,678 19,790 18,395 20,000 17,052
15,000 10,361 10,000
5,000
0 Under 15 15 to 29 30 to 44 45 to 59 60 to 74 75+ Age Group Source: NRS
1 NRS – 2011 Mid Year Estimates
3 Age Profile of the Scottish Borders: 2011 Mid Year Estimates
75+ , 10,361, 9% Under 15, 18,395, 16%
60 to 74, 21,678, 19% 15 to 29, 17,052, 15%
45 to 59, 25,874, 24% 30 to 44, 19,790, 17% Source: NRS
Projected population (2010-based) for 2010 and 2035 by broad age group for the Scottish Borders
35,000
2010 2035 30,000 4 4 5 , 3 9
25,000 7 2 6 7 , 9 6 9 , 2 4 8
20,000 2 1 5 5 0 6 4 3 , 8 5 3 3 , 1 8 , 0 , 0 2 4 0 6 9 2 , 9 15,000 2 1 0 8 0 , 7 1 7 5 , 1 3 5 3 1
10,000 6 , 7 2 4 1 2 , 0
5,000 1
0 0-15 (7.9%) 16-29 (9.8%) 30-49 (-9.4%) 50-64 (-17.7%) 65-74 (47.3%) 75+ (98.4%)
The percentage in brackets following the age group is the projected change between 2010 and 2035.
4 Life Expectancy at Birth for Males and Females Comparing Scottish Borders to Scotland 1999 to 2010
81.2 81.2 82.0 80.7 80.8 80.3 80.5 80.1 79.8 79.8 80.0 80.0 77.5 78.0 77.1 77.1 76.5 76.6 75.8 75.7 75.4 75.4 76.0 75.2
74.0
72.0
70.0
68.0 1999-2001 2000-2002 2001-2003 2002-2004 2003-2005 2004-2006 2005-2007 2006-2008 2007-2009 2008-2010
Source: Scottish Borders Male Scottish Borders Female Scotland Male Scotland Female SNS/NRS
The Scottish Borders population is expected to grow by 10.6% between 2010 and 20352. This growth affects the age spectrum of our population and will prove uniquely challenging to the way we plan and deliver services and resources. It is predicted that: x There will be an increase in people aged 75+ between 2010 and 2035 of 98.4%, greater than that expected for Scotland (81.9%). x The number of people aged 0 -15 will increase by 7.9%, greater than the Scottish figure of a 3.2% increase. x The number of people working age within the Scottish Borders is expected to increase by 2.5% between 2010 and 2035, lower than the 7.1% for Scotland. x Both men and women in the Scottish Borders have a higher life expectancy than men and women in Scotland.
Older People Older people make up a significant number within the population of the Scottish Borders. In 2010 there were an estimated 22,880 people aged over 65, or 20.3% of the Scottish Borders population. By 2020 the number of people aged 65+ is expected to increase to 29,116 or 24.5%. Then by 2035 the number is expected to be 38,938 or 31.2% of the population.
2006 2011 2016 2021 Borders predicted number of 1538 1764 2044 2419 individuals with dementia Borders predicted % growth from 15% 33% 57% 2006 baseline Scotland % growth 9% 21% 38%
Source: NHS Borders
It is predicted that the number of older people with dementia in the Scottish Borders will increase by 57% (1,538 to 2,419) between 2006 and 2012, greater than the 38% predicted for Scotland.
2 NRS – 2010 based population projections 5 Scottish Household Survey - Proportion of Households By Type (Older Smaller and Single Pensioner): Scottish Borders vs. Scotland
25 22 20 20 18 17 17 16 16 16 16 15 15 15 14
10
5
0 Scottish Borders Scotland Scottish Borders Scotland
Older Smaller Single Pensioner
2005-2006 2007-2008 2009-2010 According to the Scottish Household Survey in 2009-2010, single pensioner household account for 17% of all households in the Scottish Borders.
The 2009-2010 Scottish Household Survey reports that 51% of those aged 70 or over have a long- standing limiting illness, health problem or disability which affects their ability to do day to day activities.
Younger People Young people in the Borders make up over 16% of the population within the Scottish Borders.
6 Number of Children Referred to the Children's Reporter in the Scottish Borders
1000 899 Source: SCRA 900 863 811 800
700 611 596 602 600 554
500 435 400
300 211 200
100
0 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12
In 2011/12 211 children were referred to the Children’s Reporter 51.5% fewer than in 2010/113.
In 2009/2010, 88.3% of the school leavers in the Scottish Borders went to a positive destination (e.g. education, training or employment), slightly higher than the Scottish level of 86.8%. The proportion going to positive destinations was lower for both Scottish Borders (80%) and Scotland (59%) for those children who were looked after4.
Percentage attendance for 2009/10
Children Looked All Pupils After Scottish Borders 94.2% 92.1% Scotland 93.2% 87.8%
The attendance rate for children looked after (92.1%) in the Scottish Borders was just under that for all pupils (94.2%) in the Scottish Borders but higher than the level for all looked after children in Scotland (87.8%)5.
Disability
There are many people in the Scottish Borders living with a disability. According to the Scottish Government, nearly one in five people of working age in Scotland are disabled. This means that approximately 12,360 people of working age in the Scottish Borders were disabled in 2009. Currently there is limited information on the total number of people with disabilities.
However, there were 13,205 claims in Scottish Borders in November 2011 for health related benefits such as Disability Living Allowance, Attendance Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance, and Incapacity Benefit, and Severe Disablement Allowance. In 2009, 9.4% of the population were prescribed drugs for mental health conditions6. In 2010 26% of respondents to Scottish Borders Council’s Household survey describe themselves as having a long-term illness or disability. These figures can only act as an indication of the numbers as we know many people
3 Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration (www.scra.gov.uk) 7 4 Scottish Government 5 Scottish Government 6 ScotPHo who have a disability may not claim benefits or receive a prescription and the household survey takes a sample of the population and so does not represent everybody.
Number of Claimants of Health Related Benefits (Nov 2011) 6000 5690
5000
4000 3170 2905 3000
2000 1440
1000
0 Attendance Allowance Employment and Support Incapacity Benefit, and Disability Living Allowance (AA) Allowance (ESA) Severe Disablement (DLA) Allowance (IBSDA) Source: SNS
The table and map below demonstrate the distribution of health related benefit claimants within the Scottish Borders November 2011.
The eSAY Statitics 7 for 2011 show that there are 594 people with learning disabilities recorded as living in the Scottish Borders. This is a rate of 6.4 adults know per 1000 population slightly higher than the 6.0 rate for Scotland.
We also know that the Scottish Borders has an above average employment rate for disabled work age people, a rate which is improving, although there is still a significant gap compared with all working age people. In 2008 64% of disabled working age people in the Scottish Borders were in employment*. *Ref: The Annual Population Survey 2008
8
7 eSAY 2011 - http://www.scld.org.uk/sites/default/files/annex_b_2011.pdf November 2011 - Health Related Claimants in the Scottish Borders by Area Committee and Ward % Claiming % Claiming Best Fit Area IBSD AA+ESA+ AA+ESA+IB Best Fit SBC Ward DLA AA ESA 2010 Pop AA+ESA+IB AA+ESA+IBSDA Committee A IBSDA SDA+DLA SDA +DLA East Berwickshire 630 320 155 290 765 1,395 10,509 7.3% 13.3% Berwickshire Mid Berwickshire 500 295 130 250 675 1,175 10,537 6.4% 11.2% Berwickshire Total 1,130 615 285 540 1,440 2,570 21,046 6.8% 12.2% Jedburgh and Cheviot District 380 210 90 185 485 865 8,229 5.9% 10.5% Kelso and District 410 295 105 235 635 1,045 10,384 6.1% 10.1% Cheviot Total 790 505 195 420 1,120 1,910 18,613 6.0% 10.3% Galashiels and District 830 385 245 455 1,085 1,915 14,009 7.7% 13.7% Eildon Leaderdale and Melrose 480 260 110 220 590 1,070 10,574 5.6% 10.1% Selkirkshire 485 250 130 250 630 1,115 10,229 6.2% 10.9% Eildon Total 1,795 895 485 925 2,305 4,100 34,812 6.6% 11.8% Hawick and Denholm 595 250 150 320 720 1,315 8,535 8.4% 15.4% Teviot & Liddesdale Hawick and Hermitage 565 405 145 325 875 1,440 9,845 8.9% 14.6% Teviot & Liddesdale Total 1,160 655 295 645 1,595 2,755 18,380 8.7% 15.0% Tweeddale East 425 235 80 180 495 920 10,296 4.8% 8.9% Tweeddale Tweeddale West 390 265 100 195 560 950 9,723 5.8% 9.8% Tweeddale Total 815 500 180 375 1,055 1,870 20,019 5.3% 9.3% Grand Total 5,690 3,170 1,440 2,905 7,515 13,205 112,870 6.7% 11.7% Source: SNS Note: A person may claim more than 1 benefit.
9 10 11 Gender
The gender distribution in the Scottish Borders is consistent with the national gender distribution. The National Records of Scotland (NRS) 2011 mid year estimate showed that 51% of the population were female and 49% were male. The following table breaks down the gender profile by age.
Age Profile of the Scottish Borders: 2011 Mid Year Estimates
14,000 9
12,000 6 2 , 3 7 1 10,000 9 9 1 , 2 1 2 0 , 1 2 0 8,000 3 0 1 5 4 , 0 4 9 , 6 1 , 8
6,000 8 2 1 5 7 4 1 9 6 , 7 6 0 5 0 3 0 , , , 6 1 , 9 9
4,000 6 8 4 9 2
2,000 , 4 0 Under 15 15 to 29 30 to 44 45 to 59 60 to 74 75+ Age Group Male Female Source: NRS
Income, Wealth and the Labour Market
Statistical evidence of gender difference in access to income from earnings, assets, savings and benefits indicate that women’s income from earnings and other sources are persistently lower than men’s income, and that women are more vulnerable to poverty and that specific groups of women are particularly vulnerable. The following tables demonstrate the Gender Pay gap in the Scottish Borders compared to Scotland. In the Scottish Borders, like Scotland, there remains a persistent pay gap between the earnings of women compared to men.
Gender Pay Gap (3-yr avg): The % Difference Between the Earnings of Men and Women in the Scottish Borders Compared to Scotland
12.0 10.9 11.1 10.6 9.5 9.3 10.0 8.0 8.2 7.2 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 2007 2008 2009 2010
Source: SNS Scottish Borders Scotland
12 The following chart demonstrates the income difference between men and women in 2011 show both residence based and workplace based earnings comparing the Scottish Borders to Scotland. Earnings in the Scottish Borders for both residence based and workplace based are below the Scottish level, £38.70 and £91.10 respectively for all full-time employees.
Median Gross Weekly Earnings for Full-Time Employees (2011) - Scottish Borders Compared to Scotland 0 8 . 0
£550.00 1 9 . 8 0 1 4 0 0 . 0 5 £ £500.00 0 8 3 5 4 7 . 0 . . 0 0 2 £ 9 8 7 7 6 . 0 8 4 . 1 . 1
£450.00 9 0 4 £ 0 5 . 8 5 3 8 0 0 9 £ 8 8 £ £ 3 4 8 4 5 4 . . £400.00 £ £ 3 £ 1 0 £ 4 4 4 £350.00 4 £ £ £300.00 All Male Female All Male Female
Residence Based Workplace based
Source: SNS Scottish Borders Scotland
The following chart shows the 2011 employment rate for both men and women, comparing Scottish Borders to Scotland. It shows that the Scottish Borders has a higher employment rate than the Scottish Average, particularly for women.
Employment Rate (Aged 16-64) 2011: Scottish Borders Compared to Scotland
75.3 76.0 75.0 74.0 73.1 71.3 72.0 71.2 70.0 67.5 68.0 66.0 64.0 62.0 All Female Male
Source: SNS Scottish Borders Scottish Average
13 There is a significant difference in the employment rate for those aged 16 to 24 compared to the other age groups. This can be seen in the graph below.
Employment Rate for 2011 by Age Group and Gender - Comparing Scottish Borders to Scotland
100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 l l l l l l l l l l e e e e e e e e e e l l l l l l l l l l A A A A A a a a a a a a a a a M M M M M m m m m m e e e e e F F F F F Aged 16-24 Aged 25-34 Aged 35-49 Aged 50-64 Aged 65+
Source: SNS Scottish Borders Scotland
The following chart shows the gender profile of benefit claimants within the Borders during 2011.
Gender Profile of Benefit Claimants in the Scottish Border (2011)
16610 State Pension 10690
3550 Pension Credit 2110
4730 Council Tax Benefit 2620
3840 Housing Benefit 2490
Incapacity Benefit & Severe 1280 Disabilty Allowance 1600
580 Job Seekers Allowance Female 1420
2080 Male Attendance Allowance 1110
Employment and Support 650 Allowance 820
1270 Source: SNS Income Support 790
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000
14 Between 2008 and 2012 the number of people claiming JSA has increased by 97.7% in the Scottish Borders, a proportionally greater increase than Scotland (77.2%). The number of women claiming JSA in the Scottish Borders increased by 123.4%, greater than men and the Scottish levels. Was 3 time more men than women now 2 times
Scottish Borders Scotland Male Female Total Male Female Total JSA Claimants August 2008 745 320 1,065 60,305 21,900 82,205 JSA Claimants August 2012 1,390 715 2,105 97,960 47,705 145,665 Change (2012-2008) 645 395 1,040 37,655 25,805 63,460 % Change Over time 86.6% 123.4% 97.7% 62.4% 117.8% 77.2%
Source: Nomis
Between 2008 and 2012
Duration Claiming JSA in the Scottish Borders: Male vs. Female 2008 compared to 2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60% 50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% In 2008 In 2012 In 2008 In 2012 Male Claimants Female Claimants 2 Years + 2.0% 9.0% 0.0% 4.2% 1 Year to Under 2 Years 5.4% 20.5% 1.6% 14.7% 6 Months to Under 1 Year 14.1% 19.4% 12.5% 17.5% Under 6 Months 78.5% 51.1% 85.9% 63.6%
15 Benefit Claimants in the Scottish Borders The tables below show the “On Flow”, the work sectors males and females had previously worked in before signing on to Jobseekers Allowance for the years 2008 to 2012. The next set of tables demonstrates the “Off Flow”, the reasons why males and females signed of Jobseekers Allowance during the same period.
"On-Flow" by "Usual Occupation" for Males Claiming JSA 2008-2012
150
125
100
75
50
25
0 0 : Occupation 1 : Managers 2 : Professional 3 : Associate 4 : 5 : Skilled 6 : Personal 7 : Sales and 8 : Process, 9 : Elementary unknown and Senior Occupations Professional Administrative Trades Service Customer Plant and Occupations Officials and Technical and Secretarial Occupations Occupations Service Machine Occupations Occupations occupations Operatives
Source: Nomis August 2008 August 2009 August 2010 August 2011 August 2012
"On-Flow" by "Usual Occupation" for Females Claiming JSA 2008-2012
150
125
100
75
50
25
0 0 : Occupation 1 : Managers 2 : Professional 3 : Associate 4 : 5 : Skilled 6 : Personal 7 : Sales and 8 : Process, 9 : Elementary unknown and Senior Occupations Professional Administrative Trades Service Customer Plant and Occupations Officials and Technical and Secretarial Occupations Occupations Service Machine Occupations Occupations occupations Operatives
Source: Nomis August 2008 August 2009 August 2010 August 2011 August 2012
JSA "Off-Flow" by Reason and Gender
400 350 80 300 95 250 125 70 55 200 60 80 150 60 70 70 35 70 100 45 50 30 160 160 45 35 30 50 90 110 110 35 35 35 60 60 55 40 0 August 2008 August 2009 August 2010 August 2011 August 2012 August 2008 August 2009 August 2010 August 2011 August 2012 Male Female
Source: NOMIS Found work Failed to sign Other Resons
16 The below demonstrate the number of JSA Claimants by Ethnicity and also give a comparison to Scotland. The first table does not demonstrate the numbers of Eastern European claimants as these claimants most likely fall into the “White” category. The second table may give us a better indication in the “White other” category tables.
Number of JSA Claimants in the Scottish Borders by Ethnicity
July 2008 July 2009 July 2010 July 2011 July 2012 White 945 1,780 1,800 2,055 2,005 Ethnic minority 5 15 20 15 15 Prefer not to say 35 55 70 40 25 Unknown 10 10 20 25 25 Total Claimants 995 1,860 1,910 2,135 2,070 % Ethnic Minority 0.5% 0.8% 1.0% 0.7% 0.7% Source: NOMIS
%Scottish % Scottish Borders Scotland Borders Scotland Total 1.64 104.82 100.0% 100.0% White: British 1.43 80.15 87.2% 76.5% White: Irish 0.00 0.32 0.0% 0.3% White: Other white 0.02 0.80 1.2% 0.8% Minority Ethnic 0.00 1.62 0.0% 1.5% Prefer not to say 0.04 6.41 2.4% 6.1% Unknown 0.15 15.53 9.1% 14.8%
Employment and Support Allowance – Feb 2012 - Source DWP The tables below demonstrate the numbers of people in receipt of Employment and Support Allowance benefits and the longevity of their claim.
Employment and Support Allowance Caseload (Thousands) - February 2012
Scottish Borders Scotland Female Male Total Female Male Total Total 0.75 0.89 1.64 49.03 55.78 104.82 Up to 3 months 0.16 0.18 0.34 10.31 12.71 23.02 3 months up to 6 months 0.18 0.22 0.40 10.79 12.21 22.99 6 months up to 1 year 0.14 0.21 0.35 10.41 11.62 22.04 1 year and up to 2 years 0.16 0.16 0.32 10.27 10.91 21.18 2 years and up to 5 years 0.10 0.13 0.23 7.25 8.33 15.59
Scottish Borders Scotland Female Male Total Female Male Total Total 45.7% 54.3% 100% 46.8% 53.2% 100% Up to 3 months 47.1% 52.9% 100% 44.8% 55.2% 100% 3 months up to 6 100% months 45.0% 55.0% 100% 46.9% 53.1% 6 months up to 1 year 40.0% 60.0% 100% 47.2% 52.7% 100% 17 1 year and up to 2 years 50.0% 50.0% 100% 48.5% 51.5% 100% 2 years and up to 5 years 43.5% 56.5% 100% 46.5% 53.4% 100% Source: DWP
18 Health Statistical data indicates a number of differences in health for women and men. Women continue to have a greater life expectancy than men, though over time the gap in the average is decreasing. While cancer, heart disease and stroke continue to be the main cause of death for both men and women, there are different patterns of mortality in both genders. There are differences in health behaviors and in mental health between men and women. Men are more likely than women to risk their health through smoking, high levels of alcohol consumption, and poor diet and higher numbers of men than women are obese. However men are more likely than women to be physically active and are more likely to report psychological well-being. Within the Scottish Borders females born between 2009-2010 had a life expectancy of 81.2 years, males had a life expectancy of 77.5 years; both were greater than the Scottish average. Male life expectancy at birth in Scottish Borders is improving more rapidly than female life expectancy8.
2011 Deaths by Gender and Cause for the Scottish Borders
300 254 250 207 200 163 163 150 98 100 81 86 76 65 41 50
0 Malignant neoplasms Ischaemic heart Cerebrovascular Respitatory diseases Other Causes disease disease
Female Male Source: NRS
In February 2012 there were 5,700 claimant of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) in the Scottish Borders; of which 49.6% are female and 50.4% are male. The chart below shows the number of claimants of DLA by broad age group and gender.
Disablity Living Allowance Claimants by Gender and Broad Age Group: Feb 2012
2,000 1,830 1,800 1,630 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,050 1,000 800 650 600 390 400 150 200 0 Under 16 Working Age Pension Age
Source: DWP Female Male
8 A Gender Audit of Statistics: Comparing the Position of Women & Men, Scottish Executive
19 The following chart shows the gender break down of health indicators within the Scottish Borders.
Health / Hospital Indicators by Gender for the Scottish Borders
Emergency Admissions 6,630 (2010) 5,919
1,944 Cancer Admissions (2010) 1,484
Disease of the Digestive 1,451 System Admissions (2008) 1,314
Respiratory Disease 815 Admissions (2010) 796
Admissions for Accidents 716 (2010) 721
Coronary Heart Disease 254 Admissions (2010) 470 Male Female
Cerebrovascular Disease 188 Admissions (2010) 194
Number of new individuals 47 reported to the Scottish Drug Misuse Database (2008) 134
Source: SNS 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Education and Training Statistical evidence of gender difference in educational participation and performance indicates that girls perform better than boys at school, tend to stay on longer, leave school with better qualifications and females now make up a majority of entrants to further and higher education. Boys are more likely to be excluded and to have particular support needs for educational or behavioral reasons9. The following charts show the Scottish Borders educational profile in relation to gender.
9 A Gender Audit of Statistics: Comparing the Position of Women & Men, Scottish Executive 20 Scottish Borders Pupils: School Census 2011
4,500 4,162 3,883 4,000 3,359 3,500 3,302 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 806 389 500 0 Primary School Pupils Secondary School Pupils Pupils with Additional Support Needs*
Source: SNS Male Female * These pupils are included within the Primary or Secondary group.
Scottish Borders Secondary School Educational Attainment 2010/2011
100.0 95.1 91.6 92.4 93.1 90.0
80.0 74.1 75.9
70.0 66.2
60.0
50.0 42.6 43.8 40.0 34.9
30.0 20.0 20.0 11.1 10.0
0.0 S4: Percentage of pupils with 5 S4: Percentage of pupils with S5: Percentage of pupils with 3 S6: Percentage of pupils with 3 awards at SCQF level 3 and English and Maths at SCQF awards at SCQF level 6 and awards at SCQF level 6 and above level 3 or above above above
Source: SNS Male Female Additional Support Needs
21 In 2010/2011 there were 1,277 school leavers in the Scottish Borders. There were 665 (51.8%) male school leavers and 615 (48.2%) female school leavers. There were 102 (8.0%) school leavers with Additional Support Needs (included in the male and female figures).
Destination of Scottish Borders School Leavers for 2010/2011
250 236 235 208 195 200
155 150 119
100 63 41 50 34 18 15 15 14 9 8 4 5 3 0 2 0 0 Higher Education Further Education Training Employment Unemployed and Unemployed and Unknown seeking not seeking employment or employment or training training Source: SNS Male Female Additional Support Needs
Percent of the Scottish Borders Population Aged 16-64 Qualified to Degree Level / Equivalent and Above
30.0 27.6
25.0 20.0 20.0 18.6 16.5
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0 2006 2011
Male Female Source: NOMIS
22 Crime & Justice Statistical evidence shows that men are more likely than women to commit serious offences and to commit violent offences, and women are less likely than men to receive custodial sentences. With respect to victimisation, men are more likely to be victims of violent crimes (predominantly committed by other men) in general, with young men being twice as likely as young women to be victims of assault, while women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence, and crimes of indecency such as rape10.
The following chart demonstrates the gender profile of two year reconviction rates for offenders released from custody or given a non-custodial sentence in 2006-07. Two year reconviction rates are the standard measure for estimating re-offending levels in Scotland. The rate covers all convictions where the main offence was a crime in Groups 1-5 of the Scottish Governments classification of crimes and offences or the offences of simple assault, breach of the peace, racially aggravated harassment or conduct, miscellaneous firearms offences and social security offences were committed. Reconviction frequency rate is the average number of reconvictions within a specified follow up period (1 year) from the data of the index conviction per 100 offenders. The graph below shows the Reconviction frequency rates for 2009-2010 comparing Scottish Borders to Scotland for both genders. In the Scottish Borders the female reconviction frequency rate is below the rate for Scotland.
Reconviction frequency rates of offenders released from custody or given non-custodial sentences 2009-2010: Comparing Scottish Borders to Scotland 60.0 56.1 54.0 51.0 50.0 46.6 44.0
40.0
30.0 27.5
20.0
10.0
0.0 All Male Female
Source: SNS Scotland Scottish Borders
Gender based violence Within Scottish Borders the main focus of gender-based violence is that of domestic abuse. The reason for this is based on evidence that indicates that this is a significant problem within the Scottish Borders. Additionally, information gaps exist for the other areas of gender-based violence such as sexual harassment at work, commercial sexual exploitation, female genital mutilation, dowry-related violence; forced marriages and honour crimes and therefore we are unaware if and/or to what extent any of these problems exist. Rape and sexual assault are also considered a form of gender based violence, the commentary for these issues are reflected under the sexual crimes below. Incidents of domestic violence reported to the police have increased by 20% since 2006. During the same period, incidents nationally have increased by only 6%* and the number of referrals
10 A Gender Audit of Statistics: Comparing the Position of Women & Men, Scottish Executive 23 where children are members of households has also risen significantly. At first reading therefore, it would appear that we have an escalating problem, far in excess of the national picture. However, due to the hidden nature of domestic abuse, incidents are often not reported, and as such, we all have issues of under-reporting. Recent work carried out by the Safer Communities team estimates that under-reporting of domestic incidents in the Scottish Borders is likely to be as much as 63% while the national under-reporting figure is likely to be much lower at 40%. It is recognised therefore that much work needs to be done to increase the public’s confidence in reporting incidents and thereby give us a more accurate picture of the problem we are facing. In addition to increasing incident reporting, we also recognise that our rate of incidents resulting in a crime charge is particularly low with Lothian & Borders Police converting 35% of incidents to crimes – the lowest of all Scottish forces, compared with 62% nationally.
Crimes of a sexual nature have remained steady over the last five years. Within Scottish Borders these currently sit at nine crimes per 10,000 of population, which is around 25% lower than the national picture of 12 crimes. However, while Scottish Borders has remained steady, sexual crimes in Scotland as a whole have reduced by 1.5% over the last five years. However, under-reporting generally is a particular issue with sexual crimes and there is no evidence to suggest that Scottish Borders is any different in this. The recent introduction of Rape Crisis Services may help us identify how big a problem under-reporting is in the years ahead. *Different police forces record domestic abuse information in different ways therefore we can expect some disparity in the comparison of the local versus the national picture. Police practice in deciding when behaviour justifies the recording of a crime or offence may also differ.
In Scottish Borders (2010) police incidents showed 86% of victims were female, 12% were male and 2% were in same sex relationships. This is comparable to Scotland as a whole, where 82% of victims were female, 15% were male and 3% were in same sex relationships. (Scottish Government Statistical Bulletin Crime and Justice Series: Domestic Abuse recorded by the police in Scotland 2009-10, p4)
Scottish Borders Rape Crisis Centre opened in July 2010, and to date has supported over 60 survivors of rape/sexual assault. Analysis of data relating to survivor experience reveals 25% experienced sexual violence from their partner. These survivors are not in contact with any other specialist service and a number are still living with their partner.
Gender reassignment The information available to us concerning transgender issues is extremely limited. We recognise that we will need to identify sources that provide more comprehensive data on this topic during the life of this Scheme.
Pregnancy and Maternity
Between 2010 and 2011 the birth rate in the Scottish Borders dropped from 10.3 births per 1,000 people to 9.8, lower than the birth rate for Scotland 11.3 and 11.2 respectively. The graph below shows the changes in birth rates and the number of births in the Scottish Borders between 2009 and 2011. Between 2009 and 2011 the proportion of low weight live singleton births that were under weight in the Scottish Borders was 2.49% compared to 2.16% for Scotland.
24 Birth Rate per 1,000 Population Comparing Scotland to Scottish Borders and the Number of Births in the Scottish Borders: 2009 to 2011
12 1,170 1,159 1,161 1,160 11.5 1,150
0 11 1,140 0 0 , 1 1,130 s h r t e 10.5 r i p
1,120 B e t 1,108 a
R 10 1,110
1,100 9.5 1,090 11.4 10.3 11.3 10.3 11.2 9.8 9 1,080 2009 2010 2011
Source: NRS Scotland - Birth Rate Scottish Borders - Birth Rate Scottish Borders - Births
Between 2008 and 2010 the proportion of first time mothers aged 19 and under in the Scottish Borders was below the level for Scotland. Conversely, the proportion of first time mothers aged 35 and over is higher in the Scottish Borders compared to Scotland.
First Time Mothers Aged 19 and Under and 35 and Over: 2008-2010
14.5 14.2
14
13.5 13.1 12.9 13 12.8
12.5
12 Percentage first time mothers aged 19 and under Percentage first time mothers aged 35 and over
Scottish Borders Scotland Source: SNS
Between 2008 and 2010 the Scottish Borders had a lower rate of teenage pregnancy compared to Scotland; as seen in the graph below.
25 Teenage Pregnacy Rate per 1,000 of Relative Population: 2008-2010
60 52.9
50 44.1
40 37.9
30.8 30
20
10 7.4 5.1
0 Teenage pregnancies aged under 16, Teenage pregnancies aged under 18, Teenage pregnancies aged under 20, rate per 1000 women aged 13 to 15 rate per 1000 women aged 15 to 17 rate per 1000 women aged 15 to 19
Scottish Borders Scotland Source: SNS
The proportion of breastfed babies in the Scottish Borders in 2010-2011 was higher than the proportion for Scotland. For both Scotland and the Scottish Borders there is a drop in the proportion of breastfed babies between the first visit and the 6-8 week review.
Breastfed Babies 2010-2011: Scottish Borders Compared to Scotland
60.0 52.0 50.0 46.8 41.3 38.4 40.0 36.3 37.1
29.1 30.0 26.5
20.0
10.0
0.0 Percentage breastfed at the Percentage exclusively Percentage breastfed at the 6 Percentage exclusively First Visit breastfed at the First Visit to 8 week review breastfed at the 6 to 8 week review Scottish Borders Scotland Soruce: SNS
26 Marriage and Civil Partnership
According to the National Records of Scotland there were 732 marriages in the Scottish Borders in 2011; an increase of 3.8% from 2010 (705 marriages). The number of civil partnerships increased to 10 in 2011 from 7 in 2010. Of the 10 civil partnerships 6 were for male couples and 4 were female couples.
Race
Traditionally the Scottish Borders has had a large white Scottish population but over recent years we have seen the ethnic mix within the region continue to increase. In November 2008 the Borders Equality Forum released a summary of “Cultures in the Borders”. It provided a snapshot of the numbers of people from different ethnic backgrounds living within the Scottish Borders. The information was collected from Members of the Borders Equality Forum. It indicated that there were a number of people living in the Borders from different ethnic backgrounds. The information suggested there were a significant number of people from the following countries and regions:
Africa - Zambia, Ivory Coast, Congo, Ethiopia 85 Chinese - Cantonese / Mandarin 650 Bangladesh 150 West Indies 14 Indian 200 Colombia 10 Pakistan 200 Poland 1000 Asia - Burma, Thailand, Eastern Europe -Russia, Latvia, Philippines, Malaysia 167 Lithuania, Romania 250 Japan 30 Portugal 250 Turkey 45 Scandinavian 30 Greek 17
Although this data is based on the work of the Equality Forum and isn’t necessarily quantitative, its findings are supported by the outcomes of the ScotXed census. The census surveys the racial background and languages spoken by the children that attend the schools across the Borders region.
27 The Scottish Borders school census of 2011 stated that there were 14,834 children in the Scottish Borders schools. The annual school census collects information about ethnic background and the main language used at home.
The 2011 census identifies that 89.4% (13,265) pupils have an ethnic background of “White – Scottish” and that 10.6% (1569) pupils are of another type of ethnic background. The graph below shows the number of pupils by ethnic background (other than White – Scottish).
Ethinic Background of Scottish Borders Pupils (other than White - Scottish): 2011
White – Other British 431
White – Other 399
Not Known 217
Not Disclosed 124
Mixed or multiple ethnic groups 106
Other - Other 96
White – Polish 53
Asian – Chinese / British / Scottish 29
Asian – Other 24
Asian – Pakistani / British / Scottish 21
Asian – Indian/British/Scottish 18
African – African / Scottish / British 17
Asian –Bangladeshi / British / Scottish 13
White – Irish 8
White – Gypsy/Traveller 5
Caribbean or Black – Other 4
African – Other 2
Other – Arab 1
Caribbean or Black – Caribbean / British / Scottish 1
Source: SBC School Census 2011 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
The 2011 Scottish Border school census states that 97.0% (14,359) pupils have English as their main home language. There are 41 other main home languages for pupils of the Scottish Borders. The graph below shows the number of pupils for each of the other main home languages (including Scots and Gaelic).
28 Main Home Language (other than English) for Scottish Border Pupis: 2011 School Census
Polish 169
Scots 56 Portuguese 38
Lithuanian 23
Cantonese 19 Source: SBC School Census 2011 German 14 Spanish 11
Not known/not disclosed 10 French 10 Bengali 10
Russian 9 Latvian 7 Thai 6
Urdu 4 Swahili 4 Chinese (Modern Standard/Mandarin) 4 Mandarin 3
Korean 3 Chinese (Cantonese) 3 Arabic 3 Turkish 2 Slovak 2
Nyanja 2 Japanese 2 Italian 2
Hungarian 2 Filipino 2 Dutch 2 Danish 2
Afrikaans 2 Welsh 1 Telugu 1 Tamil 1 Shona 1 Punjabi 1
Persian 1 Norwegian 1 Konkani 1 Kannada 1
Greek 1 Gaelic (Scottish) 1 Finnish 1 Bangala 1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 29 Every year Scottish Borders Council sends surveys to a random sample of local households. In the survey one of the questions we ask is about the households ethnicity. The table below shows the number of households responses which did not consider themselves to be “Scottish” or “Other British”.
Household Survey of Ethnicity
s 25 22 d l o
h 20 e s
u 15
o 11 H
f 10
o 6 r
e 5 33322222 b 111111111111111 m
u 0 N , , r n n k i h h n h h h h e h d h n n n h e n e e e n e t a a t e h s s a c l c s c s c i e i s a a a i s i i l a i n t s l i i i a l i l i e s r e l n e e t n h s d c h t e m I u e e d i d t r c g o i e p r a e z u e n n u r v n n n w o r n f r I r r W D i P d o e I I g G f t W e e a C c r e , r E h F F a r u s A g l t G o o t u n m e S l l r / R C u r g a h h E g A g y i A o t t n A n n s d u a P O p n A A o B I y S G
Of the 2559 responses received in the 2010 survey, there were;
Scottish 1976 Refused 2 Czech 1 Other British 511 Australian 2 Portuguese 1 Indian, Indian Bangladeshi, Bangladeshi Other white ethnic 22 Scottish, 2 1 Scottish, or Bangladeshi British group or Indian British Irish 11 Welsh 1 Scottish /Kurdish 1 English 6 Anglo Indian 1 Greek 1 European 3 French 1 French American 1 Dutch 3 American 1 South African 1 Chinese, Chinese Scottish, or White British/Black 3 Anglo Indian 1 1 Chinese British Mauritian Gypsy/traveller 2 Polish 1 Argentine 1 German 2
The Department of Work and Pensions maintain the registration of the National Insurance Numbers (NINo). The graph below shows the number of NINo registrations to adult overseas nationals entering the UK in the Scottish Borders between 2002 and 2011 by world area of origin. The graph shows the dramatic increased of NINo numbers allocated to adults from EU Accession States between 2005 and 2008.
30 NINo Registrations to Adult Overseas Nationals entering the UK for the Scottish Borders 2002 to 2011 by World Area of Origin
1000 1000
900 870 900
800 750 800
700 620 700 610
600 600
500 500 390 380 390 400 630 400 540 300 270 350 380 300
200 160 220 200 140 210 210 60 100 100 10 0 0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Source: DWP European Union EU Accession States Other European * Totals may not sum due to Africa Asia and Middle East The Americas rounding method used Australasia and Oceania Total*
World Area of Origin World Area of Origin is based on a client's nationality. For consistency of reporting, EU-Accession States includes A8, Malta and Cyprus and A2 (Bulgaria & Romania) for the entire Back Series including the periods before Accession and after transitional arrangements have ended. European Union excludes the Accession States.
31 This information identifies the growing Black & Minority Ethnic (BME) community within the Scottish Borders and provides a valuable insight into the diversity of our community which we must use to ensure effective planning, allocation and delivery of our services and functions.
Gypsies/ Travellers Gypsy/ Travellers have a long history within the Scottish Borders and have been coming here for over three hundred years. Gypsy/Travellers refer to a number of travelling communities including: Scottish Travellers, Romany, Gypsies, Irish Travellers and other Travelling groups whether they travel or are settled.
There are well-documented issues around Gypsies/Travellers concerning poor health, low literacy skills, isolation, mental health, living with fear of constant eviction, experience of not being listened to, bullying and harassment in schools, discrimination, prejudice and intimidation from the settled community.
Currently we have one official Gypsy/Traveller site consisting of 10 traveller pitches which forms part of a commercial caravan site leased and managed, on our behalf by Commercial Landlords in Innerleithan.
Additionally every summer we have a significant number of Gypsy/Travellers passing through the region. Many come to the St Boswells Fair which takes place every July. A Council-supported pilot project has been under way since June 2010 to make contact with gypsy and travelling people locating on unauthorised sites in the Scottish Borders. This project has involved a liaison officer making direct contact with the Gypsy/Travellers on the unauthorised encampments, and then linking in with other Council and partner services.
In summer 2010 (June to August) our liaison officer made contact with approximately 103 Gypsy/ Travellers in 35 separate units/caravans on five unauthorised encampments. The longest stay was for 11 days and the shortest was 4 days. The officer also made contact with those visiting the St Boswells Fair. The 2010 Fair saw 21 separate units/caravans.
We recognise Gypsies/Travellers as a marginalised, vulnerable group who historically have experienced discrimination and disadvantage, and so we seek to balance the needs of the Gypsies/Traveller community with those of the local settled community and businesses.
Hate Crime Despite having increased by 47% since 2005-2006, reported incidents of hate crime within Scottish Borders continues to be relatively low. During the period from 2005- 2006 to 2009-2010 hate crimes increased from 3 per 10,000 of the total population to 4.5.
However, the majority of hate crimes within our community are race related incidents with an average of 86% falling within this category over the five-year period. The migrant population total in Scottish Borders currently sits at around 4% of the overall population, which is lower than the Scottish average of 5.7%. Given that the biggest problem of hate crime is race related, the numbers of migrants within Scottish Borders would suggest that, at least statistically, approximately 1% were the subject of racial related crime at some point in a one-year period.
Hate crime, in all its forms, is taken very seriously within Scottish Borders and a partnership approach is used to combat issues. This includes robust police procedures in identifying and investigating incidents along with a dedicated Diversity
32 Lay Advisor. The advisor roles are performed by unpaid volunteers and are drawn from the general public through a suitable application/interview process. Their purpose is to add a credible, independent and publicly focused element of scrutiny to existing and developing police practice
Religious Background
Gathering information on religion and belief locally has proved challenging. Thanks to the work of Borders Equality Forum we understand that the following religions and beliefs can be found within the Scottish Borders:
- Buddhism - Sikh - Judaism - Christianity - Hinduism - Islam (Muslim) - Baha‘i - Humanism - Jehovah Witness - Paganism - Mormons
The ScotXed school census in February 2011 showed that 41.36% of Scottish Borders School pupils were Christians, 24.07% of pupils had no religion and 28.07% had a religion which was not listed. The known religions of the remaining pupils are demonstrated in the table below.
Known Religions of Pupils in the Scottish Borders 2011 (Other than Christianity)
0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Muslim Buddhist Hindu Jewish Sikh
Sexual Orientation
The information we have access to regarding sexual orientation in the Scottish Border is extremely limited. Stonewall estimates that currently 6% of the population in Scotland are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgender (LGBT). On this basis we can expect 6761 people in the Borders to be LGBT. The 2001 Census did not seek information on sexual orientation. The 2011 census will not ask any direct questions about sexual orientation but the marital status question will include categories for registered same–sex civil partnerships.
33 In Spring 2007, LGBT Youth Borders consulted with young people on LGBT issues. The survey aimed to find out what the general population of young people thought about issues like homophobic bullying. Over 500 young people, aged 8 to 25 took part in the survey. One of the questions asked about their own sexual orientation and the responses were: x Bisexual: 2% x Gay: 2% x Heterosexual/straight: 88% x Lesbian: 1% x Unsure/questioning: 3% x Other: 1% x Information missing: 3% x And 67% of young people said they knew someone who was Lesbian Gay, Bisexual or Transgender.
Currently we work with Borders LGBT forum and Borders LGBT youth project and recognise the importance of these relationships in reaching and understanding our LGBT community.
34 Poverty and Social Exclusion
In 2008 the Scottish Borders Commission on Poverty and Social Exclusion put together a report that indicated a significant number of people in the Scottish Borders, estimated to be between 18,000 and 19,000, were living in poverty.
In 2007 the Scottish Household Condition Survey estimated that 27% of people within the Scottish Borders experience fuel poverty this is above the national average of 22%.
For two consecutive years (2007 and 2008) the weekly earnings for full time workers (workplace- based) within the Scottish Borders were the lowest in Scotland *. People within the Borders earned nearly 20% less in 2008 than the national average. *Ref: The Office for National Statistics
In 2007/2008 44% of children in the Scottish Borders were living in a low income household, a figure that had stayed the same for the previous three years. In 2009 9.6% of primary and secondary school pupils received free school meals. This rate has increased by 8.1% per annum since 2004 with the majority of increase taking place since 2007, demonstrating the negative impact of recession on household income within the Scottish Borders.
In 2009 13.2% of the work age population within the Scottish Borders was dependant on benefits. In 2008, 9295 per 100,000 people within the Scottish Borders were claiming one or more health related benefit.
In 2009 12% of the population within the Scottish Borders was income deprived and 10% were employment deprived*. *Ref: Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation
The Scottish Borders has a relatively low rate of homelessness but a higher proportion than the Scottish average of homelessness applicants from the following categories; couples (with or without children); people fleeing domestic violence or relationship breakdown; and people losing their homes due to adverse economic circumstances.
Poverty is more than just a lack of income. The factors that generate poverty are wide-ranging and include many day-to-day things in life such as health, housing, educational attainment, employability and access to services. It is not enough to talk about poverty in isolation of other factors. It needs joined-up action to grasp these problems effectively.
The current economical climate is having a particularly negative affect on those who are already living on low incomes. It is also affecting people who were previously in secure employment or stable self employment who are now in debt or at an increased risk of being in debt. With the number of employment opportunities decreasing, the pressure on wages and with continuing price increases in key goods and services means that those already experiencing poverty or those on a low income can be faced with further problems.
We are in the midst of the most dramatic reduction in public spending ever imposed on Scotland by the UK Government. The UK Coalition Government has already begun to cut public spending considerably. The likely impact of this coupled with the Welfare Benefit Reform is potentially going to present the Borders with one of the toughest economic challenges this area has ever seen.
We recognise that Socio Economic status has a huge impact on equality of opportunity and poverty impacts greatly on the lives of many members of our community and may increasingly become more of a reality for many people in the Borders. We must take account of this when planning, allocating and delivering our services and functions to ensure that we make every effort to minimise the risks and disadvantage. 35 Children in Poverty Children in poverty is defined as: Number of children living in families in receipt of Child Tax Credit (CTC) whose reported income is less than 60 per cent of the median UK income or in receipt of Income Support (IS) or (Income-Based) Job Seekers Allowance (JSA), divided by the total number of children in the area aged under 20 years (determined by Child Benefit data).
Percentage of Children in Families in Receipt of CTC (less than 60% median income) or IS/JSA - Scottish Borders vs. Scotland: 2009
20 18 19 16 14 12 13 10 8 6 4 2 0 2009
Scottish Borders Scotland Source: SNS/ DWP
Although overall the Scottish Borders has a lower proportion of children living in poverty there are wide variations across the Borders. This can be seen map on the next page.
The table below identifies the data zones were 20% or more of the children lived in poverty. Data Zone Data Zones % of Children in Poverty S01005450 Coldstream - North 20.9 S01005373 Hawick - Princes St / Wilton 22.0 S01005431 Galashiels - Balmoral Rd 22.2 S01005428 Galashiels - Hawthorn Rd 24.4 S01005487 Eyemouth - Seafront/ harbour 25.3 S01005488 Eyemouth - Haymons Cove 25.3 S01005481 Chirnside - West 25.5 S01005400 Selkirk - Bannerfield 25.6 S01005397 Yetholm 26.2 S01005485 Eyemouth - Gunsgreen 27.4 S01005363 Teviothead/ around (not inc) Newcastleton 27.6 S01005369 Hawick - Drumlanrig/ Wellogate 28.0 S01005416 Kelso - Poynder Park 28.2 S01005413 Kelso - Town Centre 28.9 S01005388 Jedburgh - Doom Hill 34.1 S01005381 Hawick - West Burnfoot 34.2 S01005425 Galashiels - Kenilworth Ave Langlee 37.3 S01005378 Hawick - South Burnfoot 37.8 S01005426 Galashiels - Langlee Dr 38.1 S01005427 Galashiels - Huddersfield 39.2 S01005380 Hawick - East Burnfoot 42.5 S01005382 Hawick - Central Burnfoot 44.9 36 37 Workforce Demographics
Currently Scottish Borders Council employs 6391 people. Below is a brake down of our workforce demographics in relation to the equality strands in 2012.
Age
Scottish Borders Council Employee Age Profile 2012
7000 6000 f f a t 5000 S
f 4000 o r
e 3000 b
m 2000 u
N 1000 0 16 to 29 30 to 44 45 to 59 60 and above Grand Total Age
Age Profile Age Category Female Male Total 16 to 29 500 164 664 30 to 44 1419 517 1936 45 to 59 2248 870 3118 60 and above 415 258 673 Grand Total 4582 1809 6391
38 Disability
SBC Employee Disability Status 2012 s r e
b 5000 m
e 4000 M f f 3000 a t
S 2000 f o
r 1000 e b 0 m
u Have declared they Not Stated Declared a disability Not Recorded N do not have a disability Disability Decleration Status
Disability Profile by Gender
Disability Female Male Total Have declared they do not have a disability 2998 913 3911 Not Stated 347 135 482 Declared a disability 64 20 84 Not Recorded 1173 741 1914 Grand Total 4582 1810 6391
39 Gender
In August 2012, 72 % percent of our staff were female and 28% were male. Some people who work for us hold more than one post so of the 9120 posts in the Council, 75% are held by females and 25% are held by males.
Gender Profile % by Pay Scale
Grade Group Female Male Total Chartered Teacher 52 14 66 Chief Executive 1 1 Chief Officer Band 1 3 3 Chief Officer Band 3 1 1 Chief Officer Band 4 5 10 15 Chief Officer Band 5 5 1 6 Common Scale Teacher 1774 382 2156 Depute & Head Teachers 91 31 122 Engineering Craftsmen 26 26 Grade 1 666 148 814 Grade 10 55 66 121 Grade 11 12 36 48 Grade 12 10 14 24 Grade 2 203 175 378 Grade 3 123 223 346 Grade 4 2319 295 2614 Grade 5 454 87 541 Grade 6 429 128 557 Grade 7 363 147 510 Grade 8 174 124 298 Grade 9 241 129 370 Lifetime Preservation 20 24 44 Music Instructor 9 15 24 Principal Teacher 154 67 221 Probationer Treacher 42 11 53 Psychologist 7 2 9 Grand Total 7209 2159 9368 Racial Profile 40
SBC Employee Profile by Race
Asian Other Bangladeshi Black Other Caribbean Indian Mixed Background Not Stated Other Ethnic Origin White English White Irish White Other White Scottish White Welsh
Employee Racial Profile by Gender
Ethnic Origin Female Male Total Asian Other 1 1 Bangladeshi 1 1 Black Other 1 1 Caribbean 1 1 Indian 3 3 Mixed Background 3 2 5 Not Stated 308 120 428 Other Ethnic Origin 2 1 3 White English 407 123 530 White Irish 45 15 60 White Other 132 32 164 White Scottish 2450 758 3208 White Welsh 13 3 16 Not Recorded 1216 754 1970 Grand Total 4582 1809 6391
41 Sexual Orientation
SBC Employee Profile by Sexual Orientation
3500
3000
2500
2000
Male Female
1500
1000
500
0 Bisexual Gay Hetrosexual Lesbian Not Stated
Percentage of Employees Sexual Orientation Status
Bisexual 0.18% Gay 0.2% Heterosexual 49.19% Lesbian 0.14% Not Stated 15% Not Recorded 35.2 Grand Total 100%
42 Appendix 3 Scottish Borders Council Equality Outcomes and Evidence
Evidence and Drivers Behind the Outcomes
1. We are seen as an inclusive and equal opportunities employer where all members of staff feel valued and respected and our workforce reflects our community.
Data shows that Scottish Borders Council’s (SBC’s) workforce is not representative of the communities it serves. Less than 2% of our staff having declared a disability when 20% of the work age population within the Borders have a disability. Less than 3% of our staff are from an ethnic minority when estimates suggest 10% of the communities we serve are ethnic minorities. Less than 1% of our staff have declared they are either Lesbian, Gay or Bisexual when it is estimated that around 10% of the population is either Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgender. Well over half of SBC staff are aged over 45, with 10% of the workforce aged 60 and above. SBC’s workforce is made up of 71% female and 29% male staff but we see these percentages reverse when we look at the top levels of our pay scale.
During the engagement part of developing our equality outcomes every equality group highlighted barriers to employment within the Council. This information coupled with the changing demographics of the Borders such as the decrease in work age population and pressures of the Welfare Reform Bill provide strong drivers for taking steps towards achieving these outcomes.
By working towards these outcomes Scottish Borders Council will begin to future proof its workforce, capitalising on all available skills and talents. Having a workforce which is representative of the community enables the council to better understand and meet the needs of its community. Evidence shows that where discrimination and inequality within the workforce are reduced, productivity increases and sickness absence rates decrease delivering a more effective and efficient workforce. As the largest employer in the Borders, Scottish Borders Council is in a prime position to make a positive contribution, to the Borders economy and communities through taking steps to reduce inequality through achieving this outcome. If this outcome is also adopted by the Community Planning partners the potential to reduce inequality across the region would be maximised delivering significant positive outcomes for the whole Borders community. 2. Our services meet the needs of, are accessible to all members of our community and our staff treat all service users, clients and colleagues with dignity and respect.
Through the engagement process of developing our equality outcomes, issues around service delivery were highlighted by all of the equality groups. Groups stated that there is a need for Scottish Borders Council to continually improve its Customer Services across all areas and should be looking to ensuring excellence within customer service in order that people can fully access Council services. This includes looking at disability, cultural and social awareness training, interpretation and translation services and appropriate signposting.
This is supported by the satisfaction rates of equality groups found within the most recent Household Survey (2010). Respondents from ethnic minorities, women and disabled people where all less satisfied with Scottish Borders Council. 19% of Disabled people rated Scottish Borders Council as poor or very poor compared with 15% of non disabled people, 21% of females rated Scottish Borders Council as poor or very poor compared with 15% of males and 18% of minority ethnic respondents did not know how to rate the council compared with 14% of white Scottish respondents, indicating that our ethnic minorities are less likely to understand or engage with the Council and it’s services.
Groups also highlighted issues around Scottish Borders Councils’ engagement and communication processes in both developing and delivering services. The need to collect better data around all the protected characteristics was also highlighted. This is essential in order that the Council can better understand the different equality groups; how and when they engage with services; their satisfaction rate with services; and be better able to identify where these groups are not engaging in order that the Council can develop and deliver effective and efficient services which meet the needs of the whole community.
By working towards these outcomes Scottish Borders Council will take significant steps towards overall service improvement and reducing inequality within the community. This can be achieved through more efficient and effective service delivery which is based upon evidence and understanding of specific needs and requirements of communities and which will enable effective targeting and maximisation of resources. This is underpinned by both the requirements and recommendations of the Best Value and the Christie Commission reports. If these outcomes are embedded within the work of the Community Planning partnership, the above mentioned benefits will be greater and will have a further reaching effect within the whole Borders community. By working towards these outcomes the Community Planning Partnership will also be better able to meet the national outcomes within the Single Outcome Agreement.
3. Everyone has the opportunity to participate in public life and the democratic process.
It is very well acknowledged that people with protected equality characteristics find it harder to participate in public life and indeed it is one of the main drivers behind the Equality Act. This is evident within the Scottish Borders and is demonstrated through the results of the household survey. Younger people, women, ethnic minorities and disabled people all indicated that they were less satisfied with their opportunities and ability to participate. 31% of women were either very or fairly well satisfied with their opportunities for participating in the local decision making process provided by Scottish Borders Council, compared with 36% of men, 19% of respondents with a disability were either fairly dissatisfied or very dissatisfied when posed the same question compared with 16% of non disabled respondents and 20% of ethnic minority respondents were either fairly dissatisfied or very dissatisfied when asked this question compared with 16% of White Scottish respondents. The same survey also indicated that, ethnic minority people and people with disabilities were less likely to attend art, cultural and social events, engage in voluntary work or take part in physical activities.
In Scottish Borders Council there are only 6 female elected members compared with 28 male members.
The above evidence was supported by the findings of the engagement work with equality groups. The groups highlighted numerous physical and social barriers which prohibited their opportunities and ability to participate in public life. The groups also highlighted the impacts that this had on their lives and the community around them, with factors such as the negative effects on health and wellbeing, inability to reach their full potential and the inability to contribute within society and to the community all being important factors.
By working to achieving the outcome above Scottish Borders Council will be taking steps to reducing inequalities across the communities it serves. This in turn will have positive effects on the economy, infrastructure, health and wellbeing and local society through having a healthier, more productive and cohesive community.
If this outcome is embedded within the work of the Community Planning partnerships the ability to have a greater impact will be presented. The Community Planning Partnership will also be better able to meet the national outcomes within the Single Outcome Agreement.
4. We work in partnership with other agencies and stakeholders to ensure that our communities are cohesive and there are fewer people living in poverty.
5. Our citizens have the freedom to make their own choices and are able to lead independent, healthy lives as responsible citizens.
Currently 12% of the Borders population is living in financial exclusion and experiencing multiple deprivation relative to the Scottish population (SIMD). Statistical evidence of gender difference within the Borders in terms of access to income from earnings, assets, savings and benefits indicate that women’s income from earnings and other sources are persistently lower than men’s income, that women are more vulnerable to poverty and that specific groups of women are particularly vulnerable. In 2009 there was a 21.6% difference between men and women’s weekly earnings in the Borders, this pay gap decreases for those who commute out with the area. Significantly more women than men are claiming housing benefits, pension credits, attendance allowance and income support. In November 2011 there were 13,205 claims for health related benefits. Nearly half of the children within the Scottish Borders live in low income households. This coupled with the effect of the Welfare Reform Bill and the current economic climate, presents serious challenges for the Scottish Borders community as a whole. Equality Groups are the most vulnerable when it comes to the effects of these changes. The impact is expected to increase demand on services and resources and so it is essential that work towards safeguarding these groups and reducing inequalities is mainstreamed into the working of the council and Community Planning Partnership.
Community tensions were an issue raised by all of the equality groups through the engagement work carried out last summer. Issues were raised around hate crime by people from the ethnic minority community, people with learning disabilities and the LGBT community. There were also issues raised around violence against women.
These finding are supported by local data. Lothian and Borders Police have consistently recorded hate crime to be 86% race related over a five year period within the Borders. Within the Household survey women, older people, people with disabilities and ethnic minority people all felt less safe to walk alone in their local area after dark.
By working towards the outcome above Scottish Borders Council will be taking steps to protect the future of the Scottish Borders and the communities it serves. Promoting a more cohesive community has added benefits for the community as a whole and work should also focus on community capacity building in order that communities are more resilient and better equipped to support themselves.
If this outcome is embedded within the work of the Community Planning partnerships the potential to have a greater impact will be presented. The Community Planning Partnership will also be better able to meet the national outcomes within the Single Outcome Agreement.
6. The difference in rates of employment between the general population and those from under represented groups is improved.
Barriers to employment opportunities were highlighted by all of the equality groups during the engagement phase of the research. The Economic downturn and the Welfare Reform Act have raised serious concern and challenges for those from the equality groups who make up many of those furthest away from work.
In November 2011 there were 13,205 claims for health related benefits in the Scottish Borders. Only 64% of disabled people in the Borders where in work in 2008. In 2010 there where 4290 claims for Incapacity Benefit in the Scottish Borders. All of these claimants are required to go through a work capability assessment as part of the Welfare Reform. It is expected that 71% will be declared fit for work related activity.
In August 2012 there where 745 young people (under 25) claiming Job Seekers Allowance in the Scottish Borders which equates to 36% of all claimants (NOMIS). Between 2006 and 2011 the employment rate for people aged 16-24 in the Scottish Borders dropped over 20% to 51%; more that the drop experienced for Scotland which was only 8% to 55%(APS). Only 10% of Care Leavers in the Borders in 2011/12 went on to further education, training or employment (Children’s Social Work Statistics 2012 Edition).
The number of women in the Borders Claiming Jobseekers Allowance increased by 123% between 2008 and 2012. Overall claims increased by 97.7% during the same period.
By Working towards this outcome Scottish Borders Council will be taking steps to reduce inequality and promote equality of opportunity.
7. The difference in educational attainment between those who are from an equality group and those who are not is improved.
During the engagement phase of the research work several equality groups highlighted issues around education. Bullying was seen as a significant issue by all of the equality groups and it was felt that this greatly impacted on educational attainment.
Females consistently out perform males within Scottish Borders Schools with more females going on to Higher Education. There is a significant gap in educational attainment between pupils who have an additional support need (ASN) and those who do not, with only 75.9% of ASN pupils gaining English and Maths at SCQF 3 or above in 2010/11 compared with 94% of pupils without an ASN.
By working towards this outcome Scottish Borders Council will be taking steps towards offering all young people within the Scottish Borders Equality of Opportunity and the ability to reach their full potential.
8. We have appropriate housing which meets the requirements of our diverse community.
Population and household numbers are growing in the Scottish Borders. Households are getting smaller and older. The Borders has a greater proportion of older people than Scotland overall and neighbouring local authority areas – 30% of households will be aged over 65 years by 2033, compared to 20% in 2008.
The number of people that require support to live independently in the Scottish Borders is also increasing – particularly older people and those suffering with dementia, people with physical disabilities and learning disabilities.
Wages in the Scottish Borders are some of the lowest in Scotland (28th lowest out of 32 local authority areas). This low wage economy has major implications on what housing ‘local’ households can afford. It is estimated that more than 50% households working locally cannot afford housing market prices in the Borders.
The 2001 Census shows that 2,697 individuals or 2.5% of the population of the Scottish Borders is made up of individuals from minority ethnic communities. Of these 2, 108 states that they are White Irish or ‘Other White’ including people from other European countries or other parts of the world. A very small proportion – 589 people, or 0.55% of the Scottish Border population includes other ethic minorities such as Indian, Pakistani, and other south Asian, Chinese, Caribbean, African or other black. The youthful age profile of a number of minority ethnic communities suggests that this population is likely to grow at a faster rate than white UK communities. We expect that the 2011 Census data when available will show a significant increase in Ethnic minorities within the Scottish Borders and we are aware that people from these communities have very unique challenges in terms of housing.
The main increases in homelessness applications in the Scottish Borders have come from single people, and young people aged 16-17 years. The main reasons for homelessness in the Scottish Borders are where family of friends are no willing to accommodate the homeless applicants, violent and non-violent relationship breakdown, and loss of private tenancies. This is in line with trends across Scotland. (SBC Local Housing Strategy 2011-2017).