Children's Services Committee
Date: Tuesday, 13 September 2016
Time: 10:00
Venue: Edwards Room, County Hall, Martineau Lane, Norwich, Norfolk, NR1 2DH
Persons attending the meeting are requested to turn off mobile phones.
Membership Mr R Smith - Chairman Mr A Adams Mr J Joyce Mr R Bearman Mr M Kiddle-Morris Mrs J Chamberlin Mr J Perkins Ms E Corlett Ms C Rumsby Mr D Crawford Mr M Sands Mr P Gilmour Mr B Stone Mrs S Gurney (Vice-Chairman) Miss J Virgo Mr B Hannah Mr A White
Church Representatives Mrs H Bates Mr A Mash
Non-voting Parent Governor Representatives Mrs K Byrne Mrs S Vertigan
Non-voting Schools Forum Rep Mrs A Best-White
Non-voting Co-opted Advisors Mr A Robinson Norfolk Governors Network Ms T Rainbow Special Needs Education Ms V Aldous Primary Education Mr J Mason Post-16 Education Ms C Smith Secondary Education
For further details and general enquiries about this Agenda please contact the Committee Officer:
1 Julie Mortimer on 01603 223055 or email [email protected]
Under the Council’s protocol on the use of media equipment at meetings held in public, this meeting may be filmed, recorded or photographed. Anyone who wishes to do so must inform the Chairman and ensure that it is done in a manner clearly visible to anyone present. The wishes of any individual not to be recorded or filmed must be appropriately respected.
2 A g e n d a
1. To receive apologies and details of any substitute members attending
2. To confirm the minutes of the Children's Services Committee meeting Page 6 held on 28 June 2016.
3. Declarations of Interest If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in a matter to be considered at the meeting and that interest is on your Register of Interests you must not speak or vote on the matter. If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in a matter to be considered at the meeting and that interest is not on your Register of Interests you must declare that interest at the meeting and not speak or vote on the matter
In either case you may remain in the room where the meeting is taking place. If you consider that it would be inappropriate in the circumstances to remain in the room, you may leave the room while the matter is dealt with.
If you do not have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest you may nevertheless have an Other Interest in a matter to be discussed if it affects - your well being or financial position - that of your family or close friends - that of a club or society in which you have a management role - that of another public body of which you are a member to a greater extent than others in your ward.
If that is the case then you must declare such an interest but can speak and vote on the matter.
4. Any items of business the Chairman decides should be considered as a matter of urgency
5. Public QuestionTime Fifteen minutes for questions from members of the public of which due notice has been given.
Please note that all questions must be received by the Committee Team ([email protected] ) by 5pm on Thursday 8 September 2016. For guidance on submitting public question, please view the Consitution at www.norfolk.gov.uk .
6. Local Member Issues/ Member Questions Fifteen minutes for local member to raise issues of concern of which due notice has been given.
Please note that all questions must be received by the Committee Team ([email protected] ) by 5pm on Thursday 8 September.
7. Integrated Performance and Finance Monitoring Report 2016 -17 Page 20
3 8. Annual Review of Norfolk Residential Service Page 64
9. Statement of Purpose of Norfolk’s Fostering Services Annual Page 77 Review
10 . Norfolk County Council Adoption Agency Annual Review Page 109
11 . Structural developments in the education system Page 134
12 . Road Crossing Patrol Page 162
13 . Youth Support Model Task & Finish Group - Update Reports to Follow
14 . Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children Reports to Follow
15 . Exclusion of the Public Page The committee is asked to consider excluding the public from the meeting under section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 for consideration of the item below on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined by Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act, and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. The committee will be presented with the conclusion (s) of the public interest test carried out by the report author and is recommended to confirm the exclusion.
16 . To confirm the Exempt minutes from the Childrens Services Page Committee meeting held on 28 June 2016.
• Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information); • Information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations in connection with any labour relations matters arising between the Authority or a Minister...
Group Meetings
Conservative 9:00am Conservative Group Room, Ground Floor UK Independence Party 9:00am UKIP Group Room, Ground Floor Labour 9:00am Labour Group Room, Ground Floor Liberal Democrats 9:00am Liberal democrats Group Room, Ground Floor
4
Chris Walton Head of Democratic Services County Hall Martineau Lane Norwich NR1 2DH
Date Agenda Published: 05 September 2016
If you need this document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Customer Services on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
5
Children’s Services Committee
Minutes of the Meeting Held on Tuesday 28 June 2016 10am, Edwards Room, County Hall, Norwich
Present:
Mr R Smith – Chair
Mr A Adams Mr M Kiddle-Morris Mr R Bearman Mrs J Leggett Mr M Castle Mr J Perkins Mr J Childs Ms C Rumsby Mr P Gilmour Mr M Sands Mrs S Gurney – Vice-Chair Mr B Stone Mr B Hannah Miss J Virgo Mr J Joyce Mr A White
Non-voting Parent Governor Representatives Dr K Byrne
Non-Voting Co-opted Advisors Mrs A Best-White Schools Forum Rep Mr A Robinson Norfolk Governors Network Ms V Aldous Primary Education Ms C Smith Secondary Education Ms T Rainbow Special Needs Education
The Chair welcomed the support worker and six young people from the Norwich Youth Advisory Board Programme for Young Commissioners who would observe the meeting. Mr R Bearman introduced the visitors to the Committee.
1 Apologies and substitutions
1.1 Apologies were received from Mrs J Chamberlin (Mrs J Leggett substituted), Mr D Crawford (Mr J Childs substituted); Ms E Corlett (Mr M Castle substituted); Mrs S Vertigan (Parent/Governor Rep), Mr J Mason (Post-16 Education Rep) and Mrs H Bates and Mr A Mash (Church Reps).
2 Minutes
2.1 The minutes of the meeting held on 10 May 2016 were agreed as an accurate record by the Committee and signed by the Chair, subject to the deletion of paragraph 11.2.7.
6 2.2 Matters arising
2.2.1 The first meeting of the Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Task and Finish Group had been held on 21 June 2016. Emma Corlett had been appointed Chair of the Group.
2.2.2 Any Member who wished to visit schools or academies to engage with Headteachers, to assess what was happening in schools and how this could be sustained or improved, could contact Flavio Vetesse, Senior Adviser in the Education Partnership Service, who would make the arrangements.
3 Declarations of Interest
No declarations of interest were made.
4 Items of Urgent Business
4.1 The Chair announced that Gordon Boyd, Assistant Director Education, would be leaving Norfolk County Council towards the end of July to take up a role in Edinburgh. The Committee placed on record its thanks to Gordon for his hard work and wished him well in his new role. Chris Snudden had been appointed Interim Assistant Director, Education.
4.2 The Executive Director of Children’s Services informed the Committee that positive feedback had been received following the recent Ofsted Monitoring Inspection. Once the report had been published it would be available on the Ofsted website and a link circulated to the Committee.
4.3 The Executive Director updated the Committee on the progress with the Parker Review. The draft report had identified that there were some issues with regard to how foster carers had been treated and, although changes had been made, further work was necessary. Once the report had been checked for accuracy it would be presented to Children’s Services Committee at its meeting in September 2016.
Discussions were taking place with the Norfolk Foster Care Association to ensure all the issues identified in the report were being addressed.
4.4 There would be a Celebration of Achievement event for Norfolk’s Looked After Children on Saturday 9 July, from 1pm to 4pm at St Andrews Hall in Norwich. If any Member of the Committee wished to attend this invitation only event, they could contact the Virtual School Team which would be pleased to issue an invitation.
5 Public Question Time
5.1 Details of the public question received and the response can be found at Appendix A.
7 6 Local Member Issues/Member Questions
No Local Member questions were received.
7 Integrated performance and Finance Monitoring Report 2016-17.
7.1 The Committee received the report by the Executive Director of Children’s Services containing the report cards and other key performance information.
7.2 The following points were noted in response to questions from the Committee:
7.2.1 Performance Dashboard & Report cards
With regard to Children in Need (CIN) Plans and the significant locality variations, the Committee noted that staffing adjustments had been made to ensure that teams had the capacity to complete plans in a timely manner and that close monitoring was taking place. The staffing adjustments were permanent moves, with vacant posts in one area of the county being moved to other areas where provision was required.
The Committee noted that the Clinical Commissioning Groups now understood their responsibilities in ensuring initial health assessments were carried out in a timely manner and that significant improvements had been made in the delivery of initial assessments.
To increase initial health assessment provision, consideration was being given to including General Practitioners (GP’s). Initial health assessments were normally carried out by a paediatrician.
7.2.2 Support for Educational Improvement
Members expressed concern about the number of pupils being excluded from school, particularly primary school age children. The Committee AGREED to establish a working group to identify any recurrent themes and patterns. Members also requested additional information about the ways parents were being involved in the exclusion process.
The Head of Education Inclusion Service agreed to provide some additional information about the following, which could also form some of the work for the working group to scrutinise:
• The number of exclusion appeals attended by Norfolk County Council. • The number of children in Great Yarmouth that had been excluded and how this figure compared with other areas in the county. The Committee recognised that meeting the needs of all children was a very complex issue, of which exclusion from school was only one part.
8 The Committee RESOLVED to convene a working group to consider all the issues surrounding children excluded from schools.
The following Members agreed to form the working group:
Emma Corlett James Joyce Mark Kiddle-Morris Judy Leggett Richard Bearman
The Head of Education Inclusion Service would circulate some meeting dates to convene the first meeting of the working group, which was asked to draw up the terms of reference to be considered by the Committee at its next meeting for approval.
7.2.3 Early Help
The Assistant Director Early Help and Prevention advised that positive feedback had been received following the inspection carried out on Youth Offending at the end of May 2016. The report had been published and the recommendations contained in the report would form an action plan which would be circulated to the Committee once completed. The inspection findings would be reported to the Statutory Youth Offending Board, which was chaired by the Managing Director and circulated to other interested Committees as appropriate.
Greater awareness of the early help offer and partnership work in localities was identified as the reasons for the increase in the number of active cases to early help and family focus in May 2016.
7.2.4 Social work
The Committee was reminded about the workshop on Looked After children and Care Leavers Strategy to be held on 27 July at 2pm in the Anna Sewell Room, County Hall Annexe and Members were encouraged to attend in their role as Corporate Parents. Those Members wishing to attend should contact Christine Byles, Member Support Officer.
Members asked for detailed information about restorative approaches, particularly around Looked after Children and were reassured that the Youth Offending Team included officers responsible for restorative approaches.
The Pathway Planning Audit had identified that there were some concerns with the quality of Pathway Plans. The Leaving Care Team was undertaking some work to improve the quality of plans and training had been arranged to ensure that all team members understood what information a good plan should contain. A follow-up audit had commenced w/c 20 June 2016 and was expected to show an improvement. The Assistant Director Social Work would continue to report the outcomes of future Pathway Planning Audits.
9 It was suggested that a change in the wording in the report to reflect what was meant by “missing from placement” would assist Members in understanding the terminology. The Norfolk Safeguarding Children’s Board had recently published a Threshold Guide on its website, which could be accessed by clicking on the link below: http://www.norfolklscb.org/threshold-guide-animation-goes-live/
7.2.5 Financial Implications
The Committee was reassured that the current overspend within Children’s Services was manageable and active steps were being taken to reduce the overspend further.
7.2.6 Risk Register
Risk RM14157 (Lack of corporate capacity and capability reduces the ability of Children’s Services to improve) was partly around the allocation of mobile technology to social workers, although this was budget dependent until the new social care reporting system had been procured and was operational.
7.2.7 General
The Committee asked if the report could be revised so the report cards were presented with its pertinent section. The Assistant Director Performance and Challenge advised that the report reflected the corporate reporting style and that he would feed the Committee’s comments back.
7.3 The Committee NOTED the report and RESOLVED to convene a working group to consider all the issues surrounding children excluded from schools.
8 The White Paper ‘Educational Excellence Everywhere’: the way forward to achieve ‘A Good Education for Every Norfolk Learner.
8.1 The Committee received the report by the Executive Director of Children’s Services giving an overview of the key local authority recommendations regarding future developments of ‘A Good Education for every Norfolk Learner’, in the context of the White Paper. The report included a consideration of how the core elements and key activity of the Local Authority would be developed in the light of the government proposals.
8.2 Members were asked to note, comment on and support the direction of travel in relation to the way forward for 2016-17.
8.3 During the discussion, the following points were noted:
8.3.1 Schools deemed to be “coasting” would not be compelled to become an academy initially, although significant improvement would need to be made very quickly to avoid the requirement for them to convert to an academy.
10 8.3.2 The Small School Steering Group continued to challenge all schools and as a result of its work, there were no longer large discrepancies between small schools and other schools.
8.3.3 The funding to meet the number of school places required had resulted in there being less money available to fund school improvements.
8.3.4 The recruitment of good teachers remained a challenge, although it was noted that this challenge was reflected across the country.
8.4 The Committee RESOLVED to note the report and support the direction of travel in relation to the way forward for 2016-17.
9 Educator Solutions
9.1 The Committee received the report from the Executive Director of Children’s Services setting out the proposal to continue Educator Solutions (a trading function of Norfolk County Council) which provided services to schools, academies and other education providers, including support for teaching and learning and governors and leaders, as well as for finance and HR.
9.2 The following points were noted in response to questions from the Committee:
9.2.1 The Education Solutions Service did not provide statutory services, which would continue to be provided by Norfolk County Council Children’s Services.
9.2.2 Working groups and staff consultations had been held and the general feedback was one of general staff engagement, although it was too early as yet to state that staff were totally on board with the proposal.
9.2.3 There was no need to split the IT systems at the present time, although this may need to be done in the future.
9.2.4 In order to provide clarity to stakeholders and Councillors, it was considered appropriate that Educator Solutions should have its own distinct identity, which would avoid confusion with the services provided by Norfolk County Council.
9.3 The Committee RESOLVED
• To approve the continued provision of services to education as a focussed trading enterprise, competing as flexibly as possible under the brand name Educator Solutions for the remainder of 2016/17 and provisionally into 2017/18.
• In September 2016, officers will bring to Children’s Services Committee an update, including a detailed income and expenditure account, along with an outline business plan. This will be followed up in April 2017 with a detailed and full business case including any structural inhibitors to be resolved. From this:
11 • If elected members are satisfied that Educator Solutions has a robust and sustainable business model, annual income and expenditure account and medium-term financial plan, and are satisfied that risks are being effectively identified and managed, it is recommended that the Children’s Services Committee advises the Policy and Resources Committee to approve Educator Solutions to operate as a private limited company, wholly owned by NCC from 1st April 2018. • If elected members are not satisfied at that point that the above has been or can be achieved and/or if the business profitability is declining and the strategic, operational or financial risk is deemed too great, it is recommended that the Children’s Services Committee advises the Policy and Resources Committee to approve that Educator Solutions be given a further year (2018/19) to operate in the ‘transitional phase’ or otherwise be wound down and fully returned to being a division of NCC Children’s Services. • That Children’s Services Committee advises Policy and Resources Committee to retrospectively approve the creation of a dormant / shelf private limited company (wholly owned by NCC) with the name Educator Solutions Ltd, with Stuart Mullineux as Director and County Hall as the designated registered office/company address.
10 Development of a Norfolk Youth Support Model (Consultation Update).
10.1 The Committee received the report by the Executive Director of Children’s Services providing an update on the outcomes of the consultation on the development of a new youth support model for Norfolk as requested by the Committee on 15 March 2016 and built on the proposal to remove the Youth Support savings from the budget which was made at Children’s Services Committee on 26 January (agreed at Policy & Resources Committee on 2 February and ratified at full Council on 22 February 2016).
10.2 Members were also asked to identify members to undertake the task and finish activity agreed within the March 2016 Children’s Services Committee to consider the responses within the consultation feedback and inform the approach going forward.
10.3 In response to questions from the Committee, the following points were noted:
10.3.1 Some Members raised concern about the consultation process and the fact that there had not been any Member involvement in the proposals presented to the Committee.
10.4 The Committee felt it did not have sufficient information to agree all the recommendations contained in the report.
The Committee AGREED to support recommendation 1 (Maintain current contract commitments in respect of Positive Activities and returning the management of Positive Activities Commissioning to Norfolk County Council Children’s Services from April 2016) and deferred a decision on the other
12 recommendations in the report until the Task and Finish Group had considered all the issues.
10.5 The Committee RESOLVED to agree to
1. Maintain current contract commitments in respect of Positive Activities and returning the management of Positive Activities commissioning to Norfolk County Council Children’s Services from April 2016. 2. Appoint the following Members to the Task and Finish Group to consider the responses within the consultation feedback and inform the approach going forward: Emma Corlett Barry Stone James Joyce Judy Leggett Richard Bearman Judith Virgo
11 Proposals announced by the Immigration Minister – unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.
11.1 The Committee received the report by the Executive Director of Children’s Services updating the Committee on proposals announced by the Immigration Minister on 13 May 2016 relating to new arrangements for accommodating unaccompanied asylum-seeking children (UASC).
11.2 The Executive Director informed the Committee that, since the report had been written, there had been a change to the draft details. The consultation carried out by the Home Office was due to finish on 29 June, after which the Home Office would issue details for implementation on 1 July 2016.
11.3 In response to questions by the Committee, the following points were noted:
11.3.1 Norfolk County Council had the capacity to home UASC, although the Government would not be funding the full costs once the young person had left care, the costs of which needed to be clarified.
11.3.2 Concern was expressed about how the age of the young persons would be assessed. The Executive Director of Children’s Services reassured the Committee that a young person’s age was assessed during an interview and a definitive age would be ascertained at the point of entry into care. A challenge could be made to the Home Office if further information became available that questioned the definitive age given.
11.4 The Committee RESOLVED to note the verbal update from the Executive Director of Children’s Services which superceded the report and DECLINED to make a recommendation to full Council. The Executive Director of Children’s Services was asked to make a recommendation to Council based on the new information from the Home Office once it became available.
12 Internal and External Appointments
13
12.1 The Committee received the report by the Head of Democratic Services setting out the outside and internal appointments relevant to Children’s Services Committee, together with the current Membership. Members were asked to review and make appointments to those external bodies, internal bodies and Champions positions, as set out in Appendix A of the report.
12.2 The Committee RESOLVED to make appointments to external bodies, internal bodies and champions’ positions as set out in Appendix B of these minutes.
13 Exclusion of the Public
13.1 The Committee considered excluding the public whilst agenda item 14 (Strategic Partnerships) was discussed and was presented with the following public interest test, as required by the 2006 Access to Information Regulations for consideration by the Committee:
“Exclusion of the press and public in relation to agenda item 14 (Strategic Partnerships) is sought under paragraph 3 of part 1 of schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 as it contained information relating to the financial or business affairs of a particular person including the person holding that information”.
The Committee RESOLVED to exclude the public from the meeting while the report was considered.
14 Strategic Partnerships
14.1 The Committee received the confidential report by the Executive Director of Children’s Services.
14.2 The Committee RESOLVED to agree the recommendations contained in the confidential report.
The meeting closed at 1.55pm.
Chair
If you need this document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact Customer Services on 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
14 Appendix A
Children’s Services Committee
Tuesday 28 June 2016
5 Public Question Time
Question from Ms C Smith:
Can NCC give assurances for the next academic year, that all current year 11 and 12 students can access the courses that they wanted to follow, at Dereham Sixth Form and will students have the best qualified teachers available from the pool of staff that are currently employed there? Will any staff be adversely affected by recent events?
Reply by the Chairman:
Following Neatherd High School’s announcement in February 2016 to withdraw from Dereham Sixth Form College (DSFC), Northgate High School has made the arrangements necessary to ensure that high quality post-16 provision for the 2016- 17 academic year is appropriately in place. Given that DSFC will now continue in 2016-17, there will be an inevitable implication for Neatherd teachers who have previously taught at DSFC.
Those teachers working exclusively at DSFC have been offered contracts of employment with Northgate High School and will continue as before. Other teaching staff from Neatherd High School will continue to be ‘bought in’ by the sixth form and these timetabled requirements have now been agreed but there are fewer teaching sessions available for some staff who have worked at both Neatherd and DSFC. This is a direct consequence of the withdrawal by Neatherd from the partnership between February and April and Northgate High School’s actions to secure sufficient and appropriately qualified staffing in response to that.
The continuation of one larger sixth form provides financial viability as well as greater certainty that a broad range of subjects will be offered. This is one of the reasons that NCC intervened in the plans Neatherd put forward that would have created two smaller institutions.
As is usual for sixth form provision, there will be a minimum number of students required to ensure that each course is financially viable. A larger organisation makes a broad course choice more likely. Prior to Neatherd’s announcement, the decision had already been taken to slightly reduce the number of courses on offer in response to budgetary pressures. However, DSFC staff have indicated that the majority of students will be able to study the subjects they chose. Since February, all course choices offered to students remain available for 2016-2017.
15 Appendix B 2016/17 Appointments shown
Children’s Services Committees/Boards/Working Groups/Outside Bodies
(a) Children’s Services Committees/Boards/Working Groups
1. Adoption Panels (1 member for each of the 2 Adoption Panels)
Alison Thomas James Joyce
Plus 1 nominated substitute for each member
These are statutory bodies. Appointments to the Adoption Panels have by convention, not been made on a politically balanced basis, but instead on the basis of those best able to give the extensive time and commitment required.
2. Capital Priorities Group - 5
1 Labour (Emma Corlett) 1 Con (Shelagh Gurney) 1 UKIP (Paul Gilmour) 1 Lib Dem (James Joyce) Chairman (Roger Smith)
This Group should consist of members of Children’s Services Committee. It:
• contributes to discussions about priorities for capital expenditure • Develops consistent prioritisation criteria for capital expenditure • Monitors capital building programmes • Reviews the effectiveness of decisions it has taken and adapts criteria accordingly
3. Local Authority Governor Appointments Group – 3 (quorum 2)
1 Labour – Emma Corlett 1 Conservative – Barry Stone 1 UKIP - Paul Gilmour
This Group makes recommendations to the Director of Children’s Services on:
1. Filling of vacancies for LEA School Governors on the basis of nominations recommended by the appropriate nominating Party Spokesmen 2. Dismissal of LEA School Governors 3. Making appointments to educational trusts
16
4. Norfolk Foster Panels – 1 for each Panel plus 1 nominated substitute for each member
Central Norfolk – Judy Leggett (sub Richard Bearman) West – James Joyce East – Tom Garrod
These are statutory bodies. Appointments to the Foster Panels have by convention, not been made on a politically balanced basis, but instead on the basis of those best able to give the extensive time and commitment required.
5. Teachers Joint Consultative Committee – 11
2 Labour (Mike Sands and Emma Corlett) 5 Cons (Roger Smith, Colin Foulger, Judy Leggett, Tony Adams, Barry Stone) 1 Green (Richard Bearman) 1 LD (Brian Hannah) 2 UKIP (Denis Crawford tbc) and Paul Gilmour)
This is a forum for discussion between teacher unions and the County Council on employment related matters.
6. Youth Advisory Boards
Breckland –Terry Jermy Broadland – Judy Leggett Great Yarmouth – Jonathan Childs King’s Lynn and West Norfolk – Richard Bird North Norfolk – Vacant Norwich – Richard Bearman South Norfolk – Barry Stone
7. Virtual School Reference Group (4)
1 Lib Dem (James Joyce) 1 UKIP (Paul Gilmour) 1 Conservative – (Judy Leggett) 1 Green – Richard Bearman
8. Small Schools Steering Group (2)
This Group monitors the small schools strategy.
1 Conservative (Judy Leggett) (Chair) 1 Green (Richard Bearman)
17 9. Corporate Parenting Executive Group (6)
This Group ensures that Norfolk’s promise to young people leaving care is implemented, by holding to account people who are responsible for its delivery. It replaced the Corporate Parenting Strategic Group.
Chairman of the Committee (Roger Smith, Co-Chair) 1 Labour – (Emma Corlett) 1 Conservative – (Judy Leggett) 1 UKIP – (Paul Gilmour) 1 Green – (Richard Bearman) 1 Lib Dem (James Joyce)
10. Joint Road Casualty Reduction Partnership Board (4)
A partnership that brings together appropriate public, private and voluntary sector commissioner and provider organisations in Norfolk to reduce the number and severity of road traffic casualties on roads in Norfolk, and to increase public confidence that all forms of journeys on roads in the county will be safe.
The Partnership Board requires a member from the following Committees
Environment, Development and Transport, Communities Health and Well-Being Board Children's Services
Children's Services – Jenny Chamberlin
(b) Outside Bodies
1. Standing Advisory Council for Religious Education (4)
Jim Perkins Barry Stone Chrissie Rumsby
The organisation aims to ensure that the statutory provision of RE and collective worship is of a consistently high standard.
2. Norfolk Community Health and Care NHS Trust Shadow Council of Governors (2)
(1 representing Adults) Mike Sands (1 representing Children) Barry Stone
Norfolk Community Health & Care NHS Trust is responsible for community health provision across all of Norfolk except for Great Yarmouth and Waveney. This includes community hospitals and a full range of non-acute services including community
18 nursing, health visiting, and school nursing services. The Trust currently shares one senior manager post with Adult Social Care and is in the process of agreeing a joint senior management team with the Council.
Council appointees as a Governor of an NHS Trust should not also be members of the Norfolk Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee because of the potential / perceived conflict of interest.
c) Member Champions
Child Poverty – Brian Hannah Young Carers – Colleen Walker
19 Children’s Services Committee Item No Report title: Integrated Performance and Finance Monitoring Report 2016-17 Date of meeting: 13 September 2016 Responsible Chief Michael Rosen Officer: Executive Director Children’s Services Strategic impact Robust performance and risk management is key to ensuring that the organisation works both efficiently and effectively to develop and deliver services that represent good value for money and which meet identified need.
Executive summary Performance is reported on an exception basis, meaning that only those vital signs that are performing poorly or where performance is deteriorating are presented to committee. Those that do not meet the exception criteria will be available on the Performance section of the Norfolk County Council web site. This is currently under development.
Of the 12 vital signs indicators that fall within the remit of this committee, the following have met the exception criteria and so will be discussed in depth as part of the presentation of this report:
• Children in Need (CIN) with an up to date plan
In addition to vital signs performance, this report contains other key performance information via the Education Scorecard, Early Help Dashboard and the Monthly Management Information (MI) Report.
Locality-level performance information is available on the Members Insight area of the intranet.
Recommendation:
Review and comment on the performance data, information and analysis presented in the vital sign report cards and determine whether the recommended actions identified are appropriate or whether another course of action is required (refer to list of possible actions in Appendix 3).
20
1. Introduction 1.1 Performance dashboard 1.1.1 The performance dashboard provides a quick overview of Red/Amber/Green rated performance across all 12 vital signs over a rolling 12 month period. This then complements that exception reporting process and enables committee members to check that key performance issues are not being missed.
21
1.2 Report cards 1.2.1 A report card has been produced for each vital sign. It provides a succinct overview of performance and outlines what actions are being taken to maintain or improvement performance. The report card follows a standard format that is common to all committees.
1.2.2 Each vital sign has a lead officer, who is directly accountable for performance, and a data owner, who is responsible for collating and analysing the data on a monthly basis. The names and positions of these people are clearly specified on the report cards.
1.2.3 Vital signs are reported to committee on an exceptions basis. The exception reporting criteria are as follows:
• Performance is off-target (Red RAG rating or variance of 5% or more) • Performance has deteriorated for three consecutive months/quarters/years • Performance is adversely affecting the council’s ability to achieve its budget • Performance is adversely affecting one of the council’s corporate risks.
1.2.4 Vital Signs performance is reported on an exception basis using a report card format, meaning that only those vital signs that are performing poorly or where performance is deteriorating are presented to committee. To enable Members to have oversight of performance across all vital signs, all report cards will be made available to view through Members Insight. To give further transparency to information on performance, for future meetings it is intended to make these available in the public domain through the Council’s website. . 1.3 Recommendation 1.3.1 For each vital sign that has been reported on an exceptions basis, Committee Members are asked to:
Review and comment on the performance data, information and analysis presented in the vital sign report cards and determine whether the recommended actions identified are appropriate or whether another course of action is required.
22
Section 17 Children in Need (CIN) with an up-to-date CIN Plan Why is this important? Our Section 17 CIN services are designed to support and empower families to make changes enabling them to thrive and meet any challenges / difficulties via their own reserves and/or use of universal services. A good quality CIN Plan that is regularly updated to reflect the changing needs of children and families is essential in achieving this outcome. Performance What is the background to current performance? • Percentage of Section 17 CIN with up-to-date CIN Plan: The % of CIN with an up to date plan has dropped slightly since the previous report to Committee. However, North Norfolk & Broadland has improved and is now in line with 97.5% other localities. Norwich remains a significant outlier.
80.9% • The primary issue remains our 20-day target for CIN Plans and the throughput of work within assessment teams. To illustrate this fact, the County performance for CIN with an 50% up-to-date Plan, outside of assessment teams, is 89%.
• Staffing adjustments have been made and have impacted positively in one of the Norwich Assessment teams but not AprMayJun Jul Aug Sep Oct NovDec Jan FebMarAprMayJun Jul Aug Sep Oct NovDec Jan FebMar in the other. 13/ 14/ 2015/16 2016/17 14 15
Norfolk Trend Norfolk Target 12-month Trajectory Action required • Norwich to continue to focus across September on clearing What will success look like? the backlog.
• Essex will be supporting us with a ‘deep-dive’ diagnostic • Almost all Section 17 CIN have a plan that has been reviewed within the exercise into the Norwich locality, which will help to inform previous 12-weeks. what additional action is required. • The target is for 97.5% of Section 17 Children in Need have a timely CIN Plan by the end of March 2016.
Responsible Officers Lead: Cathy Mouser Data: Don Evans
23 2. Support For Education Improvement (Scorecard at Appendix 1) 2. 1 Ofsted Outcomes (Appendix 1, page 7) Ofsted currently judge 86% of Norfolk Schools to be Good or Outstanding in their latest inspection data, compared to 87% nationally. The percentage of Norfolk Schools judged good or better has continued to increase and is now broadly in line with national figures at all phases. (It should be noted that the spikey pattern of the profile for Norfolk special and secondary school outcomes reflects the fact that one school inspected has a significant impact on outcomes.) Percentage of Schools judged Good or Outstanding 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40% Apr-12 Oct-12 May-13 Nov-13 Jun-14 Dec-14 Jul-15 Jan-16 Aug-16 Mar-17
National Primary National Secondary National Special Norfolk Primary Norfolk Secondary Norfolk Special
2.2 Educational Achievement
2.2.1 All achievement data for 2016 at this stage remains provisional and early national comparators may be unreliable. At Key Stage 4 and 5 no national comparators are yet available.
2.2.2 Outcomes for children in the Early Years and Year 1 have further improved from 2015. Key Stage 1 and 2 provisional outcomes for schools for the summer 2016 are not comparable to previous years, as they are the first results measuring achievement against the revised National Curriculum which was introduced in September 2014. New headline measures at Key Stage 4 reflect the government’s ambition for pupils to achieve more than 5 good GCSEs. At KS5 headline
24 measures are also changing in 2016. Appendix 2, summary of changes to national tests and examinations, details these changes.
2.2.3 At the end of Reception Year , all pupils are assessed against the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile . Those who reach the expected standards in all elements of Personal, Social and Emotional Development, Communication and Language, Physical Development, Literacy and Numeracy are said to have reached a Good Level of Development (GLD). Results have improved again and are now at the provisional national average of 69%. (Appendix 1, page 3)
% Early Years Good Level of Development 70
65
60
55
50 2014 2015 2016 Norfolk 58 65 69 National 60 66 69
Norfolk National
2.2.4 In Year 1 all pupils in the country take a phonics screening check . Norfolk has shown a year on year upward trend in outcomes in the phonics test. It still remains below the national average but the gap has narrowed from 5% below in 2014 to 3% below in 2016. 2.2.5 2016 Key Stage 1 and 2 results are not comparable to previous years in terms of a like for like comparison of numbers. The only comparison that can be made is the results relationship with national averages. Schools in Norfolk may have been better prepared for the new assessment model than in some other parts of the country, due to the high take up level of extensive LA training and support materials. (Appendix 2, summary of changes to national tests and examinations) 2.2.6 Schools responded positively to the significant changes to Key Stage 1 teacher assessment, and teacher assessment outcomes in Norfolk are above national averages in every respect. Up until 2015, attainment at Key Stage 1 was very similar to national averages.
25 2016 Key Stage 1: %Expected Standard (EXS) and working at Greater Depth (GDS) 80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Reading Writing Maths RWM Norfolk EXS+ 75 70 74 63 Norfolk GDS 28 16 21 11 National EXS+ 74 66 73 60 National GDS 24 13 18 9
Norfolk EXS+ Norfolk GDS National EXS+ National GDS
2.2.7 At Key Stage 2 , the new National Curriculum introduced some more challenging, technical content in English and Mathematics. 11 year olds sat the new tests for the first time in 2016. Nationally, early provisional data shows that 53% of pupils achieved the new expected standard in Reading, Writing and Mathematics which shows this is significantly more demanding than the previous level 4, where 80% achieved the expected standard. The increased demands of the 2016 tests has resulted in significantly more variation in results between schools and between groups of pupils. 2.2.8 Between 2013 and 2015 Norfolk showed a 3 year upward trend in Key Stage 2 attainment, at a rate in line with the national increase: the gap to national for the percentage of pupils achieving Level 4 or higher in Reading, Writing and Mathematics remaining at 4%. In 2016 the percentage achieving the new expected standard in all of reading, writing and mathematics is also 4% below the national average. (Appendix 1, page 4). Until all local authorities data is published by the DfE it is impossible to evaluate whether this gap between Norfolk and national averages is as significant as in previous years. The 4% gap historically indicated performance that was in the bottom quartile of local authority performance across the country. The autumn term DfE statistical release will indicate whether the overall Norfolk performance has improved compared to that of other local authorities. The attainment pattern across subjects in Norfolk school results shows far more variation than in previous years.
26 2016 KS2 % Expected Standard 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Reading Writing TA GPS Maths RWM Norfolk 63% 76% 66% 62% 49% National 66% 74% 72% 70% 53%
Norfolk National
Attainment in Writing was slightly better than the national average, and that of reading is slightly worse. Attainment in the Grammar, Punctuation and Spelling test (which is not included in the headline attainment measure) is 6% below national. Of greatest concern is attainment in Mathematics, which is 8% below the national average. A plan will be taken to Committee in October 2016 outlining the actions the Local Authority will be taking to analyse this further, in order to challenge and support significant improvement in mathematics outcomes. 2.2.9 Raising the attainment of disadvantaged pupils is a high priority nationally to encourage social mobility. The attainment of pupils who have been eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) in the last six years is a good indicator as to how well schools raise attainment for disadvantaged pupils, and how effectively Pupil Premium funding has been spent in raising achievement for these pupils. 2.2.10 In 2015, the gap between FSM and other pupils achieving the expected level 4 in reading, writing and mathematics at Key Stage 2, was 18 percentage points (ppt) in Norfolk compared to 15 ppt nationally. In 2016, the gaps in the attainment of FSM and other pupils achieving the new expected standard is much wider both nationally and locally. However the gap in Norfolk is very slightly smaller at 20ppt compared to the gap of 21ppt nationally.
2.2.11 At Key Stage 4 (age 16) schools reported very provisional GCSE outcomes on the 25 th August. No national comparator data is yet available. DfE have changed the accountability measures, removing the ‘5 good GCSEs including English and Mathematics’ measure. (Appendix 2, summary of changes to national tests and examinations)
The percentage of pupils, (as reported by schools), who have achieved A*to C in English and Mathematics (Basics) has increased from 57% in 2015 to 61%. The percentage of Pupils eligible for FSM in the last 6 years achieving the Basics has improved from 38% to 39% (Appendix 1, page 5).
27 % GCSE English and Mathematics (The Basics) A*-C 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2014 2015 2016 Norfolk 56% 57% 61% National 59% 59%
Norfolk National
2.2.12 The average attainment of pupils is now calculated using a new indicator called ‘Attainment 8’. 2016 is the first year that this measure will be published. Norfolk’s provisional Attainment 8 score (as reported by schools) is 48.8. Last year DfE made ‘shadow’ Attainment 8 data available. 2016 outcomes in Norfolk are above the 2015 shadow Norfolk and national outcomes. National Attainment 8 will also undoubtedly rise as schools nationally have matched their curriculum offer to this new measure. 2.2.13 The average progress of pupils will be measured using a new ‘Progress 8’ value added indicator. Progress 8 will be the most important accountability measure from 2016, and will be the only Floor Standard measure going forward. Because Progress 8 is calculated relative to the progress of pupils nationally, it is not possible to estimate Progress 8 scores with any accuracy before they are first published in October. 2.2.14 DfE has introduced the expectation that all pupils should be entered for the EBacc (English Baccalaureate), a combination of academic GCSE subjects. (Appendix 2, summary of changes to national tests and examinations).The percentage of pupils who were entered for the full EBacc remains stable at 35%, with 21% achieving a grade C or better in the EBacc subjects. 2.2.15 At the end of Key Stage 5 (age 18 ) the early results for Norfolk’s secondary schools, sixth form colleges and further education colleges the average grade was a C+. This is an improvement in the average grade of C, and above the 2015 National average, also a C. The provisional figures for the county include for the first time Norfolk’s further education and sixth form colleges which make up approximately a third of the total A level cohort. National comparisons and the results for vocational courses (which are not released on a single day) will be published in October. 2.2.16 The percentage of Norfolk pupils not in education, employment or training (NEET) remains in line with the national performance. The increase in the percentage of young people whose destination is not known is not unusual for this time of year as we establish the continuing participation of students whose courses have come to an end. (Appendix 1, page 6) 2.2.17 The number of pupils permanently excluded is not yet finalised for the summer term, as the statutory process is not completed for all pupils. 20 primary pupils were excluded, the lowest figure since Autumn 2014. 54 students were excluded from secondary schools, which is slightly higher than the summer term in 2015. (Appendix 1, page 9)
28 2. 3 A Flying Start
2.3.1 All schools will again receive A Flying Start pack produced by the Norfolk Education Achievement Service at the start of the school year. This pack is designed to support governors and school leaders in the early analysis of outcomes using provisional county and national data. The packs provide access to data that would not otherwise be available to schools until the middle of the autumn term. Leaders and governors can use this data to benchmark their school data against it making any revisions or adjustments to the curriculum and teaching and learning. Packs will be sent to governing bodies and school leaders electronically in the first week of September. Some schools will be encouraged to return a workbook to the local authority to enable us to further challenge and support appropriately to improve outcomes for children.
2.4 LA Achievement Profiling
2.4.1 The previous system of categorising schools in bands A-F will not be continued as the priority has shifted from increasing the number of pupils who attend a good school, to one where all pupils receive a good education. We are therefore developing an approach which profiles achievement across a range of indicators. The aim is to support school leaders and governing bodies by sharing a local authority view of strengths and areas for improvement in relation to pupil achievement. There will be no summative view of the school and the profile will be continuously revised throughout the year as provisional data for a wide range of achievement measures are validated. We will share this profile with all school leaders and Chairs of Governors during the autumn term as it becomes robust and accurate and national comparators are confirmed.
29 3. Early Help 3.1 Dashboard & Highlights in respect of Early Help and Family Focus
30 Return to Home Interv iews May June July 8 cases had not been closed, 15 cases closed within the 72 hour deadline. While 17 cases Didn't hit target, there were extenuating circumstances in All County 38 40 all cases
Our July figures are predictably low due to the school holidays. Historically Schools and Children services have always our main source of FSP's. We are now seeing an increase in FSP's from Primary Health sources, Adult Services and District Council, Housing (homeless departments.) Family Support Process -Rolling month on month 90 90 81 80 80
70 62 70 59 60 55 60 50 50 40 40 37 35 37 40 29 30 30 30 27 30 20 20 19 16 16 18 20 13 20 12 11 10 11 11 10 7 9 8 8 8 9 10 4 4 3 4 3 3 5 4 10 0 0 Jul 15 Aug 15 Sep 15 Oct 15 Nov 15 Dec 15 Jan 16 Feb 16 Mar 16 Apr 16 May 16 Jun 16 Jul 16 Total FSP Opened in month FSP Worked with by NEHFF Worked with Other Agency Advised Closed
The number of FSP has increased to 74% above the yearly average due to NEHFF recording FSPs on DOREIS. Last month we noted that we have seen a decline in the number of Universal FSPs since December which could be an impact of an Children's Services Early Help offer as well as FSP training stopping in September. This month we can see that there is a slow reversal of that trend.
31 3.1.1 July saw a16% increase against the average number of referrals received into Early Help over the last twelve months. This is a picture that we are seeing more and more. Since the last report new referrals have increased to 255 in July, compared to 187 in July 2015. There were 1,259 active cases to Early Help and Family Focus in July. This is up from 1203 as reported at the last Committee and represents a 35% increase across the financial year to date.
3.1.2 In total there are 2,859 Family Support Plans in place across Norfolk worked with by Children’s Services and partner organisations. An increase of over 3% from our last report. However we are expecting this to increase further as FSP training begins again.
3.1.3 While our main source of requests are from schools, there has been an increase in referrals from Health professionals, such as midwives and health visitors. There has also been an increase in self referrals via MASH
3.1.4 July saw 9 cases transferring from Social Care (Step Downs).
3.1.5 Families are continuing to access on-going support once their agreed outcomes have been met. There were 135 families accessing the supporting progress service in July. This is a further increase since our last report to Committee (133 in March).
3.2 Highlights in respect of Children’s Centres:
3.2.1 Performance reviews (known as the Annual Conversation), with each children’s centre commenced in August and are due to be be completed by the end of September for all 53 centres. This will require the centres to have provided their self-evaluation based on the new service specification during the next month. All centres have been provided with guidance so expectations on what must be delivered is clear.
3.2.2 Two providers, Martham Primary & Nursery School, and another (who have asked not to be named due to commercial sensitivities at this time), have requested to end their contract for the management of these Children’s Centres.
3.2.3 Martham Primary & Nursery School have agreed to continue the management of Trinity Children’s Centre until a new provider is in place. This will allow for seamless transfer. The re- tendering process for Trinity Childrens Centre has commenced.
3.2.4 One provider is ceasing to operate as a national organisation, and as such we have agreed novation of contracts from them to Action for Children in respect of the three Children’s Centres as part of their national negotiations on contract transfers. This will allow for seamless transfer.
32 4 Social Work (MI Report at Appendix 3) 4.1 Contacts, Referrals and Assessments
4.1.1 The number of contacts continues to fluctuate around the 2500-3000 per month range. With that translating to 600-700 referrals (around 25%). It should be noted that a significant number of contacts relate to requests for advice and as such, the conversion rate does not directly equate to the validity of contacts.
4.1.2 The percentage of assessments completed in 45 days has fallen from 78%, as reported to the last Committee to, 66%. This relates primarily to specific action that is being taken to clear backlogs of assessments, particularly in the Norwich and North localities. As a consequence of completing those assessments which are outside the 45 day timescale, the percentage completed in timescale is impacted negatively. To emphasise the work that has been undertaken, the total number of assessment authorised in May was 599, whereas the total authorised in July was 759, an increase of 27%.
4.2 Children In Need (CIN)
4.2.1 CIN with a visit in timescale has fallen to 66%, with performance in Norwich being the main cause for concern having slipped from 53%, as reported to the last Committee, to 39%. The assessment backlog in Norwich is a significant factor here as the cases are awaiting write up and closure but while they are being written up the cases fall into the timescale of needing another visit. It is important to note that the Child in Need cases being worked within the longer term teams are being seen within timescale at the rate of 90%.
4.3 Child Protection (CP)
4.3.1 The number of children subject to a CP plan has increased significantly in the last 2 months from 459 in May to 518 in July, an increase of 13%. We are not proposing any direct responsive activity at this time as this still falls within the levels of variation we have seen previously. However, we will continue to track this over time.
4.3.2 92% of children subject to CP plans were seen in timescale, a further small increase since the last Committee.
4.4 Looked After Children (LAC)
4.4.1 LAC with an up to date plan is currently at 95% with all localities achieving 90%+ and Gt Yarmouth achieving 100%. Further work needs to be done to ensure that all plans meet the highest quality requirements and the QA and IRO services will have key roles in ensuring this happens.
4.4.2 Performance in the two placement stability indicators, ‘ 2+ years in the same placement’ and ‘3 or more placements in any one years’ is strong against our targets with 80% (target is 70-80%) and 10% (target is less than 11%) respectively.
33 4.5 Care Leavers
4.5.1 The % of relevant* or former relevant** care leavers who have had face-to-face contact in the last 2 months has risen to just over 80%. Considerably more care leavers have been contacted when other means (letter/phone/text etc) are included.
4.5.2 90% of relevant or former relevant care leavers are deemed to be living in suitable accommodation, which is a 13% improvement on the previous year end figure and 8% higher than the last recorded average for our statistical neighbours. It should be noted that the key measure in this KPI is the perception of the care leaver and as such, does not necessarily reflect on the current accommodation type.
* Relevant care leavers are Young People aged 16 or 17 who have already left care and who were looked after for (a total of) at least 13 weeks from the age of 14 and have been looked after at some time while 16 or 17 ** Former relevant care leavers are Young People aged 18-21 who have been eligible and/or relevant Care Leavers
34 5. Social Care Recording System Update 5.1 Following a detailed and thorough procurement process, the contract for the new system has been awarded, subject to the statutory standstill period.
5.2 The procurement covered Children’s Services, Adults Services and Finance and the chosen provider scored highest of the three bidders on both quality and price.
5.3 The Governance arrangements are well established with the respective Directors of Children’s and Adults Services as the project sponsors and the project leads as follows: Children’s: Don Evans (Assistant Director Performance & Challenge) Adults: Janice Dane (Assistant Director Early Help & Prevention) Finance: John Baldwin (Head of Finance Exchequer Service's)
5.4 Key Project Manager, Business Lead and Data Analysis roles have been appointed. However, we have not been able as yet to appoint an overall Programme Manager.
6. Financial Implications 6.1 This section provides a summary of the financial projections for the department for the 2016/17 financial year.
6.2 The main financial points within the paper are:
• The Children’s Services revenue budget is projected to be £9.333m overspent for the year, before the impact of the point below.
• Senior managers have identified various departmental reserves which could be further drawn down to make a one-off contribution to the in-year overspend. This would reduce that overspend by £2.337m.
• The impact of this point is to reduce the in-year overspend to £6.996m.
6.3 At the previous Children’s Services Committee, the projected overspend for the year was £3m. The following table shows the areas where movements have occurred, leading to a change in the projections. Reason Movement
LAC Agency Residential 1,201 LAC Agency Fostering 270 LAC In-house Fostering -243 Residence/Kinship 230 Agency Social Workers 910 Independent Review Officers 260 Unregulated Accommodation 780 School Crossing Patrols 140 Management action adjustment 1,800 Troubled Families Grant Income -400 Education Support Grant -215 Use of Reserves -737 Total 3,996 35
6.4 The following tables set out the variations between the 2016/17 approved budget and the associated projected spending during the year, and also provides a summary of the department’s reserves and balances.
6.5 Table 1. Revenue – Local Authority Budget
6.5.1 The following summary table shows by type of budget, the actual spend for the year. The table shows the variance from the approved budget both in terms of a cash sum and as a percentage of the approved budget.
Movement Approved +Over/- +Over/ - since last Division of budget Outturn Underspend Underspend service as % of report £m £m £m budget £m Spending
Increases Looked After Children - 3.954 8.657 +4.703 +119 +1.201 Agency Residential
Looked After Children - 12.872 14.657 +1.785 +14 +0.270 Agency Fostering In-house LAC 8.384 8.522 +0.138 +2 -0.243 fostering Staying-put 0.000 0.265 +0.265 n/a - fostering Residence/ kinship 3.195 3.495 +0.300 +9 +0.230 payments Mainstream Home to 23.295 23.795 +0.500 +2 - School/College transport Post 16 Home to School 3.335 3.502 +0.167 +5 - transport Agency Social 0.792 1.702 +0.910 +115 +0.910 Workers Independent Reviewing 0.420 0.680 +0.260 +62 +0.260 Officers Unregulated Accommodation 1.220 2.000 +0.780 +64 +0.780 for 16/17 year olds
36 School Crossing 0.129 0.269 +140 +109 +0.140 Patrols Spending
Reductions Social Care Management 0.00 n/a +1.800 Actions Additional Troubled -2.324 -2.724 -0.400 -17 -0.400 Families Grant Sub Total +9.548 +4.948 One off corrective actions
Education 0.000 -0.215 -0.215 n/a -0.215 Services Grant
Use of
conditional 0.000 -2.337 -2.337 n/a -0.737 grants and
reserves Sub Total -2.552 -0.952
Total +6.996 +3.996
6.5.2 Senior managers are currently working to identify plans to achieve the department’s strategic and operational objectives at a sustainable lower cost with the aim of bringing the projected in-year overspend nearer to a balanced budget position. Further updates will be provided in future monitoring reports.
6.5.3 The main reasons for the projected variances: Children’s Services is a demand-led service; there are ongoing demographic pressures in Norfolk that have placed a considerable amount of pressure on several of the budgets.
• Looked After Children – Agency Residential Placements The number of placements has not reduced as quickly as planned over the preceding few years and (all other things being equal) this is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.
• Looked After Children – Agency Fostering Placements The number of placements has not reduced as quickly as planned over the preceding few years and (all other things being equal) this is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.
• In-house LAC fostering There has been an increased number of in-house foster care placements.
• Staying Put Fostering The additional cost of the Staying Put policy has been partially offset by a government grant of £361k, but there remains a residual pressure.
• Residence/kinship payments The number of payments and the cost per payment on average is higher than originally anticipated.
37 • Mainstream Home to School/College transport Additional cost of pupils with special educational needs
• Post-16 Home to School Transport Children’s Services will no longer be charging post-18 students for transport from the beginning of the next academic year (September 2016)
• Agency Social Workers Additional cost of agency social workers due to greater numbers being employed than anticipated.
• Independent Review Officers Increased number of officers employed as a result of the Ofsted report.
• Unregulated Accommodation Additional cost of Ofsted unregulated accommodation for 16 and 17 year olds for Looked After Children due to additional numbers and additional support costs.
• School Crossing Patrols Additional cost of school crossing patrols due to planned reductions in the number of staff not occurring in full.
6.6 Table 2. Revenue – Schools Budget
6.6.1 The Dedicated Schools Grant funds the Schools Budget. The Schools Budget has two main elements, the amounts delegated to schools and the amounts held centrally for pupil related spending. The amount delegated to schools includes a contingency which was allocated to schools for specific purposes.
6.6.2 The Dedicated Schools Grant can only be used for specified purposes and must be accounted for separately to the other Children’s Services spending and funding.
6.6.3 The following summary table shows by type of budget, the actual spend for the year. The table shows the variance from the approved budget both in terms of a cash sum and as a percentage of the approved budget.
Movement Approved +Over/- +Over/ - since last Division of budget Outturn Underspend Underspend service as % of report £m £m £m budget £m Independent and non- 14.287 16.535 +2.248 +16 +0.769 maintained education Dedicated Schools 0.000 -2.109 -2.109 n/a -0.630 Grant reserve Suspended 0.264 0.065 -0.199 -75 -0.199 Staff School Staff 1.047 1.107 +0.060 +6 +0.060 Maternity
38
6.6.4 Table 3 . The main reasons for the variances:-
Division of service +Over/ - Reasons for variance from budget Underspend £m Independent and +2.248 Additional cost and number of children non-maintained placed with independent and non- education maintained education providers. Dedicated Schools -2.109 Use Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) Grant (DSG) reserve to fund the above variance reserve Suspended School -0.199 Reduced cost and number of school Staff costs suspended staff School Staff +0.060 Additional cost of school staff maternity costs maternities
6.6.5 The Scheme for Financing Schools in Norfolk sets out the local framework within which delegated financial management is undertaken. In respect of budget plans the expectation is that schools submit budget plans at the end of the summer term, taking account in particular the actual level of balances held at the end of the previous financial year.
6.6.6 Based on budget information provided by schools, the projection of balances is as follows:
6.6.7 Table 4. Projected School Balances as at 31 March 2017
Title/description Balance at Forecast In year Schools 01-04-16 balance at Variance becoming £m 31-03-17 £m academies £m Nursery schools 0.103 0.047 -0.056 0.000 Primary schools 16.057 9.801 -4.159 -2.097 Secondary schools 2.470 0.907 -0.704 -0.859 Special schools 1.296 1.110 -0.186 0.000 School Clusters 2.308 1.840 -0.468 0.000
Total 22.234 13.705 -5.573 -2.956
6.7 Reserves & Provisions
6.7.1 A number of Reserves and Provisions exist within Children’s Services. The following table sets out the balances on the reserve and provision in the Children’s Services accounts at 1 April 2016 and the projected balances at 31 March 2017.
6.7.2 The table has been divided between those reserves and provisions relating to Schools and those that are General Children’s Services reserves and provisions
39
6.7.3 Table 5. Children’s Services Reserves and Provisions
Title/description Balance at Balance at Variance Reason for variance 01-04-16 31-03-17 £m £m £m Schools Transport Days 0.757 0.000 - Additional number of Equalisation 0.757 home to Fund school/college transport days in the 2016/17 financial year as a result of the timing of Easter. Dedicated 5.547 1.331 -4.216 £2.000m planned and Schools Grant £2.248m extra used (DSG) reserve for additional cost of High Needs expenditure and £0.107m of the school energy shared savings scheme, partly offset by other net underspends of £0.139m. Schools Non- 0.933 0.933 +0.000 These are school Teaching funds held on behalf Activities of schools Building 1.157 1.157 These are school Maintenance +0.000 funds held on behalf Partnership Pool of schools School Sickness 1.273 0.000 -1.273 These are school Insurance funds held on behalf Scheme of schools School Playing 0.273 0.273 +0.000 These are school surface sinking funds held on behalf fund of schools Education 0.015 0.015 Provision for +0.000 Holiday Pay Non BMPP 1.169 1.169 +0.000 These are school Building funds held on behalf Maintenance of schools Fund Norfolk PFI 2.349 2.349 +0.000 Sinking Fund
Schools total 13.473 7.227 -6.246
Children’s Services IT Earmarked 0.222 0.158 -0.064 Use of reserves to Reserves fund IT schemes
40 Repairs and 0.200 0.183 -0.017 Use of reserves Renewals Fund Grants and 2.885 1.450 -1.435 Prior year Contributions unconditional grants and contributions to be spent in 2016-17 Children's 0.490 0.000 -0.490 Use of reserves to Services post support Children’s Ofsted Services service Improvement improvement Fund
Children’s 3.797 1.791 -2.006 Services total
Total 17.270 9.018 -8.252
7. Issues, risks and innovation (Appendix 4) 7.1 Appendix 4 shows the current list of children’s services risks and mitigations.
7.2 These risks are regularly reviewed and updated as appropriate by the CS Leadership Team.
Officer Contact If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper or want to see copies of any assessments, eg equality impact assessment, please get in touch with:
Performance Officer Name: Don Evans: Tel: 223909 [email protected]
If you need this report in large print, audio, braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
41
42
August 2016
Norfolk Children’s Services Education Improvement Plan Scorecard
A Good Education for Every Norfolk Learner 2014 – 2016
Phase 2 – Embedding the Local Authority Strategy for Supporting School Improvement
SCORECARD
The Local Authority has 4 key strategic aims which underpin the support provided to settings, schools and colleges. The support for school improvement sits within a broader ambition of ‘A Good Education for Every Norfolk Learner’. The four key aims are to:
Aim 1: Raise Standards at all Key Stages Aim 2: Increase proportion of schools judged good or better Aim 3: Improve leadership and management Aim 4: Improve monitoring and evaluation of impact
(This scorecard reflects measurable data for Aim 1 and Aim 2 for routine monitoring purposes)
1
43
Performance Monitoring – Against LA High Level Strategic Targets for Improvement
Aim 1: Raise Standards at all Key Stages
Data is collected each half term from all Norfolk schools. The data collected from these schools is analysed school by school by the Education Achievement Service and an interpretation is sent back to the school with comments.The Education Intervention Service then follow up with schools of concern to quality assure the data provided.
Each school’s data is aggregated to calculate an overall percentage in order to monitor to the impact of intervention and support on the overall trajectory to meet 2016 targets.
Aim 2: Increase the proportion of schools judged good or better
Outcomes from school inspections are monitored weekly. A report is provided to the Assistant Director of Children’s Services showing the impact of Norfolk inspections on our trajectory towards our 2016 targets. Further analysis is undertaken to show the impact of intervention, challenge and support on inspection outcomes by LA risk category.
Key Green Performance is in line with national or better *Latest – represents the latest value and rating available at the time of reporting + Performance above national Amber Performance is off-track (up to 4% below national) Red Performance is well below national (more than 4% below national) ↑ / ↓ Improvement / decline from 2015 Norfolk outcomes Frequency of reporting is given against each measure - available Monthly [M], Quarterly [Q], Bi-annually [B] or Annually [A], some measures with © against are cumulative figures so data Frequency cannot be compared month to month as numbers will always increase.
2
44
Aim 1: Raise Standards at all Key Stages
1.1 Improve Early Years outcomes - % Achieving A Good Level of Development
Percentages represent the percentage of pupils.
FSM = Pupils eligible for Free School Meals at any point in the last 6 years
All = All pupils in the cohort
2015 predictions are derived from half termly report card data collected from all schools
Result Results School Forecasts 2016-2017 Improv ement 2013 2014 2015 2016 since 2015 December 2016 March 2017 2017
All 46 58 ↑ 65 ↑ 69 +4 Norfolk FSM 32 43 ↑ 51 ↑ 54 +3 All 41 58 ↑ 64 ↑ 66 +2 Breckland FSM 28 49+ ↑ 47 ↓ 50 +3
All 52 60 ↑ 69 + ↑ 75+ +6 Broadland FSM 37 + 41 ↑ 48 ↑ 52 +4 Great Yarmouth All 40 57 ↑ 61 ↑ 65 +4 FSM 32 48+ ↑ 53 + ↑ 54 +1 All 47 61+ ↑ 66 ↑ 69 +3 Kings Lynn & West FSM 34 43 ↑ 54 + ↑ 54 = All 48 57 ↑ 62 ↑ 71 +9 North FSM 37+ 45 ↑ 52 + ↑ 55 +3 All 38 51 ↑ 62 ↑ 66 +4 Norwich FSM 28 38 ↑ 48 ↑ 56 +8 All 55+ 60 ↑ 70 + ↑ 74 +4 South FSM 32 42 ↑ 51 ↑ 59 +8 National All pupils 52 60 ↑ 66 ↑ 69 +3 FSM 36 45 ↑ 51
In order to track the progress in closing the gap with national averages - the colour coding relates to the Norfolk gaps to national average .
We did not collect FSM data in autumn term 1 (Schools should compare the FSM gap with pupils who are not FSM – and not to the average for All children. So it is advisable not to calculate the gap between FSM and All children)
3
45
1.2: Improve Outcomes at Key Stage 2 - % achieving the expected standard
Percentages represent the percentage of pupils.
FSM = Pupils eligible for Free School Meals at any point in the last 6 years
All = All pupils in the cohort
2017 In year tracking 2017 Result 2016 Provisional Results Subject Gaps to National Reading Writing Maths % Pupils 2015 Gap to % Pupils meeting the expected meeting the National level standard expected 4b standard %Expected+ Gap to December March July National Norfolk All -5 49 -4 -3 2 -8 FSM -7 35 -4 -2 2 -10 Breckland All -12 46 -7 -4 3 -6 FSM -12 32 -7 -9 -7 -13 Broadland All +4 58 +5 6 8 -2 FSM +3 42 +3 8 11 7 Great Yarmouth All -12 45 -12 -6 2 -9 FSM -6 38 -1 -1 4 -7 Kings Lynn & West All -4 49 -4 -5 2 -9 FSM -3 34 -5 -1 4 -9 North All -7 51 -2 0 5 -5 FSM -9 36 -3 0 5 -8 Norwich All -4 47 -6 -5 4 -10 FSM -4 37 -2 0 7 -9 South All +2 56 +3 5 3 -2 FSM -3 34 -5 0 -2 -9 National All pupils 53 FSM 39
In order to track the progress in closing the gap with national averages - the colour coding relates to the Norfolk gaps to the national average. Gaps for 2016 will not be colour coded until we have comparative data and can understand the significance of the size of the gap.
Schools should compare the FSM gap with pupils who are not FSM – and not to the average for All children. So it is advisable not to calculate the gap between FSM and All children.
1.3: Improve outcomes at Key Stage 4 - % Achieving 5 GCSEs A* - C, including English and Mathematics – up to 2015. For 2016 onwards the measure changes to the Progress 8 and Attainment 8 score. It is possible to monitor the schools forecasts and their progress towards Attainment 8, but not Progress 8. 4
46
Percentages represent the percentage of pupils.
FSM = Pupils eligible for Free School Meals at any point in the last 6 years
All = All pupils in the cohort
2015 predictions are derived from half termly report card data from all schools
Attainment 8 English and Mathematics Progress 8 * Result Forecast Result Progress 8 Forecast Result July 2015 (validated) July 2016 (unpublished) March July July 2015 * March July July 2015 Dec 2015 Dec 2015 2016 2016 (unpublished) 2016 2016 Norfolk All 57 59 ↑ 59 ↑ 61 Norfolk All 0.0 47 49.5 48.3 48.8 FSM 38 43+↑ 42+↑ 39 FSM -0.3 36.1 42.4 41 39.1 Breckland All 57 60+↑ 61 ↑ 59 FSM 41+ 41 + 49 Breckland All 0.1 47.9 50.0 48.5 48.5 44 + Broadland 64+ 69 FSM -0.1 39.6 42.8 42.3 39.8 All 60 + 64+↑ Broadland All 0.1 49.6 51.6 49.7 52.1 FSM 41 + 59+↑ 58+↑ 45 FSM -0.3 40.5 42.8 42.8 41.5 Great All 52 52 52 55 Great All 0.1 44.4 45.9 44.3 46.9 Yarmouth FSM 39 40+↑ 41+↑ 35 Yarmouth FSM -0.1 37.9 41.9 40.2 40.5 Kings Lynn & All 55 46 46 55 Kings Lynn All -0.3 44.5 45.2 45.9 47.6 West FSM 35 28 27 32 & West FSM -0.7 35.5 37.4 37.1 38.6 North All 59 64+↑ 61 63 North All 0.1 49.2 52.0 50.1 50.6 FSM 40 + 46+↑ 42 44 FSM -0.1 41.7 46.5 45.0 41.9 Norwich All 52 59 ↑ 60 57 Norwich All -0.1 45.6 49.1 46.8 47.1 FSM 36 48+↑ 44+↑ 36 FSM -0.3 38.0 44.7 38.9 40.1 South All 68 + 67+ ↓ 70+ 71 South All 0.2 52.4 52.8 52.3 53.1 FSM 42 + 48+↑ 49 +↑ 40 FSM -0.2 41.0 46.1 44.2 42.4 National All 59 National All 0.0 47.8 FSM 39 FSM -0.36 39.0
Notes: Attainment 8 and Progress 8 Progress 8: Green = at or above 0 (national) Attainment 8: Green = at or above national *No Norfolk schools opted into Attainment 8 and Progress 8 in 2015, so school data will not be published for any Amber = -0.1 or -0.2 Amber = 1 or 2 below national Norfolk schools. 2015 data is provided here only as a context by which to evaluate 2016 forecasts and results. Red = -0.3 or lower Red = 3 or more below national Attainment 8 and Progress 8 are affected significantly by curriculum options, and entry patterns in schools are changing considerably as all schools will be held to account using the measures in 2016. Progress 8 figures are a value added 1 = 1 GCSE grade above national An attainment 8 score of 50 = average grade C calculation, so capture the difference between the attainment 8 score and the national average attainment 8 score for 10 = an average of 1 GCSE grade across all subjects pupils with the same starting points. Because Progress 8 is calculated relative to the progress of pupils nationally, it is not possible to estimate Progress 8 scores with any accuracy.
In order to track the progress in closing the gap with national averages – the colour coding relates to the Norfolk gaps to the national average . (Schools should compare the FSM gap with pupils who are not FSM – and not to the average for All children. So it is advisable not to calculate the gap between FSM and All children)
5
47
↑ 6
48
Aim 2: Increase the proportion of schools judged good or outstanding
Shown as a percentage of school, out of the current number of schools with an Ofsted judgement.
July 2014 July 2015 July 2016 December 2016 April 2017 July 2017 No rfolk National Norfolk National Norfolk National Latest Actual Actual Actual Norfolk
%Schools Judged Outstanding 11% 21% 12% 22% 13% 22%
%Schools judged Good or 70% 78% 79% 84% 86% 87% 86% Outstanding %Early Years settings judged 85% + ↑ 83% 87% ↑ 84% 96%+ ↑ 96%+ ↑ good or better %Childminders judged good 80% + ↑ 78% 89% ↑ 84% 93% 93% or better %Children’s Centres judged 71% + ↓ 67% 67% 66% 68% ↑ 68% ↑ good or better %Primary phase schools 70% ↑ 81% 81% ↑ 85% 87% ↑ 88% 87% ↑ increase
% should % should judged good or better %Secondary phase schools judged good or better 62% ↓ 70% 67% ↑ 74% 77% ↑ 77% 77% ↑ %Special schools judged good or better 91% + ↑ 90% 100% 91% 91% 93% 91%
Reduction in District Variation: Percentage of all schools, percentage of schools judged good or better :
Norfolk July 2014 July 2015 July 2016 December 2016 April 2017 July 2017 Latest Breckland 69% (44/64) ↑ 69% (44/64) ↑ 80% (47/59) ↑ 80% (47/59) ↑ Broadland 75% (45/60) ↑ 88% (51/58) +↑ 93% (53/57) +↑ 93% (53/57) +↑ Great Yarmouth 65% (22/34) ↑ 67% (22/33) ↑ 72% (23/32) ↑ 72% (23/32) ↑ Kings Lynn & West 63% (49/77) ↑ 73% (52/71) ↑ 80% (52/65) ↑ 80% (52/65) ↑ Norwich 70% (28/40) ↑ 74% (29/39) ↑ 91% (32/35) + ↑ 91% (32/35) + ↑ North 73% (39/54) ↑ 93% (49/53) ↑ 96% (51/53) +↑ 96% (51/53) +↑ South 81% (59/73) ↑ 85% (62/73) 85% (63/74) 85% (63/74) National 81% 84% 87% 87%
7
49
Inclusion Performance Framework Attendance of Looked After Pupils
Shown as a percentage of pupils who are in Local Authority Care
2015-2016 2012-2013 2012-2013 2013-2014 2013-2014 2014-2015 (*Persistent Absence = 10%+ missed sessions) Norfolk National Norfolk National Norfolk National Norfolk National LAC LAC LAC LAC Autumn Spring Summer Autumn Spring Summer All Pupils* All Pupils* All Pupils* All Pupils* Pupils* Pupils* Pupils* Pupils* Primary 4.9% 4.7% 4.0% 3.8% 3.4% 3.2% 4.3% 3.5% 3.5% 3.0% Absence 4.7% 4.4% 3.8% 3.9% Secondary 6.5% 5.8% 5.1% 5.6% 5.6% 6.6% 6.6% 6.2% 6.9% 5.0% Persisten t Primary 2.9% 3.0% 2.1% 2.1% 4.4% 3.8% 5.0% 6.0% (*9.9%) 5.0% (*9.7%) 3.3% (7.2%) Absence (15% + 4.8% 5.0% 3.4% 4.6% missed Secondary 7.4% 6.4% 5.2% 5.8% 7.8% 10.1% 11.0% 11.4% (*17%) 11.4% (*15.9%) 7.7% (14.1%) sessions) % Attending a good 63% 76% 69% 78% 63% 71% 84% 70% 78% or better school
*Annual absence figures are taken from DfE Statistical First Release (SFR49_2014) -shows absence from school over five terms for children who have been looked after for at least 12 months. Termly monitoring shows absence of all looked after pupils using data collected from schools by Welfare Call.
Access to Education
Autumn 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Autumn 2015 Spring 2016 Summer 2016 Children Missing 192 181 195 193 159 Education (CME)
8
50
Exclusions
Percentage of Pupils (National Statistics) Number of Pupils Summer Norfolk National Norfolk National Summer Autumn 2015 Autumn Summer Autumn 2014 Spring 2015 Spring 2016 2016 Spring 2017 2013-14 2013-14 2014-15 2014-15 2015 2016 2017 (Provisional) 0 – 4 years x x 1 0 0 0 0 0 5– 11 years (No of YR/KS1) 0.05% 0.02% 0.06% 0.02% 16 (4) 22 (3) 33 (8) 29 (7) 31 (11) 20 (8) 12 – 16 years 0.19% 0.12% 0.24% 0.15% 46 35 45 85 59 54 SEN Pupils (Statement / EHCP) 4 7 12 11 10 7 FSM Pupils 26 26 28 44 31 27 Permanent Exclusions Permanent Exclusions Looked After Children (all LAC in Norfolk 2 3 6 4 5 4 schools)
Achievement of Vulnerable Groups (KS4)
Progress 8 Attainment 8 Grade C+ GCSE English and Mathematics (%) July 2015 July July July 2015 July July Result Forecast Result Forecast Result (unpublished) 2016 2017 (unpublished) 2016 2017 (validated) March March FSM FSM July 2015 Dec 2015 July 2016 Dec 2016 July 2017 -0.3 2016 2016 Non - Non - FSM 0.15 FSM FSM 38 (Nat 39) 43 42 Looked Looked Non -FSM After N/A After N/A 63 (Nat 65) 65 65 Pupils Pupils Looked After Pupils 22.4 (Nat 15.9) 13.3 12.7
9
51 Appendix 2: Summary of changes to national tests and examinations
Primary School Assessment (Key Stage 1 age 7, Key Stage 2 age 11) • The new National Curriculum was assessed for the first time in Summer 2016 • Significantly different to the previous curriculum it covers fewer things in greater depth. There is more focus on technical understanding (e.g. grammar, fluency in mathematics calculation) • New Teacher Assessment bands for Key Stage 1 and 2, and a new secure fit methodology. To reach the new ‘Expected Standard’ at the end of each key stage, pupils have to achieve all the criteria for each standard. Previously teachers made a ‘best fit’ judgement. • Key Stage 2 test outcomes reported as Scaled Scores, not levels • The new Expected Standards are more demanding than the previous Level 4.
Primary School Accountability Measures • The previous measures based on levels have been removed (% Level 4+, % making 2 Levels of Progress) • Four key accountability measures: o the percentage of pupils achieving the ‘Expected Standard’ in reading, writing and mathematics o Pupils’ average scaled score in each of reading and mathematics o The percentage of pupils who achieve the higher standard in reading, writing and mathematics o Pupils’ average progress in each of reading, writing, mathematics • New KS2 Floor standard o The progress element of the floor is now much more significant than under the previous floor standard, as the national average attainment is well below 65%. A school will be below the floor standard if both : o fewer than 65% meet the expected attainment standard in reading, writing and mathematics o pupils have not made ‘sufficient progress’ in any one of reading, writing or maths (threshold to be set by DfE in the autumn). • New Coasting Schools definition o For a school to be deemed coasting it must meet all the following criteria for three successive years. ‹ Fewer than 85% of pupils meet the expected attainment standard in reading, writing and mathematics ‹ For 2014 and 15 - for reading, writing and maths fewer pupils made expected progress than the national median percentage of pupils. ‹ From 2016 - pupils have not made ‘sufficient progress’ in any one of reading, writing or maths (this may be a different threshold to the floor standard) o If a school is above any indicator, in any year, they cannot be described as ‘coasting’ 52 Secondary School Accountability Measures • Six Key Accountability Measures o Progress 8 o Attainment 8 o % achieving a good pass in English and Maths o % of pupils achieving the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) o % of pupils entering the EBacc o % of students staying in education or employment after KS4 (destinations) 5 A*C including English and Maths will no longer be used as a measure • New KS4 Floor standard o Progress 8 below -0.5 (and sig-) o There is no attainment element to the floor at KS4 from 2016 EBacc • English Language or Literature and Mathematics • 2 Sciences • History or Geography • A Language
Attainment 8 and Progress 8
Attainment 8 is the sum of up to 8 GCSE results, double weighting English and Mathematics. Progress 8 is the difference between the Attainment 8 score, and the Attainment 8 score of pupils nationally with the same prior attainment divided by 10 to give an average grade difference. A Progress 8 score of +0.5 means that the Attainment 8 score is 5 points (x10) higher than the Attainment 8 estimate. Progress 8 scores are the average difference per subject, attaiment 8 scores are the total score, effectively out of 10.
53
2017 – 2019: New GCSEs More demanding • Linear – exams at the end of two years study • Non-exam assessment removed or reduced • New grading system from 9 – 1 (top to bottom) • 4 is equivalent to the bottom of a C grade • 5 (top third of a C) is the new “good pass” for threshold measures
Post 16 Accountability measures • 5 key measures
o Progress - a value added progress measure to show how well students have progressed when compared to students with the same prior attainment. (This is only for students taking Level 3 qualifications); o Attainment – an average point score per entry measure and removing the average point score per student measure at level 3; o Retention - a measure showing the proportion of students being retained on their main qualification; o English and Maths – a measure of the average change in grade for students who did not get a good pass (currently a grade C) in these two subjects at GCSE; o Destinations – the measure will show the percentage of students going to or remaining in a sustained education or employment destination in the academic year after taking A levels or other Level 3 qualifications. From 2016 minimum standards will change from attainment based standards to progress based standards.
2016-2019 New A and AS Levels More demanding • Linear – exams at the end of the study period • Non-exam assessment removed or reduced
2017-2020 New Apprenticeship provision New approach to the development of skills required for particular sectors, designed by employers, with a final end point assessment that is graded.
54 Norfolk County Council
Children's Services
Monthly Performance Monitor
County Report
July 2016
Produced by Business Intelligence & Performance Service All Data sourced from CareFirst & accurate as at midnight 07/08/2016
Page55 1 of 7 Contents Business Area Page Introduction 2 Contacts & Referral, Assessment & Children in Need 4 Safeguarding 5 Looked-After Children 6 Care Leavers 7
Introduction:
This report overall county performance.
For each measure, data is available for both the most-recent month, alongside the previous reporting month &, where possible, data published by the DfE for Norfolk from the latest available statistical return (county level only) and targets.
Data is accurate at the point at which it is extracted from CareFirst (see front page for date extracted in this issue) & will not reflect any changes within the system that were made after the stated date. [email protected]
Each measure title states whether a higher or lower figure signifies better performance (where relevant).The report shows colour coded figures, where possible, for current performance vs. last month performance - the colours are calculated in the following way:
Green - Performance is in line with or exceeding target Amber - Performance is within designated tolerance level of target (i.e. not on target, but not too far below target to be of urgent concern) Red - Performance is below target & action is required to turn the curve
Current Month Performance also gives a direction of travel indicator comparing it to the previous month, the markers have the following meanings: h Performance has improved by more than 5% compared with the previous month's performance n Performance is in line with previous month's performance i Performance has declined by more than 5% compared with the previous month's performance
Performance against certain comparator areas is also recorded where available, with a pictorial grading system with the following interpretation:
Page56 2 of 7 Each measure title states whether a higher or lower figure signifies better performance (where relevant).The report shows colour coded figures, where possible, for current performance vs. last month performance - the colours are calculated in the following way:
Green - Performance is in line with or exceeding target Amber - Performance is within designated tolerance level of target (i.e. not on target, but not too far below target to be of urgent concern) Red - Performance is below target & action is required to turn the curve
Current Month Performance also gives a direction of travel indicator comparing it to the previous month, the markers have the following meanings: h Performance has improved by more than 5% compared with the previous month's performance n Performance is in line with previous month's performance i Performance has declined by more than 5% compared with the previous month's performance
Performance against certain comparator areas is also recorded where available, with a pictorial grading system with the following interpretation: J Norfolk performance is better than comparator areas K Norfolk performance is in line with comparator areas L Norfolk performance is below comparator areas
Page57 3 of 7 Performance as at end of: July 2016 unless otherwise stated 7
Contact & Referral Indicator Name Indicator Type Current Performance Last Month Perf Previous Latest Latest Top Target Snapshot Reporting Year Statistical Published & Neighbour Quartile or year-to-date Direction of Average Average Travel & Frequency* Number of contacts received in month M 2737 2680 Number & % of contacts received in month that became a referral Bigger is Better M 646 23.6% i 685 25.6% Number & % of referrals where a decision was made within 1 working day Bigger is Better M 443 68.6% i 495 72.3% 100% Number & % of re-referrals within the last 12 months Smaller is Better M 159 24.6% h 193 28.2% 20%
Assessment Indicator Name Indicator Type Current Performance Last Month Perf Previous Latest Latest Top Target Snapshot Reporting Year Statistical Published & Neighbour Quartile or year-to-date Direction of Average Average Travel & Frequency* Number of social work assessments authorised in month M 759 704 Number & % of social work assessments authorised in month within 45 working days Bigger is Better M 502 66.1% i 547 77.7% 72% L 81% L 95% L 80%
Children in Need Indicator Name Indicator Type Current Performance Last Month Perf Previous Latest Latest Top Target Snapshot Reporting Year Statistical Quartile Outturn Neighbour Average or year-to-date & Average Direction of & Frequency* Travel Number of cases at month end M 5439 5553 Number of Children in Need at month end M 2032 2046 Number & % of Children in Need with an up to date CIN plan Bigger is Better M 1231 60.6% n 1250 61.1% 100% Number & % of Children in Need with a review in last 12 weeks Bigger is Better M 1197 58.9% n 1210 59.1% 100% Number & % of Children in Need with a visit in timescale Bigger is Better M 1336 65.7% i 1432 70.0% 100%
* Frequency: M = Monthly; Q = Quarterly; HT = Half-Termly, A = Annually
Page58 4 of 7 Performance as at end of: July 2016 unless otherwise stated 7 Safeguarding
Indicator Name Indicator Type Current Performance Last Month Perf Previous Latest Latest Top Target Snapshot Reporting Year Statistical Quartile & Neighbour Average or year-to-date Direction of Average Travel & Frequency* Number of children subject to strategy discussions in month M 339 272 Number of children subject to an ICPC in month M 95 109 Number & % of ICPCs held within 15 days of strategy discussion Bigger is Better M 89 93.7% n 107 98.2% 85.5% h 81.6% J 93.4% K 95% Number & % of ICPCs that resulted in no CP Plan Smaller is Better M 7 7.4% h 19 17.4% 15% or less Number of children on child protection plans at month end M 518 509 Rate of children on child protection plans at month end per 10k Under-18s Smaller is Better M 31.0 n 30.5 34.2 h 30.2 K 28.7 L 30 Number & % of child protection plans allocated to qualified social worker Bigger is Better M 513 99.0% n 490 96.3% 100% Number & % of children whose child protection plan ceased at first review Smaller is Better M 22 27.5% 13 32.5% 60.8% h 70% J 52% J Number & % of RCPCs held in timescale in month Bigger is Better M 156 98.1% n 101 99.0% 100% Number & % of core group meetings held in timescale in month Bigger is Better M 76 84.4% i 66 91.7% 80% Number & % of children subject to child protection plan for > 2 years Smaller is Better M 0 0.0% n 0 0.0% 1.9% h 3.3% J 0.3% J 10% or less Number & % of children on child protection plans seen within timescales** Bigger is Better M 393 91.6% n 383 91.4% 93.1% h 63.9% J 93.7% K 100% Number & % of children on child protection plans seen alone within timescales Bigger is Better M 280 65.3% i 300 71.6% 80% Number of children whose child protection plan ceased this month M 80 40 Number of children whose CP Plan started this month M 86 90 Number & % of children whose child protection plan started this month who had previously been subject to a CP Plan within the last M 8 9.3% h 11 12.2% 18.2% h 17.0% J 9.9% J Below 15% 2 years Smaller is Better
* Frequency: M = Monthly; Q = Quarterly; HT = Half-Termly, A = Annually
Page59 5 of 7 Performance as at end of: July 2016 unless otherwise stated 7
Looked-After Children Indicator Name Indicator Type Current Performance Last Month Previous Latest Stat Latest Top Target Snapshot Perf Reporting Year & Nbr Average Quartile DoT Average or year-to-date
& Frequency* Number of Looked After Children Smaller is Better M 1059 n 1045 1070 n 534 L 920 Rate of Looked After Children pe 10k Under-18s Smaller is Better 63.4 n 62.5 64 n 53 L 36 L 55 Number & % LAC Placed in County Bigger is Better M 822 77.6% n 805 77.0% 81% n 79% K 77% J Number & % LAC Placed Out of County Smaller is Better M 172 16.2% n 174 16.7% 19% h 21% J 23% J Number & % of LAC Seen within Timescales Bigger is Better M 943 95.3% n 959 95.5% 100% Number & % of LAC Seen Alone within Timescales Bigger is Better M 826 83.5% n 827 82.4% 80% Number UASC LAC M 4 4 10 h Number & % of LAC with up-to-date Care Plan Bigger is Better M 1004 94.8% n 984 94.2% 100% Number & % of School-Aged LAC with up-to-date PEP Bigger is Better M 578 86.5% n 597 88.1% 100% Number & % of LAC with all Reviews up-to-date since start of reporting year - NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE M 0% 0% 0% 0% Number & % of LAC Reviews in month where child attended Bigger is Better M 115 59.0% n 101 62.0% Number & % of LAC Reviews in month where child participated Bigger is Better M 181 92.8% n 153 93.9% Number & % of LAC with up-to-date Health Assessment Bigger is Better M 689 88.8% n 676 87.7% 83% h 90% K 99% L 100% Number & % of LAC Starts with Initial Health Assessment request within 5 working days of LAC start Bigger is Better M 31 58.5% h 14 38.9% 100% Number & % of LAC with Immunisations were up-to-date Bigger is Better M 698 89.9% n 679 88.1% 97% i 90% K 98% L 100% Number & % of LAC with up to date dental check Bigger is Better M 696 89.7% n 679 88.1% 85% h 84% J 96% L 100% Number & % of LAC where child had visited optician in last 12 months Bigger is Better M 697 89.8% n 680 88.2% 100% Number & % of LAC aged <5 with up to date development checks Bigger is Better M 75 96.2% n 69 93.2% 95.0% h 92% J 100% K 100% Number & % of LAC for 2+ Years in same placement for 12+ months Bigger is Better M 502 79.9% n 491 78.7% 70-80% Number & % of LAC with 3 or more placements in any one year Smaller is Better M 104 9.8% n 104 10.0% 11% or less Number of LAC Currently missing from placement Smaller is Better M 27 23 Number of Current Courtwork Activity M 391 347
* Frequency: M = Monthly; Q = Quarterly; HT = Half-Termly, A = Annually
Page60 6 of 7 Performance as at end of: July 2016 unless otherwise stated 7
Care Leavers Indicator Name Indicator Type Current Performance Last Month Previous Latest Stat Latest Top Target Snapshot Perf Reporting Year & Nbr Average Quartile DoT Average or year-to-date
& Frequency* Number of Eligible Care Leavers M 208 204 Number & % of Eligible Care Leavers with a Pathway Plan Needs Assessment completed Bigger is Better M 190 91.3% n 192 94.1% 100% Number & % of Eligible Care Leavers with Pathway Plans Bigger is Better M 173 83.2% n 175 85.8% 100% Number of Relevant Care Leavers M 17 19 Number & % of Relevant Care Leavers with Pathway Plans Bigger is Better M 16 94.1% n 18 94.7% 100% Number & % of Relevant Care Leavers contacted in last 2 months Bigger is Better M 13 76.5% i 17 89.5% 100% Number of Former Relevant Care Leavers M 463 472 Number & % of Former Relevant Care Leavers with Pathway Plans Bigger is Better M 430 92.9% n 443 93.9% 100% Number & % of Former Relevant Care Leavers contacted in last 2 months Bigger is Better M 372 80.3% n 372 78.8% 100% Number & % of Care Leavers (Relevant & Former Relevant) in Employment, Education or Training Bigger is Better M 271 56.5% n 274 55.8% 42% h 47% J 65% L tbc Number & % of Care Leavers (Relevant & Former Relevant) in Suitable Accomodation Bigger is Better M 433 90.2% n 424 86.4% 77% h 82% J 95% L tbc
* Frequency: M = Monthly; Q = Quarterly; HT = Half-Termly, A = Annually
Page61 7 of 7 Risk Register - Norfolk County Council
Risk Register Name Children's Service Risk Register Red
Prepared by Don Evans High Amber
Date updated August 2016 Med Green
Next update due October 2016 Low Met
Prospects of meeting Date Current Date of Target Reviewed Risk entered Target Direction review Area Risk Name Risk Description Tasks to mitigate the risk Progress update Risk Risk Owner and/or Number on risk Date of Travel and/or Score by updated by CDGSTP register of Risk update Target Target Impact Impact Target Current Impact Current Target LikelihoodTarget Target Risk Score Risk Target Date Current Likelihood Current Current Risk Score Risk Current
C Children's RM14284 The amount spent Rising transport costs, the nature of Continue to enforce education transport Monthly SEN Transport Budget Meeting now Services on home to school the demand-led service (particularly policy, and work with commissioners re embedded to ensure frequent and consistent joint transport at for students with special needs) and school placements. working between Transport/SEN commissioners in significant variance the inability to reduce the need for Continually review the transport networks, Children's Services and the Passenger Transport Unit; to predicted best transport or the distance travelled will to look for integration and efficiency review of exceptional cases criteria, application of estimates result in a continued overspend on opportunities. policy, early warning of legislation and case-law impact the home to school transport budgets Work with Norse to reduce transport on costs. Travel time/cost reduction is key element of and an inability to reduce costs. costs and ensure the fleet is used new Education Inclusion Strategy and its efficiently and effectively. implementation is being supported by a dedicated Look for further, more innovative, ways to project manager using DfE grant money and a new plan, procure and integrate transport. post for 'Transport Invest to Save' has been recommended for funding from this grant also; to Overall risk treatment: reduce. reduce the number of children needing to access Richard alternative specialist provision or, if necessary, then to Snowden and 04/11/2015 4 3 12 2 3 6 Red Gordon Boyd 14/08/2016 attend local specialist provision, the impact of this is not Michael likely to kick in until latter part of 2016/17. The LA Bateman continues to be fully engaged with the Chairs of the 31/03/2017 Headteacher Associations and the Chair of the Schools’ Forum / Governor Association to ensure that the strategy is jointly developed, owned and implemented. SEN budget has been split down to lower levels and regular data is being sent to decision-makers in Children's Services to enable further transparency and better budget monitoring. While student numbers continue to decrease in secondary and Post 16 education, spend is reducing.
C Children's RM14147 Potential failure to CS Teams do not show the improved Action plans are being designed and Feedback from the first monitopring visit was generally Services meet the needs of performance at the speed which is delivered following each Ofsted positive. All areas for developemnt identified by Ofsted children in Norfolk. acceptable to DfE and Ofsted and monitoring visit. in that visit have been captured in the action plan. subsequently, children and families Strategic partnership arrangement is A joint innovations fund bid has been submitted with do not receive a good/outstanding being developed with Barnardo's to focus Barnardo's to assist in funding the partnerhsip service. 01/12/2013 2 5 10 on LAC and Care Leavers. approach. Governance arrangements are being 1 5 5 31/03/2017 Amber Michael Rosen Don Evans 14/08/2016 Essex CC have been commissioned by discussed. the DfE to support our improvement Colleagues from Essex have visited and we have activity. provided them with a locality-level stocktake in order to inform them of current performance and to help identify where there support would be most beneficial.
D Children's RM14157 Lack of Corporate Lack of NCC capacity and Review of Resources Department has We are not yet aware of the outcome of the review of Services capacity and infrastructure to support the back- been conducted. the Resources Department or the potential implications capability reduces office functions that Children's MDDU offering some additional capacity for CS. the ability of Services needs in particular ICT and within their remit. The Head of Client Management continues to work Children's Services BIPS capacity limitations Social Care Recording System is being closely with the Corpoprate centre to ensure CS' needs to improve. reporcured and the new system will are communicated and understood and to resolve 13/03/2014 4 5 20 include self-reporting tools. However, the issues. 3 5 15 31/03/2017 Amber Michael Rosen Don Evans 14/08/2016 ICT strategy must reflect the equipment 1xFTE from BIPS is currently working exclusively within requirements which will allow us to fully CS. exploit the new recording system. Decentralisation of services for schools report to Education Challenge Board. More robust client side function.
62 Children's D Children's D CDGSTP Services Services Area Number RM14148 Overreliance Overreliance on RM14148 M30 Looked After RM13906 Risk interim capacity overspends Children ikNm RiskDescription RiskName improvement. unsustainable performance leads toteams social worker Overreliance on interim capacity in Norfolk County Council Children’s otheror of Services parts funded elsewhere withinfrom thatoverspends will need to be budget could result in significant That the Looked After Children’s 11/033515 5 3 01/12/2013 80/014520 5 4 18/05/2011 register entered on risk on Date
Current Likelihood Current Impact
Current Risk Score substantive replacement is secured. in worker eachthe role same until a opeartional we will teams, to retainseek agency staff are workingWhere in academy. to includeworkers, the new social care Review and update of our 'offer to social the County a as whole. itas relates to geographical variation and understaningGreater data of workforce given to the appropriateness/efectiveness established to ensure specific scrutiny is A residential panel placemenst is being right children are in the right placements. group are in place and are ensuring the The panel permanence and monitoring scrutinised. All are rigorously CS costs and routinely of andresidential costs placements. ak omtgt h ikProgressupdate Tasksmitigaterisk the to
63 The NIPE programme The is beingNIPE programme evaluated to understand colleagues on a suite of key data. workforce HR Business partner is working with corporate The projected TheLAC projected for overspend the year current is some large some sibling in groups coming to care. haveLAC increased slightly, numbers primarily due of excess £7million. implications in relation to costs. achieving sustainable but performance clearly this Agency retention is generally good in realtion to The social academy care has been launched. its impact.
in to
31/03/2017 8 4 2 31/03/2017 8 4 2 Target Likelihood Target Impact
Target Risk Score Target Date Direction of Travel of Current of Risk of of meeting of Prospects Scoreby Target Target Amber Date Risk Red RiskOwner ihe oe o vn 14/08/2016 Don Evans Michael Rosen ihe oe o vn 14/08/2016 Don Evans Michael Rosen updated by updated Reviewed and/or and/or Date of update review and/or and/or
Children’s Services Committee Item No
Report title: Annual Review of Norfolk Residential Service Date of meeting: September 2016 Responsible Chief Michael Rosen Officer: Executive Director Children’s Services Strategic impact
Annual Approval of the Statement of Purpose of Norfolk’s Residential Children’s Homes and a Summary Review of the Year.
Members in their role as the registered provider of these homes are required under law (Children’s Home Regulations 2015 (as amended); Care Standards Act 2000) to approve each children’s home’s Statement of Purpose and Functions.
It is a requirement that each of our children’s homes has a clear Statement of Purpose which details the aims and objectives and how the standards will be met. The nine standards are: • Quality and purpose of care standard • Children’s wishes and feelings standard • Education standard • Enjoyment and achievement standard • Health and well-being standard • Positive relationships standard • Protection of children standard • Leadership and management standard • Care planning standard
Each home must also provide a children’s guide which explains for the child the purpose of the home as well as how the child can complain and access advocacy services. Each home’s Statement of Purpose is available on Members Insight and hard copies will be in the Members’ room.
Executive summary This paper reports to Members on the performance and outcomes achieved by the Norfolk Residential Service.
The key performance outcomes achieved for the service this year are:
• Ofsted inspection outcomes which are above the national average. • The service continues to offer high occupancy levels. • Short breaks have worked with families to offer support to promote families staying together. • The service continues to offer beds at a rate comparable with similar provision
1 64 nationally. • The Outreach Team have worked with families to support children staying at home • The majority of young people in in-house residential homes are in full time education • The service has contributed to reducing the number of looked after children placed in out of county provision
Recommendations:
Members are asked to: • Scrutinise the information within the report • Challenge the service on the performance and outcomes achieved • Recommend the approval of the Statements of Purpose and Functions for all the Local Authority children’s homes to Full Council to comply with the Care Standards Act 2000
1. Proposal (or options)
2.1 Members are asked to scrutinise the information within the report and provide challenge to the service to ensure continued outcomes for Norfolk children and families along with internal performance improvement. Members are asked to recommend approval to Cabinet of the Statement of Purpose and Functions for the Local Authority Residential Service to comply with the Care Standards Act 2000.
2. Residential Care in England, Population Make up and Trends
2.1 An independent review of children’s homes was published in July 2016, by Sir Martin Narey’s. These are some of the statistics around why young people are accommodated in residential homes:
• Approximately 55% of children in homes are placed on a ‘voluntary basis’, (most of whom enter care for the first time in adolescence). The remainder are placed as a result of care proceedings. • There may be more than one reason for a child being placed in a home, but the primary reason is their abuse or neglect (45%) followed by family dysfunction. • For 25% of children, the children’s home is their first care placement, but almost a third of those in children’s homes have had 6 or more previous placements. • Children in children’s homes are more likely to be living away from their local communities than those in foster care (37% are placed more than 20 miles from home and outside their local authority). • 35% of placements in a home last less than a month, 47% last between a month and a year, 10% last between one and two years, and just 8% of placements last more than two years. More than half of placements last less than 3 months, reflecting, in part, the use of residential care for children on the edge of care, many of whom will either return home, become fostered, or move on to a more permanent residential placement. • Today, residential care accounts for 12% of all care placements in England. On 31 st March 2015, 8,320 children were in residential care from a care population of 69,540. Of these, 5,290 (64%) lived in children’s homes, 180 lived in secure units, 1100 lived in hostels (generally as part of the process of leaving care), 1080 lived in other residential settings 2 65 (including care by the NHS, mother and baby units and custody) and 670 lived in residential schools.
2.2 Sir Martin Narey found that the children he spoke with were overwhelmingly positive about life in a children’s home. Many have a preference for living in a home rather than being fostered. That was the view of the Children’s Commissioner, confirmed by the survey she commissioned to support this review.
2.3 Children’s homes can and should be better. Sir Martin Narey made 34 recommendations which he believes will deliver significant improvement in the care of the challenging, troubled, harmed, often damaged, yet frequently inspiring children who live in them. The overwhelming majority of homes are already good or better and he witnessed that we can be proud, as a society of the care of children in some residential homes. He also said that those who choose a career in residential care deserve our thanks and our admiration and we should no longer see the homes in which they work as institutions to be used only as a last resort.
3. Ambition
3.1 We want all of our young people to be safe, happy and well cared for. We want our young people to be respectful to themselves and others and to build relationships around this. We aim to help them have a well-rounded education and life skills. We want them to be the best version of themselves in everything they do. We would like to help them to grow and make steps towards their goals. We act as good role models and we do our best to help our young people succeed in their lives.
4. Evidence
4.1 The Norfolk Residential Children’s Service currently has six children’s homes, three residential short- breaks children’s homes, five supported flats and the outreach team. The service works alongside other services supporting children and families in need. Accommodating children is always a last resort and the authority has to be satisfied that the care threshold is met. Over the past year the service has accommodated the majority of young people referred to us in need of accommodation unless their risk assessment identifies that the placement in Norfolk Residential Children’s Services would not be suitable (fewer than 5 occasions). We have reviewed and changed the services provided to ensure they meet the needs of all young people including those with challenging behaviours.
4.2 The following homes deliver a range of interventions to children and young people within residential care depending on their individual needs:
• Norwich Road and The Lodge provide eight beds between them, offering emergency accommodation, for children where there is an immediate need for accommodation following a crisis breakdown either at home or at their current placement. This accommodation is used while an alternative, appropriate placement is sourced.
3 66 • Waterworks Road and Well Green are both 2-bedded Emergency/Crisis Intervention Homes. The aim of the homes is to provide emergency and time- limited residential care. They are specialist homes for young people (male and female) aged between 8 and 17 years.
• Aylsham Road Short Breaks provides planned or short term stays of residential care to children and young people aged between 5 and 17 who are considered on the edge of care.
• Loki House is a 4 bedded home offering care planning and assessment placements specialising in young people returning from out of county.
• Easthills is a long term home which provides support and accommodation for 4 young people up until independence.
• Marshfields is a short breaks home providing 4 beds for children and young people who have severe learning/ physical disabilities including children and young people with complex health needs and challenging behaviour.
• Linked Family’s Short Breaks Fostering Service, this service is linked to Marshfields residential home it has offered short breaks for children with disabilities.
• Foxwood is a 9 bed home (functioning 8 beds and 1 emergency bed) providing overnight short breaks for children with physical disabilities, learning disabilities and sensory impairments, aged 5 to 17 years.
• The Outreach Team is linked to the residential service and is a short term edge of care support service which offers 24/7 support to families countywide. Outreach enables families to remain together despite issues or crises until longer term support can be put in place or issues are resolved.
4.3 There are four supported flats available which are managed in partnership with Broadland Housing and one private flat. These provide accommodation for 16 and 17 year-olds and help them prepare for independent living. The young people receive 37 hours of support each week by Children’s Services staff with 24 hour (7 days per week) telephone support available.
4.4 Norfolk County Council has clear priorities to reduce Norfolk’s Looked-After Children population to levels comparable with the average for a Local Authority in England. The service team’s plan focuses on robust planning for the young people and the delivery of targeted interventions to reunify them with their families or extended families. This applies to those placed in County as well as for children who are currently in provision outside of Norfolk. The service supports young people’s transition to independence.
4.5 The central ethos of Norfolk Residential Service’s work with children and young people is to promote their inclusion within the development and delivery of our service by ensuring we obtain their wishes and feelings in all aspects of our work. A recent example of this is the use of tools and strategies outlined in the Signs of Safety approach in key working sessions, residents meetings and daily practice. 4 67 In feedback gathered after placements the young people have stated they felt they had a say in how things were run and felt they were listened to.
4.6 What Children and Young People say about the service
Feedback is gathered by the service from the young people as well as from families and professionals. This feedback is analysed to identify areas for development and to improve the service.
The following is a selection of comments about Norfolk’s Residential Service from children and young people who have been accommodated during the past 12 months:
One young person, aged 15, said, “I love Aylsham Road, it is fun and the best choice I could have had is coming here.”
‘I have enjoyed many things at Frettenham and these are some of them. Staff have been very supportive and have helped me calm when I am annoyed. They did this by talking to me and reassuring me. Staff have also stuck up for me in court. I liked playing football with staff in the park. The village is quiet which is good. The food at Frettenham has also been quality.’ KW.
ED made cards for all of the staff when she left. ED thanked each staff member for their support. ED had been placed in residential homes in-house the last year. ED sent a card to one member of staff who had followed her on this journey and continued working with her in The Lodge. ED stated ‘thank you for everything you’ve done in the past year. It’s been amazing and really great getting snugly hugs from you. Thank you for getting me this far and supporting me getting this far and helping me through things .
‘The staff were all very kind and are willing to make compromises.’
4.7 Compliments
Each home has a feedback folder to capture positive experiences for children and young people. Please see some examples outlined below:
A compliment received from Jane Dodsworth from the UEA said ‘Many thanks for inviting us to undertake a focus group for our research on CSE & multi-agency perceives on working with young people involved in CSE with staff at Loki House. It was really kind of so many people to give up their time to take part. Penny & I were impressed with the team’s understanding of CSE and their evident commitment to the young people who come to Loki house. You all clearly take a very child–centred approach to working with the young people in your care. The house itself seemed well laid out, warm, cosy & very much a home from home. Please pass on our thanks to everyone who took part.
“A and I would like to say a big thank you to you all. The love, care and support you have shown us, makes every day fun and easier to face! Hope every young person who gets a chance to come to Foxwood has just as many fun stays.
5 68
‘The staff worked so hard to meet S’s complex needs. Alan and his team were amazing with S and went over and above with every part of the care they gave her.’ Social work feedback.
Compliment from another professional (virtual school): ‘Hi Natalie, I always find that I have a good relationship with you and the others on the team. You work hard to promote education and to ensure that you are proactive in chasing up provision for your residents.’
A tutor from Open Academy stated a marked improvement was seen in LL who was accommodated here. He attended every day and his behaviour improved. LL won an award for his achievements, whilst accommodated. The improvements and academic commitment were significant.
4.8 Complaints
4.8.1 Each home has a complaints book in which all complaints are recorded. Young people have open access to a telephone should they wish to make a complaint at any time. Contact numbers for Ofsted, the Children’s Rights Director and Voice, the independent advocacy service, are available to young people, as are complaints leaflets.
4.8.2 The homes’ welcome books, which are available in a variety of formats to make them accessible for all ages and levels of ability, provide information and advice on how to complain. All residential staff have mandatory training on complaints and there is a Norfolk County Council complaints team which can offer consultation and advice to both staff and young people.
4.8.3 Since September 2015 the service has received seven complaints in total. One complaint from a neighbour due to noise from the home, the manager responded to this and resolved the issue. Six complaints were received from young people for various reasons from short break care being cancelled to complaints about other young people in the home. All complaints are responded to as per procedure in order to find resolution and improve practice where appropriate.
4.8.4 As a result of the complaints we ensure that all young people have the opportunity to discuss this with the manager and explore a satisfactory solution. At every house meeting the young people are given feedback which is recorded. The managers have engaged with the local community to address any concerns and improve relationships, this has been supported by the local police community support officer when needed.
4.9 Proposed next steps for the service
• Review residential policies and procedures in line with Ofsted • Establish good links to local museums to enable young people to access cultural and educational opportunities • Continue to improve Resfest (the annual residential homes camping trip) and plan for future years • Pathway Plans, residential staff to contribute to these plans • Develop a magazine with a quarterly publication to inform the county of what is happening within the service on the Intranet and to continue to develop a child friendly magazine • Improve the relief bank system 6 69 • Work alongside the Performance Team to improve Reg 44 process • To visit private, regulated and unregulated provisions in and out of county alongside the Quality Assurance team to ensure all Norfolk young people are receiving a good quality of care. • To ensure that residential services are working in line with the LAC Strategy and that staff are aware of the goals • Residential services to implement the strategies outlined in the Sufficiency Plan
4.10 Ofsted Inspection Outcomes
Each residential home is inspected twice a year by Ofsted who conduct a full and an interim inspection. The latest judgement from the most recent full inspection of each home is shown in the table below:
Overall The overall How well children The impact and inspection experiences and and young people effectiveness of findings progress of are helped and leaders and No. of children and protected managers Home beds young people living in the home are
Marshfields 4 Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Aylsham 4 Good Good Good Good Road
Foxwood 9 Good Good Good Good
Norwich 4 Good Good Good Good Road
Loki House 4 Good Good Good Good
Waterworks 2 Good Good Good Good Road
Frettenham 2 Good Good Good Good
Requires Requires Requires Requires Easthills 4 Improvement improvement improvement improvement Requires Requires Requires Requires The Lodge 4 improvement improvement improvement improvement
The above table shows 1 Outstanding, 6 Good and 2 Requires Improvement Ofsted inspection judgements.
4.10.1 The Residential Service continues to review and improve the standards of its service to meet the revised criteria from Ofsted, who continue to “raise the bar” in their inspections. There is an active improvement plan and after each inspection key themes and trends are shared across the service.
4.11 Achievements for Young People
7 70 • Some of the young people have received educational awards through their education provisions. • One young person had an article published in the EDP. • All young people that attended Resfest learnt various new skills from Canoeing to spoon carving as well as improving their social skills. • Young people have been supported into employment and volunteer opportunities within their community, this includes rescue dog walking and working in charity shops. • Young people have performed in charity talent competitions and some of the homes took part in the Macmillan coffee morning. • Some of the young people have been given the opportunity to complete ASDAN awards, achieving both bronze and silver so far. • Young people take part in a variety of sporting activities including boxing and rugby at a regional level. • Young people have taken part in the recruitment of IRO’s, creating their own questions for interviews and sitting on the interview panel.
4.12 Children Missing from Norfolk Residential Service Children’s Homes
4.12.1 A missing from care procedure has been implemented by the Residential Service, which includes sexual exploitation and radicalisation risk assessments, all staff have had training in these areas. The definition of missing from care for the service includes children and young people who leave the residential home without permission, those who do not return to the home at the agreed time and those who are absent overnight. Each young person has an individual care plan, which identifies strategies to be implemented for a young person who is absent without authorisation or is missing from care.
4.12.2 The table below shows the number of times children and young people went missing from Norfolk’s Residential Service Children’s Homes in 2015/16, September to August.
Children / Young People Missing from Norfolk’s Residential Service Children’s Homes
201 5/1 6 Sep - Aug Number of times children / young people 124 went missing Number of children / young people who 24 went missing Number of overnight absences 32 Number of children / young people who did not return at the agreed time or left without 52 permission
4.12.3 This year we have again seen a significant decrease in the number of young people missing from care within the service. This is due to our continued work with partner agencies. In addition further guidance and training, and raising CSE awareness in team meetings has enabled staff to become more proactive in finding effective strategies to minimise missing from care. The service has worked closely with partner agencies to address the risk of looked after children 8 71 going missing and produced a working protocol to regulate practice. The service has built close working relationships with the Missing Persons Coordinator (police), Safer Neighbourhood Teams (police), Barnardos and The Rose Project.
4.13 Physical Intervention and Positive Handling
4.13.1 All of the residential staff have been trained in the Norfolk Steps de-escalation and positive handling strategies. As per national guidance and local policy the Residential Service will only use restrictive physical intervention as a last resort when the young person places him/herself or others at risk of injury or may cause significant damage to property. If such risks exist, consideration is given to effective strategies that will be employed to minimise the risk.
4.13.2 For the period of September 2015 – August 2016 there were a total of 71 incidents of physical intervention across the service, these were mostly carried out in our emergency homes with 53 for two younger young people (due to their age and level of aggression, physical intervention was used to prevent them from running away and harming themselves or others) 12 were in a CWD home and the other 6 were individual cases. All restraints were necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of the young people. All restraints carried out in the homes are reviewed by the Reg 44 visitors and Ofsted inspectors and in all cases they agreed with the actions taken.
4.14 Significant Incidents Reported
4.14.1Ofsted must be notified (Regulation 40 Notifications) of all significant incidents that occur in any residential children’s home. The reasons for notifications for 2015/16 by Norfolk’s Residential Services are shown in the following table:
Total Regulation 40 Notification s by Classification Type
201 5/1 6 Regulation 40 Notification Classifications Sep – Aug Serious incident – police called to home 63 Serious complaint about the home or person in the home 1 Instigation & outcome of any child protection enquiry involving child in the home 0 Serious illness or serious accident 11 Other incident relating to a child that the registered person considers to be serious 1 Involvement or suspected involvement of a child accommodated in the home in child sexual exploitation (this generally relates to young people entering the system with a known CSE risk) 9 Total Regulation 40 Notification Classifications 85
4.15 Outcomes for Permanency
9 72 4.15.1 From September 2015 to August 2016 Norfolk Residential Children’s Homes have provided accommodation for 186 children and young people that reside in Norfolk. Of these 135 were short term breaks, and 51 children have moved on following interventions delivered by the service, these have been complex cases, and 19 are still currently accommodated:
• 12 young people returned home • 6 to foster care • 13 to independent living or supported lodgings • 11 to other children’s homes • 7 to in house children’s homes • 2 to specialist placements.
4.16 Number of Children Accommodated in the Homes and their Occupancy Rates
4.16.1 The table below shows the occupancy rates for all residential homes since September 2015:
Occupancy Rates & Children / Young People Accommodated by Chi ldren’s Homes
% Bed Nights Number of Children/Young Occupied People Accommodated Easthills Road 90% 7 Frettenham 100% 4 Loki House 97% 7 Norwich Road 80% 24 The Lodge 78% 22 Waterworks Road 100% 4
As Norwich Road and The Lodge offer emergency provision turnover is necessary to be able to have placement availability for unplanned admissions, but in some cases due to the level of need they have not run at full capacity.
Number of Children offered Short Breaks:
Number of Ch ildren/Young % Bed Nights People Accessing Short Occupied Breaks Aylsham Road Offers short breaks for 55 80% children Foxwood Offers short breaks for 46 70% children Marshfields Offers short breaks for 34 75% children
In some cases the occupancy rate has been affected in the homes due to the level of need and risk assessment of the young people. For example we have taken young people in an emergency which has impacted on the group dynamic risk assessment which has meant that we have had to restrict the number of available beds in order to meet the needs of the young people already accommodated.
10 73
5. Service Development
5.1 The Outreach team continue to offer a vital service within Norfolk, since September 2015 the team have worked and closed 139 cases. 9 cases became LAC, 1 was reunified home, 113 remained in the family home and 16 looked after children placement breakdowns were prevented.
5.2 Aylsham Road continues to offer Short Breaks and there has been an increase in the capacity of family’s being helped.
5.3 We secured a further years funding to train another 2 children’s homes through the innovation programme, this has been completed successfully using the Result model. The Result model was recognised in Sir Martyn Narey’s report as an effective approach with staff teams that work with young people.
5.4 The Service has offered multiple placements to social work and police students to give them the opportunity to work more directly with young people. These placements offer valuable learning opportunities to all involved.
5.5 Part of last years and this coming year’s development is to continue to inspect the county’s private regulated and unregulated residential homes. This has been beneficial to share best practice between agencies and ensures all Norfolk young people are receiving a good quality of care.
5.6 Resfest2: This is the second year we have run this and it has been even more successful, from activities such as canoeing to spoon whittling. This is for one week with an activity based programme to help improve self-esteem, independence skills and relationship building with peers.
5.7 All residential staff continue to undertake training via a range of recourses these include The Learning Hub and internal and external agencies.
5.8 The management team and the training department reviewed the training needs of the service to ensure appropriate training is offered to meet the needs of the young people we look after.
5.9 Continuing review of residential policies and procedures in line with any Ofsted changes.
5.10 The health passports for Looked after children was designed collaboratively by Norfolk County Council, the NHS and the In Care Council with input from some of the young people and managers in our residential service. This is to ensure that we as corporate parents promote the health and wellbeing of young people and help them to take ownership of their own health needs as they get older, preparing them adequately for adulthood. This has been a very successful incentive so far.
6. Financial Implications
6.1 Financial Monitoring Information
6.2 Each placement in Norfolk’s Residential Service children’s homes in 2015/16 was on average £2176 per week. This compares favourably with the agency
11 74 placement costs of £3212 for the basic package of care, anything extra would incur further charges.
6.3 Following the last financial year, Norfolk Residential Children’s Services finished the year within budget.
7. Sufficiency
7.1 A sufficiency analysis is currently taking place with the view to an action plan being created. Early indication shows there is capacity for the residential service to expand. There is a key need for a home specifically for children who display sexually harmful behaviours, an increase in the provision for short breaks, the need for medium to long term in house residential homes and consideration as to whether the Outreach team needs to be expanded. Capital growth would be required to increase the capacity of residential care within Norfolk.
8. Issues, risks and innovation
8.1 The key challenges for the Service are:
• Ensuring the Service meets the Ofsted criteria and expectations • Ensuring that our young people have permanence plans that meet their needs • Expansion is line with sufficiency report • Working alongside corporate strategies to ensure the residential services aligns with these
8.2 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA)
As can be seen in the purpose and function documents, all our homes are committed to policy, procedures and practice which promote equality and address the poor outcomes for this group.
8.3 Impact on Children and Young People in Norfolk
Children’s Services deliver a range of residential homes to meet the needs of young people who require residential care. As can be seen from the quality of care as judged by Ofsted, and our own quality assurance checks, our children’s homes are having very positive effects on the outcomes of our young people.
9. Background
9.1 Background Papers
The statement of purpose for each home is available for Members Insight
9.2 Officer Contact
If you have any questions about matters contained or want to see copies of any assessments, eg equality impact assessment, please contact:
Cathy Mouser Assistant Director Tel No: 01603 217653 12 75 Email: [email protected]
Peter Ronan, Head of Social Work Resources Tel No: 01603 222574 Email: [email protected]
Lee Napper, Residential Co-ordinating Manager Tel No: 01362 693250 Email: [email protected]
If you need this Agenda in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
13 76 Children’s Services Committee Item No
Report title: Statement of Purpose of Norfolk’s Fostering Services Annual Review Date of meeting: 13 September 2016 Responsible Chief Michael Rosen Officer: Executive Director Children’s Services Strategic impact
Every fostering service has a statutory requirement to publish, and regularly update, a document which describes the ethos and goals of the fostering service, its management and oversight arrangements and the experience of its staff.
This Statement of Purpose (appendix 1) is a public document, approved by the Children’s Services Committee before being made available to foster families, fostered children, their birth parents and guardians, and staff working in the field of fostering. It is also inspected by OFSTED (Office of Standards in Education). The committee paper will focus on a performance review of Norfolk Fostering Service.
Executive summary
The key strengths:
• Further developing the Norfolk Fostering Advisory Partnership and issuing a new foster carer team around the child charter. • Increased the number of approved foster places • The proportion of Norfolk Foster Carers who have completed the Children’s Workforce Development Council training – “Certificate in Training, Support and development Standards for Foster Care” remains very high • Permanence decisions are made at the earliest opportunity via a permanence monitoring group and we have introduced a panel to agree long term foster placements ensuring children’s needs are met and resources are provided if required. • Ensured scrutiny of fostering panel minutes and the identification of key themes to improve opportunities and support to foster carers • Develop the new kinship team • Implemented a new supervision format. • Established the kinship care team who have undertaken over 500 reviews offered a twice weekly helpline to kinship carers. The helpline received 349 calls with 97 calls from other professionals and 252 calls from families only one call was a repeat so the team of 1.5 social workers reached 251 families and undertook in access of 500 reviews. Key themes were: advice to access early help queries in relation to birth parent contact and financial reviews to access
The key areas of challenge:
• Work across children’s services to implement the improvement plans and ensure the right children are in the right placement for the right amount of time. • Implement a new system for foster carers to record into care first. • Ensure the voice of the child is included in foster carer reviews.
1 77 Next year we w ill:
• Develop a questionnaire for children to give feedback on their foster home • Review staffing levels in the kinship care team to increase its scope and reach • Further develop support foster care offering short breaks to children on the edge of care • Deliver support groups to special guardians • Develop a resource pack for foster carers to support care leavers • Ensure CPD portfolios are included in every foster care review from January 2017
Recommendations:
To recommend the approval of the statement of purpose and provide scrutiny and challenge to the fostering service
1. Proposal
Members are asked to scrutinise the information within the report and provide challenge to the service to ensure continued improved outcomes for Norfolk children and families.
Members are asked to recommend approval to full Council of the Statement of Purpose and Functions for the Local Authority Fostering Service to comply with the Care Standards Act 2000.
2. Evidence
2.1 Norfolk Fostering Service recruits, assesses, approves and supports the following types of foster carers:
• Long term foster care • Short term foster care, including pre-adoption and pre-permanence • Emergency foster care • Friends and Family foster care • Parent and child foster placements • PACE foster care (established following the service’s Ofsted inspection of November 2011 as PACE – Police and Criminal Evidence Act beds to prevent young people staying overnight in custody suites) • Short break foster care and support foster care.
2.2 The service is made up of the following teams:
• Three Fostering Support Teams who supervise and support foster carers (this includes on-going training needs) • A Fostering Recruitment Team with responsibility for assessing and training prospective foster carers • County Children with Disabilities Service – which runs two resource centres (short break residential units) and provides support to disabled children and young people to access the most appropriate services • A new kinship Care team to offer support and advice to special guardians
2 78 2.3 Numbers of children in Foster Care, Foster Carers, number of Carer Households and Placement Stability.
2.3.1 At 31 st March 2016, 427 children and young people were placed in mainstream and friends and family foster homes provided by Norfolk Fostering Service.
2.3.2 52 young adults remained in their foster placement after their 18 birthday, supported by Norfolk County Council an increase in 7 arrangements.
.
2.3.3 Norfolk Fostering Service supported 643 approved carers across Norfolk at the end of March 2016, including 533 mainstream carers, 61 friends and family (kinship) carers and 49 short breaks carers.
2.3.4 6 Foster Carer placements were subject of unplanned endings in 2015/16, compared with 18 the year before an average of 28.5 for local authorities in England 2012/13. When these figures are viewed as a rate per 100 children placed with foster carers, Norfolk’s rate of 1.6 is considerably better than the local authority average for England of 5.4 2012/13 national figures for this year are not available till November.
2.4 Recruitment & Retention of Foster Carers
2.4.1 In 2015/16 we had 367 initial enquiries and approved 111 fostering households of these households 63 were temporary approvals of friends or family carers and 48 were fully approved foster carers following a panel of which 29 were task centred foster carers. In the same period 67 households left the register.
Norfolk Fostering Service recruited 55 new foster care households between April 2015 and March 2016, 13 more than in the previous 12 months. This is higher then the English local authority average of 28 for 2013/14. It should be noted that there was a significant increase in the number of friends and families temporary approvals, which resulted in a significant increase in work load in the fostering recruitment team. Last year there were 88 temporary approvals.
2.4.2 67 foster care households left the fostering register between April 2015 and March 2016. The vast majority of people leaving the register went on to be special guardians other reasons for leaving included retirement, the end of a long-term placement, changes in family circumstances.
On average Norfolk fostering service has 40 vacancies it can match to at one time. Foster carers can be on hold for a variety of reasons including family circumstance, ill health, the needs of a child already placed or rarely as a result of concerns of allegations.
2.5 Concerns and Allegations against Carers and Child Protection Enquiries
2.5.1 There were 10 referrals and discussions with the Local Authority Designated Officer relating to Norfolk foster carers between April 2015 and March 2016. From these, no Section 47 (child protection) enquiries were made. The number of referrals, discussions and section 47 enquiries were lower than the previous year which was 22 and 9. 3 79
2.5.2 Our foster carers are provided with individual membership of the Fostering Network – this provides access to a comprehensive website which includes library items on fostering, help lines, legal and medical advice, stress counselling and a new on-line community. It also provides the support of a solicitor and a worker who provides advice, mediation and advocacy for our foster carers. The Fostering Network is well used by our carers.
2.6 Incidents of Restraint and Children Going Missing from Care
2.6.1 There were no incidents of restraint on children by Norfolk foster carers between April 2015 and March 2016 compared to 9 the previous year. All our foster carers are taught de-escalation techniques restorative approaches and longer courses are available to help carers therapeutically re parent children
2.6.2 Eight children/young people went missing from a Norfolk foster home in 2015/16 on 17 separate occasions. The average for English local authorities is 10 children going missing on 28 separate occasions.
2.7 Support for, and Supervision of, Foster Carers
2.7.1 Every year, foster carers should be reviewed by their supervising social worker to ensure their continued appropriateness for the fostering task (an Annual Review). The number of fostering households who have not had an annual review within the last 12 months has decreased over the past year, from around 48 as at 17 th July 2015 to 28. As a percentage 93% of review are in time scale all of the overdue reviews are being actively worked and in 10 cases the review has been written and is with the foster carer for comment. The table below shows a breakdown of the length of time reviews are overdue.
Time Overdue (months) Number 0-<1 14 1-<3 11 3-<6 2 6+ 1
2.7.2 Norfolk Fostering Service should complete one unannounced visit to each fostering household per year. As at 10 August 2016, two carer households had not had an unannounced visit within timescales visits were undertaken in these 2 cases but no one was in.
2.7.3 Foster Carers are required to have up-to-date DBS (Disclosure and barring service that replaced Criminal Records Bureau (CRB)) checks. As at 10 August 2016, 100% of all Norfolk Fostering Service carers had current DBS / CRB checks in place.
2.7.4 Norfolk Fostering Service has a duty desk, which provides 24 hour telephone cover, staffed by experienced social workers from the service outside of normal office hours, and by specialist carer support workers during office hours. This 4 80 means that if a carer is unable to reach their allocated social worker, there is ALWAYS a person to contact and help with any problems they might be facing.
2.7.5 In the last three years 13 fostering households have transferred from being agency foster carers to becoming in-house foster carers. They are clear the quality of support and training offered is a key factor in their decision to transfer. In the last 3 years no foster carers have left Norfolk Fostering Service to join an agency.
2.7.6 As a result of concerns expressed by foster carers and former foster carers the service is fully engaged with the Independent Foster Care Panel Parker 2 Review. The service has made all files available for scrutiny and audit no member of staff was interviewed by the second Parker review.
2.8 Foster Carer Training
2.8.1 Foster carers are encouraged to complete the Children's Workforce Development Council's (CWDC) certificate in 'Training, Support and development Standards for Foster Care'. Foster carers are meant to complete this training with in 12 or 18 months of their approval. Currently (10 August 2016) 7 fostering households have not completed in their relevant timescale or 98.% of carer household have completed or are on course to complete with in time scales.
2.8.2 Norfolk Fostering Service provides a wide range of training opportunities for foster carers. In addition to the mandatory courses of safeguarding and emergency aid, a variety of long and short courses are available both face-to- face and on-line via e-learning technology. Additional training is provided by Norfolk Safeguarding Children Board (NSCB), which carers often attend directly without the explicit knowledge of the fostering service. Carers are also able to access training courses provided by BREAK. This is done via the NCC Learning and Development team so that places can be monitored. Training is overseen by the fostering advisory partnership and all training is co delivered by foster carers who have been selected and trained as trainers.
The following table shows attendance at courses run from September 2014 –August 2015
Course title Number of courses Number of Delegates Emergency Aid for Foster Carers 12 113 (Mandatory) Safeguarding (Mandatory) 6 85
Bridging to Adoption (short) 2 16 Delegated Authority (short) 2 25 Drug and Alcohol Awareness (Short) 1 (2 cancelled) 8 Equality and Diversity (short) 2 (1 cancelled) 14 Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (short) 2 38 Health Information (short) 3 (1 cancelled) 26 Moving and Handling (CWD) 1 4 Norfolk Steps De-escalation (short) 16 Overview of Autistic Spectrum disorder 3 25 (short) Pathway Planning (short) 3 50 5 81 Restorative Approaches (Short) 5 (3 cancelled) 14 Secure Base (short) 3 27 Sensory, communication and low 3 33 arousal (Autism 2) (short) Social Media (short) 3 32 Teenager abuse and healthy safe 2 17 relationships (short)
Fostering Changes 5 -11 (Long course) 1 10 1 course cancelled Nurturing Attachments (long course) 1 12
In addition to this training with the fostering advisory partnership we run 6 support groups across the county and delivered a conference on trauma attended by over 100 foster cares. The service has also delivered signs of safety workshops to over 90 foster carers.
This year we have introduced a continuous professional development portfolio that foster carers can log learning from all sources and link it to improving their practice. From January 2017 these portfolios will be part of their annual review and to be eligible to future placements foster carers will need to demonstrate their learning in practice.
2.9 Complaints
2.9.1 Between April 2015 and March 2016, Norfolk County Council received 20 complaints relating to the fostering service.
As a result of complaints we have: • introduced a sickness payment to Foster Carers who have to end placements due to their ill health • changed policy and procedures relating to allegations and concerns • formed the Fostering Advisory Partnership • clarified payments for mother and baby placements • changed arrangements regarding the Agency Decision Maker • changed guidance around unannounced visits
3. Financial Implications
There are no financial implications from recommending this report
4. Issues, risks and innovation
It is critical in performing its duty as a corporate parent that the committee scrutinises the functioning of its fostering service.
5. Background
Please see attached Statement of Purpose (appendix one)
Officer Contact If you have any questions about matters contained or want to see copies of any assessments, e.g. equality impact assessment, please get in touch with:
6 82 If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with:
Officer Name: Peter Ronan Tel No: 222574 Email address : [email protected]
If you need this Agenda in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
7 83 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Norfolk County Council
Fostering Service
Statement of Purpose
2016-17
LOCAL AUTHORITY FOSTERING SERVICE REGULATIONS 2011 1 84 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Foreword from the Children’s Service Executive D irector , – Michael Rosen
Putting children first
Foster carers are of critical importance to Norfolk County Council.
We welcome people from all walks of life and all ethnic backgrounds and religions. It doesn't matter if you are a home owner, tenant, or on housing benefit, employed or not employed. If you can demonstrate that you could meet the needs of a child or young person who is in the care of the Local Authority, then we will consider your application.
Many of the children we need to place in foster care will have suffered trauma, grief and loss. Some will have experienced or witnessed abuse or lived in chaotic environments, which may have left them feeling vulnerable and unsafe. We are looking for carers who can provide children with a safe and stable environment in which they can grow and develop. You will need to help them feel comfortable in your home and their surroundings. Foster carers work as part of a team with birth parents and a range of professionals to ensure good outcomes for children and young people.
It's important to remember that we are not simply looking for people who have had straightforward lives. We will consider your family history sympathetically. Coming through and learning from difficulties or losses can be helpful experiences for fostering.
We welcome applications from adults over 21 years of age. You need to have a genuine commitment to care for a child and lots of energy, understanding and patience. You need to have a spare bedroom in your home and sufficient time and space in your life to care for children and young people who may have a range of additional needs.
Thank you for taking the time to find out more about fostering in Norfolk.
2 85 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Contents
Introduction from the Children’s Service Executive Director, Norfolk County Council Page 2 Contents Page 3 Aims & Objectives of Norfolk Fostering Service Page 4 Who we are Page 5 Achievements over the last year and plans for the next 12 months Page 6 Fostering Service Structure Page 7 Children with Disabilities Service Structure Page 8 Types and numbers of foster carers Page 9 The Fostering Recruitment Team Page 10 The work of the Fostering Recruitment team Page 11-12 Fostering Supervision and Support Teams Page 13 Partnership working Page 14 Annual foster carers review Page 14 Use r Engagement Page 15 Children with Disabilities Service Page 16 Learning and Development Page 17-18 How to Complain or Challenge a Decision Page 19 Contact details for Ofsted & the Children’s Rights Director Page 20 Fostering Service Management Arrang ements Page 21 Appendix One - Staffing Page 22
3 86 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Aims & Objectives of the Norfolk Fostering Service
Norfolk Children’s Services Vision: Our Vision: Children First The objectives of Norfolk County Council Fostering Service are:
‘Norfolk County Council will be a consistent, caring and V Recruit and assess carers who can meet the needs of responsible parent to all children and young people in our care Norfolk’s looked after children and young people through to adulthood. We Promise to put Children First and to V Train carers to the highest standards possible to ensure they work with them and the important people in their lives to ensure can offer children and young people a safe and nurturing they are safe, happy and well. We will always be there at the experience right time to support children and young people to achieve their V Ensure carers, as part of the team around the child, are able own personal ambitions by never giving up on them’ to support children and young people in accessing a full range of services to meet their needs; this will include their
educational, health and attachment needs
V Work in partnership with our colleagues within Children’s The aims of Norfolk County Council’s Fostering Service: Services and external agencies to keep the child's best interests paramount We believe that children and young people in our care should:
V Help carers to support our aims through:
V Be helped to grow and reach their potential
V Be given safe, nurturing experiences within a variety of caring o Regular, planned and recorded supervision sessions resources which reflect need, respect difference, value diversity o Ensuring the holistic, continuous professional and promote inclusion development of all foster carers V Be listened to and services we provide should take these views o Regular carer support groups (Network Groups) into consideration o Annual appraisals/reviews of carers that reflect V Receive high quality, relevant aftercare. continual practice and development o Publishing and advising our foster carer handbook We believe that children looked after by Norfolk Children's Services o Agreeing a foster care charter with our carers deserve: o Offering 24 hour support V Services which help them overcome adversity and positively o Involving carers in recruitment and training of new address disability carers V Good assessments and understanding of their needs o Paying allowances and fees to carers V Positive care planning and high aspirations for their future V All significant adults in their lives to be working together V To be heard 4 87 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Who Are We?
Norfolk Fostering Service comprises 4 teams plus 2 resource centres which offer short-term break to children with a disability:
The Fostering Recruitment Team takes the lead in recruiting and assessing new carers and Family and Friends Carers County wide.
Three Family Placement Supervision Teams supporting foster carers These teams each service a geographical area.
The Children with Disabilities Family Service workers are based at Marshfield & Foxwood resource centres, this team also recruits and supervises carers offering short-term breaks for children with a disability.
Appendix 2 gives full details of all personnel in our service.
5 88 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Achievements in 2014/15 & Plans for 2015/16
Last year we: Next y ear we will: • Reclaimed permanence for children by attending • permanence panel and our staff co-producing linking Develop a questionnaire for children to give feedback on their reports matching the child to their foster carer foster home • • Scrutinised more carefully the quality of viability Review staffing levels in the kinship care team to increase it’s assessments to ensure they are of a good standard. scope and reach • • With the fostering advisory group published a new foster Further develop support foster care offering short breaks to care charter with it becoming a team around the child children on the edge of care • charter Deliver support groups to special guardians • • Established the kinship care team who have undertaken Develop a resource pack for foster carers to support care over 500 reviews offered a twice weekly helpline to kinship leavers carers • Ensure CPD portfolios are included in every foster care review • Embedded signs of safety within the service a foster carer from January 2017 presented their signs of safety work to the Norfolk signs of safety conference • Introduced a continuous professional development (CPD) portfolio for all fostering households
6 89 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Norfolk Fostering Service Structure
Head of social work resources
Team Manager – Team Manager Team Manager Team Manager Fostering Fostering Support Team 1 Fostering Support Team 2 Fostering Support Team 3 Recruitment Team
4 SSW – 5.2 SSW 2.1 SSW 3 SSW 2 FPSW 2.1 FPSW 4.3 FPSW 3.2 FPSW 1CSW 1CSW 1 CSW
Glossary to Abbreviations TM : Team Manager SSW: Senior Social Worker FPSW: Family Placement Social Worker CSW: Carer Support Worker
7 90 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Norfolk Children with Disabilities Service Structure
Head of social work resources
Resource Resource Centre Centre Manager Manager Foxwood Marshfields Short breaks Short breaks fostering fostering
8 91 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Types of foster carers, numbers of foster carers and children Numbers of carers: Foster Carer Types: who are we looking for? At 31 March 2016, Norfolk County Council supervised and Foster carers are approved to offer: supported 359 foster carer households. V Foster placements to meet the objectives of a child’s care plan In the year 2014/2015, Norfolk County Council recruited 55 V Parent and child placements new foster families, 28 of which were kinship foster carers. V Connected Persons (Kinship Care) approved as foster carers in order to offer a placement to a specific child or children known to them Numbers of Children: V Short Term Breaks / Short Breaks Plus for children who have At the end of March 2016, there were 427 children living in Norfolk a disability County Council foster homes. The short term break scheme and V Targeted recruitment for carers offering police and criminal short term plus scheme for children with disabilities offered evidence (PACE) beds. placements to 53 children and young people. .
9 92 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
The Fostering Recruitment Team
The Fostering Recruitment Team (FRT) has taken the lead in raising the public's awareness of the need for foster carers, responding to all initial enquiries, and in preparing and assessing all foster carers with the exception of those who specifically wish to care for children who have a disability.
Aims and Objectives
In its fostering role, our aims are to target recruitment to meet placement demands and meet the diverse and complex needs of Norfolk’s looked after children by:
V Inviting people who are enquiring about fostering to attend information sessions. They are shown a presentation about fostering and the recruitment process and get the opportunity to talk to experiences foster carers and social workers. Evaluation from people who have attended these meetings have proven to be positive. V recruiting carers and assessing their suitability to offer fostering placements for children aged 0-18 years and into adulthood V we assess carers who wish to transfer to Norfolk from Independent Fostering Providers or other local authorities V undertaking kinship care assessments (connected person carer assessments) using BAAF ( British association of fostering and adoption) form C V we have a diverse and experienced staff team which includes qualified social work practitioners and administrative support
V we involve foster carers and young people who have been in foster carer in our recruitment and preparation training V we raise an awareness of fostering with the general public, conducting specific publicity campaigns and promoting fostering as a rewarding and worthwhile activity
10 93 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
(b) Applicants progressing beyond the initial visit stage are invited to Work of the Fostering Recruitment Team attend a preparation course based on Fostering Network’s "Skills to Foster" course. Working with difference is stressed throughout the Publicity course. The service aims to complete six courses per year. Basic The Fostering Recruitment Team has collaboratively worked in Emergency Aid training is also provided. Young people from the partnership with the Norfolk County Council Corporate Marketing Norfolk In Care Council attend this training and talk about their Office and Communications Unit neighbouring Local Authorities and experiences of being fostered, and an experienced foster carer co Fostering Net Work. presents the training with a qualified social worker . The team have implemented Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Assessment and approval of foster carers: Amendments to the (c) For those who are considered suitable and identify their wish to Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulations. proceed, a social worker will be allocated to start the BAAF form F Information on our website produces a significant number of Fostering Assessment. This normally involves 8-10 visits to both enquiries, and informs enquirers of the new processes. partners (less if a single applicant) and two individual sessions. In There is on-going monitoring of the sources of our initial enquiries addition, a comprehensive set of checks are completed in line with the and recruitment and assessment process. Brighton and Hove Part VIII report including:
Recruitment and Assessment o Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks (a) All members of the public who make an initial enquiry can o Six references do so by contacting Norfolk County Council Customer o Employment check/reference Services on 0344 800 8020. Information about Fostering for o Contact made with ex-partners of a significant relationship Norfolk Children’s Services can be found on the Norfolk o GP report Fostering service web site www.norfolk.gov.uk/fostering . o A Health & Safety checklist o A Safe Caring Family Policy Once an enquiry has been noted, a Stage 1 Fostering Recruitment o The assessing social worker also conducts an unannounced Social Worker will make contact with the enquirer to discuss the visit. fostering task, including current placement and matching needs, they will gather basic information and if appropriate invite them to Applicants read, comment and contribute to the report by writing some an information session. sections themselves. Where an assessor and applicant(s) have differing views this will be clearly stated in the report. Generally the information sessions are held every 3 weeks. A Fostering Recruitment Social Worker, a Fostering Supervision (d) The report is presented to a Foster Panel for a recommendation on Worker and an experienced Foster Carer will be available to whether the application should be approved and the terms of any such present information about fostering, the assessment process and approval. A suitably qualified senior manager, as Agency Decision answer any questions. People attending these sessions will be Maker, will make the final decision. invited to complete and return a Register of Interest Form (ROIF) and once this has been received and discussed with a Team Manager a decision will be made as to whether an Initial Home Visit will be arranged. 11
94 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Work of the Fostering Recruitment Team – Continued
Family and Friends wishing to be approved as foster carers (connected persons)
Regulations require that children who are looked after by the local authority can only be placed with either an approved foster carer or, for a period not exceeding 16 weeks, with a relative or friend of the child who has been approved as a temporary foster carer by an appropriate senior manager within Children’s Services.
o The FRT offers consultation to the team and the practitioner where connected persons assessments may be required, and when temporary approval has been given
o Once temporary approval has been granted a social worker from the FRT will undertake an initial visit to complete the necessary paperwork required by regulation
o If suitable for assessment by FRT an assessment plan will be agreed and reviewed.
o The assessing social worker, together with the child’s social worker, will complete a BAAF Form C assessment and present it to the fostering panel. The agency decision maker will make the final recommendation
o The FRT also undertake fostering assessments where specific children have been identified but not yet placed.
12 95 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Fostering Supervision and Support Teams
The teams offer supervision and support to foster carers. All carers have an allocated supervisor who will visit regularly, conduct an annual foster carer review, liaise with children’s social workers and help to ensure appropriate placements are made. All children placed with foster carers should be in placements with a carer who has the quality, skills and experience to meet their needs.
The teams supervise and support two types of foster carers:
Foster carers and their families receive: Fostering: Offering placements to children until the conclusion of their care plan. V Regular supervision visits in line with the fostering task ,
generally 4-8 weeks Connected Persons (Kinship Care): Offering a Looked V Twenty-four hour telephone support from an on-call Fostering After Child a placement where the child is known to them as a worker family member or friend. V Invitations to regular support groups held throughout the county,
including educational and social events and a group specifically All newly registered foster carers are approved to care for for the children of foster carers. children and young people between the ages of 0 to 18, but in V All foster carers on approval are funded for membership of the line with our smoking policy, some carers will not be approved Fostering Network which provides independent advice and for children under the age of 5 (with exceptions for connected mediation as well as other associated benefits carer approvals). V Long service awards
V On-going training to encourage continuous development
13 96 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Fostering Supervision and Support Teams – Continued The team provides supervision and support to enable foster carers to work to young people’s care plans. We aim to provide foster placements offering therapeutic care by promoting a Team Around the Child approach, with the focus on the foster carer providing ‘therapeutic re-parenting’. We actively manage the placement to ensure that outcomes for the children are our primary focus.
Foster carers need the following to “therapeutically re-parent” young people:
o To be seen as a key part of the Team Around the Child o A heightened sense of self-awareness, including being emotionally grounded and evidencing the ability to be reflective in their practice o To possess a good working knowledge of theoretical models to use as a framework for understanding young people’s behaviour o Access to good quality wrap-around services.
Partnership Working
The Fostering advisory partnership which consist of foster carers and staff has become the group that drives our service over seeing training and improving team around the child working.
All carers are required to work closely alongside the families of looked after Annual Foster Carer Review children, with sensitivity and an understanding of the responsibility attached to looking after another person’s child. This can be complex and demanding, Annual reviews of carers ensure that we keep in the forefront our both for the carers and the child, and requires an emphasis to be placed on aims and objectives for the children in our care. The views of all joint working with social workers and colleagues in all relevant agencies. those involved are sought to contribute to the review. It is particularly important that the child or young person’s voice is heard. All carers are required to record details of the child’s life in their care and contribute to effective assessments. It is at the review that decisions are made regarding the carers’ continued suitability. Their terms of approval are reconsidered and In addition to the basic allowance, in Norfolk we operate an accreditation support and training needs identified. scheme, based on the 'Task Skills Profile' which is used by the social worker and carer to determine whether a carer has the skills required to be accredited The supervision teams have developed the way in which reviews are at a higher level. carried out to ensure that foster carer reviews are reflective of continual practice, and support the continuous professional All carers can access the LAC CAMHS Service (A Primary Mental Health development of all foster carers. Service for Looked After Children and Adopted Children). This service provides consultation and guidance to foster carers and professionals working 14 with looked after children. Each child’s situation will be considered individ97ually My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
User Engagement
The fostering service has strong links with the Norfolk In Care Council (NICC). The NICC comprises a group of children and young people who are or have been looked after by Norfolk County Council Children’s Services. It is hoped that by talking with and listening to those in our community who experience what it is like to be looked after in a foster family we can find ways to improve our service.
NICC contribute to the Skills to Foster preparation training for applicants to foster by attending a session and taking questions. All participants attending the course find this a useful part of the preparation training.
The NICC have been working in partnership with the fostering service and the virtual school to develop training programmes focused upon the educational requirements of looked after children and the role foster carers can play in maximising educational opportunities for the children in their care.
NICC have also been involved in helping to train foster panel members and divisional managers in the importance of placement planning. They attended sessions and underlined the importance of delegated authority
15 98 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Short Term Break Service . The scheme provides short break opportunities for disabled children and their families. Caring for a disabled child will present carers with challenges and difficulties significantly beyond those experienced by the Short Breaks Plus Scheme carers of a non-disabled child. Disabled children do not always get the same opportunities as their nondisabled peers e.g. staying away from The Short Breaks Plus Scheme was commissioned to provide a service home with friends and relatives, the scheme offers them that experience . for children and young people with complex health needs, autism and/or challenging behaviour who were ‘hard to place’. Therefore the scheme provides parents and carers with a break and provides the children with a positive, alternative experience to living at Fee paid (or contract) carers provide up to four nights planned care per home. week, caring for children that the STB scheme cannot place. High levels of support, more in-depth training and an expectation to take ‘hard to Carers are recruited to provide: place’ children distinguish these carers from the STB scheme. o A sitting service (carers going into the child’s home thereby allowing the parents to leave their child). o Care for a child in their own home for daytime, overnight (less than 24 hours) and overnight (more than 24 hours).
Carers are recruited, trained, assessed and approved in line with other carers in the broader fostering service. They attend a foundation course; undertake a detailed assessment and their approval is considered at a Foster Panel. Carers are fully involved in the matching process. Placements are planned and entail a series of introductory visits. Carers are supported in a variety of ways: by phone, home visit, at meetings, support groups and the sharing of information (e.g. newsletters). Levels of support relate to the task the carer undertakes. Carers, irrespective of their status, are reviewed annually. The demand for ‘standard’ short break carers has lessened significantly since the introduction of Direct Payments for families assessed as needing short breaks which empowers families to make their own arrangements for their children’s care. There has also been a considerable expansion of other short breaks provision, giving families increased choice.
16 99 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Learning & Development
Skilled foster care is central to the County Council's ability to provide the best possible service to children; training is of central importance in supporting carers and helping them to increase skills to face the many challenges that foster caring brings.
To encourage and support the development of the Team around the Child fostering, training has been incorporated within the wider corporate parenting training plan. This facilitates and supports our belief that those who train together will work well together. It breaks down barriers and improves understanding of colleagues’ different perspectives.
We have a training strategy that reflects the core beliefs and aims Training for foster carers ensures the following: of the fostering service, and addresses the requirements set out in the National Minimum Standards for the Fostering Service o Training meets the needs of foster carers, the requirements of Regulations. National Minimum Standards for the Fostering Service, and the Training, Support and Development Standards for Foster Care Integral to all our training is valuing difference, diversity and o The training provided enables foster carers to provide high challenging discrimination. Anyone who delivers training for Norfolk quality care which meets the diverse and complex needs of the County Council is expected to sign a tutor agreement form which children placed with them clarifies our anti-discriminatory practice. o The training promotes the recruitment and retention of foster carers o The training ensures that carers are an integral part of Children’s Services o The training is delivered within existing and planned resources o All training promotes partnership working.
We offer foster carers & staff an increased knowledge of what works & why, and some fresh ideas through the training programme.
The service offers foster carer buddies who work with carers to help them achieve the Fostering Training Standards and all aspects of the fostering task. 17 100 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
The full Training Plan is updated each year. Every carer is expected to gain the knowledge required from the core training courses, which include: Skills training, Safeguarding Children and Emergency Aid; de-escalation training and workshops on equality and diversity.
Following the core courses, carers can choose from a range of further opportunities including:
o Working with Children and Young People in Care o Fostering Changes Programme o Managing Relationships o Courses on attachment/helping manage behaviour o Making and Maintaining Positive Relationships with Birth Families o Making the Most of Reviews o Substance Misuse o Bridge training o Secure Base training
Learning is offered by face to face courses, as well as e-learning and other learning opportunities.
An NVQ Level 3 qualification is available.
18 101 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
How to Complain or Challenge a Decision
While Norfolk’s Fostering Service endeavours to get things right first time, every time, there may be occasions where service users wish to make a complaint. This section sets out the procedures in place, should this situation arise.
The complaints procedure
Norfolk County Council has a designated Compliments & Complaints Team which coordinates the investigation of complaints made by prospective and approved foster carers. All complaints are logged by the team. Challenges to decisions regarding suitability to Children, young people or their representative can make a complaint by foster using the local rate number 0344 800 2020 or accessing the Norfolk
County Council website www.norfolk.gov.uk If prospective fostering enquirers are assessed as unsuitable as
foster carers before having a formal application accepted, they can The key features of this complaints procedure are: ask for a Team Manager to review the decision.
V Most issues can be sorted out informally by the manager If the Team Manager upholds the decision, the enquirer(s) can ask responsible for the service within 10 working days. to refer the decision not to proceed with the process to the V If the case is not resolved, an independent person completes an Operational Manager -Adoption, Fostering & Residential Care for investigation within a further 25 working days. final adjudication. If this reviewing officer upholds the original V If the issue remains contentious, the Chief Executive’s Department decision, there is no further ground for appeal. commissions another investigation to make recommendations to be
considered by a Panel of three independent people. If a formal application to foster is accepted by the fostering
agency, and doubts regarding suitability subsequently arise, the Children and young people wishing to make a complaint must either be applicants are able to insist that their assessment as foster carers receiving or seeking a service from Norfolk County Council Children's is presented to the Fostering Panel. Services.
If the panel recommends that the applicants are unsuitable as Any individual or group, other than children and young people, receiving or foster carers, and this recommendation is agreed by the agency seeking a service from Norfolk County Council, who wish to make a decision-maker, the prospective carers can refer themselves to an complaint, can do so by writing to: independent panel through the Independent Review Mechanism.
Compliments and Complaints Manager, FREEPOST IH 2076 Norwich NR1 2BR or at www.norfolk.gov.uk 19 102 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Any serious concerns regarding the Fostering Service practice can be referred to the OfSTED inspectorate. The main office for the OFSTED fostering inspectorate service is:
OFSTED National Business Unit Royal Exchange Buildings St Anne's Square Manchester M2 7LA Tel: 08456-40-40-40 e-mail address: [email protected]
If a child has any serious concerns relating to Fostering Service they can contact the Children’s Rights Director themselves. The details are:
Office of the Children’s Rights Director Ofsted Aviation House 125 Kingsway London WC2B 6SE
Tel: 0800 528 0731 web address: rights4me.org
20 103 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Fostering Service Management Arrangements
The OfSTED named, responsible manager is the head of social work resources.
Pen picture of Peter Ronan – Head of social work resources
- History Honours Degree (University of East Anglia, 1984) - Diploma in Social Worker (CETSW No 41175, 1993) - Certificate in Management (NEBS NC970000221711051098, 1998) - HCPC Council Registered Social Worker (Registration Number SW31989.) - Enhanced DBS July 2016
Peter has worked for Norfolk County Council since 1988 beginning in a residential children’s home. Peter developed a key worker system whilst studying for his diploma in social work. Post qualifying, Peter developed an interest in working with families to achieve change. He Developed and led the Children Support Team which developed flexible packages of support to assist families to change drawing particularly from solution focused and attachment theory.
During this period Peter also chaired Foster Panels (1997 – 2000) and took on management responsibility for home care. Peter became the responsible individual for Children’s Services Homecare, a service that has been constantly rated as ‘outstanding‘(3 teams) and ‘good’ (one team).
In 2006 Peter became a key member of Norfolk Children’s Safeguarding Board, acting as Chair of the Southern Local Safeguarding Group and leading and managing 5 child protection teams across the Southern area. . Peter was also the operational lead for the re-write of Child Protection Procedures following Working Together 2010.
Peter brings a strong understanding of the families Looked After Children came from, detailed working knowledge of child protection and court process in adoption, fostering and residential care.
Since coming in to his current post in June 2011, Peter has put continuous improvement at the heart of all three services he manages, and there are active improvement plans for each of the three services in place
21 104 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
APPENDIX ONE: Staffing
Staffing at 01.04.2013 is as follows. Full time hours unless stated.
Adoption, Fostering and Residential Care Operational Delivery Manager
Total Experience of Experienc e of Fostering Children and Families Peter Ronan 27 4
County Fostering Recruitment Team
Total Experience of Experience Children and Families of Fostering Team Manager
42 years 22 years Sheila English Certificate in Social Services, PQ Child Care Award, HCPC-registered Social Worker Family Placement Social Workers CQSW, MA Social Work, PQ Child Care Award, GSCC-registered 26 years 6 years Senior Social Worker DIP SW, BA Specialist Award Children & Families, PQ Certificate 14 years 3yr & 3 mths HCPC registered Senior SW BSc (Hons), MA Social Work, DipSW, HCPC-registered Social Worker 12 years 6 years DipSW, PSCC Inservice London, HCPC-registered Social Worker 30 years 12 years CQSW, BA Specialist Award Children & Families, HCPC-registered 28 years 12 years Senior Social Worker DipSW (Germany), MA Social Work, PQ certificate, HCPCGSCC- 17 years 6.5 years registered Senior Social Worker DipSW, Degree in Social Sciences, RSA in Counselling Skills, HCPC 16 years 1 years registered Senior Social Worker, NNEB in Child Development
22 105 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Fostering Team 1 Total Experience of Experience Children and Families of Fostering Team Manager Mike Woodward 28 24 CQSW, Cert. Counselling, HCPC Registered SW Family Placement Social Workers BA Classical Studies, MA/Dip SW, Child Care Award (MA Route). HCPC registered SW 13 7 DipSW, Practice Teaching Award, Specialist Award (Hons), HCPC 23 8 Registered SW DipSW, PQ1, HCPC registered SW 27 21 CSS. PQ, HCPC registered SW 34 10
BA Hons (First Class) History, MA/ DipSW (Distinction), HCPC 13 7 registered SW Dip SW & HE Cert, Cert. Residential Care of Children and Young 18 12 People, HCPC registered SW HNC, DipSW, PQ1. HCPC registered SW 18 8 BA Hons Drama & English Literature, MA in Social Work, HCPC 10 5 registered SW Carer Support Worker NVQ Level 3 – Business Studies 3 3
23 106 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Fostering Team 2 Team Manager Suzy Holman, BA (Hons), CQSW, MA Social Work, Practice Teacher 27 15 Certificate, Counselling cert, HCPC registered SW Family Placement Social Workers DipSW, PQ (1), HCPC registered SW 14 9
Dip Sw, PQ, RGN, Management cert, HCPC registered SW 21 1
Dip SW, HCPC registered SW 27 9
DipSW, HCPC registered SW 24 14
DipSW, Montessori Teaching Cert. HCPC registered SW 23 9
Dip SW, HCPC registered SW 14 8
BA Hons in Social work, PQ, HCPC registered SW 6 25
Carer Support Worker 6 6 BA English lit, Post graduate cert
20 1 NVQ 3 ( Business) RSA 1, 2 3
24 107 My Name is Hope – I Am a Foster Carer
Fostering Team 3 Total Experience of Experience of Fostering Children & Families Team Manager Martyn Lovett 31 Years 4 Years NEBS Management Certificate, DipSW, HCPC registered SW
Senior Social Worker 17 Years 15 Years CSS,HCPC registered SW 25 Years 8 Years CSS, HCPC registered SW 33 Years 24 Years CSS, HCPC registered SW 22 Years 12 Years CSS HCPC registered SW Family Placement Social Workers
MA in Social Work, HCPC registered SW 5 Years 3 Year MA in Social Work, HCPC registered SW 8 Years 2.5 years MA in Social Work, HCPC registered SW 3 Year 3 Year MA in Social Work, HCPC registered SW 22 Years 2 Years CSS, HCPC registered SW Carer Support Worker 12 Years 12 Years
25 108 Children’s Services Committee Item No
Report title: Norfolk County Council Adoption Agency Annual Review Date of meeting: 13 September 2016 Responsible Chief Michael Rosen Officer: Executive Director Children’s Services Strategic impact Every adoption agency has a statutory requirement to publish, and regularly update, a document which describes the ethos and goals of the adoption service, its management and oversight arrangements and the experience of its staff.
The following pages detail the performance of the adoption service and include the following information;
• Performance in recruiting adopters • Performance in finding adoptive families for children • Performance providing post adoption support • Complaints • Service-User Engagement
It is important to remember that the purpose of the adoption service is to approve prospective adopters, prepare children for adoption, and match adopters with children and to provide appropriate post adoption support. This supports the overarching outcome which is to ensure that children and young people are brought up in secure and permanent homes.
This Statement of Purpose (appendix 1) is a public document, approved by the County Council each year before being made available to adoptive families, adopted children, their birth parents and guardians and staff working in the field of adoption. It is also inspected by OFSTED (Office of Standards in Education). This committee paper will focus on a performance review of Norfolk Adoption Service.
Executive summary The key strengths: • The number of adopters approved has decreased this year after 4 years of rising numbers mirroring national trends there also has been a reduction in numbers of children with a plan for adoption. • The number of children matched with adoptive families, in 2015/16 was 83 compared with 85 the previous year. This decline follows a national trend and is likely to be linked to Case Law (Re BS Case). • The number of adoption orders granted was 74 which is the largest number to date. • Norfolk children, on average, are waiting for a shorter period between entering care and moving in with their adoptive family. • Prospective adopters assessments are of a good standard • The number of social workers in the Adoption Support Team have been increased by one FTE. • We worked with three voluntary adoption agencies and 6 local authorities to prepare for regionalisation of adoption services. 1 109 • Early permanence decisions are being made quicker and with greater senior management oversight to ensure that children are placed swiftly and experience minimal delay including robust arrangements to track cases in public law. • We achieved 7 foster to adopt placements compared with just one placement the year before.
The Key areas of challenge:
• The number of children with a plan for adoption has declined. This is a trend reflected locally and nationally. • Variability in the quality of child permanence reports. • Some children with complex needs or large sibling groups remain difficult to place. • To ensure all children with adoption as a plan have good quality life story books.
Next year we will:
• Target recruitment on BME groups, those with an offer to large sibling groups and children with a disability. • Continue to recruit and champion foster to adopt placements. • Work with health to increase the available medical advice to adopters • Ensure procurement process around adoption support applications. • Further develop attachment friendly schools project. • Continue to work with partners to create a reginal adoption agency. • Work with colleagues to improve the quality of life story work
Recommendations: To recommend approval of the statement of purpose to full council and provide scrutiny and challenge to the adoption service.
1. Proposal
Members are asked to scrutinise the information within the report and provide challenge to the service to ensure continued improved outcomes for Norfolk children and families along with internal performance improvement.
Members are asked to recommend approval to Full Council of the Statement of Purpose and Functions for the Local Authority Adoption Service to comply with the Care Standards Act 2000.
2. Evidence
2.1 Background
2.1.1 What is Adoption?
Adoption is a way of providing a new and permanent family for children who cannot be brought up by their own parents. It's a legal procedure in which parental responsibility is awarded to the adopters who become the only adults with parental responsibility. Once an adoption order has been granted it can't be reversed except in extremely rare circumstances.
2.2 Performance & Benchmarking 2 110
2.2.1 Children Awaiting Adoption
The Department for Education produced two “heat maps” showing the number of children awaiting adoption (as at 31 st March 2013) for each local authority. Norfolk was shown as having 85 children awaiting for adoption a reduction from 110 at 31 st March 2012. As of March 2014 this had further reduced to 80 of which 12 were matched but not placed 23 were awaiting placement orders from the courts. As of July 2015 there were 39 children waiting adoption in Norfolk of which 24 had a potential match identified. On 31 march 2016 this had fallen to 35 children and as of August 2016 this had further reduced to 21 of whom 11 had a likely match, 3 their plan was to change from adoption to long term fostering and 6 there was no potential match but active family finding. This startling reduction is the result of increased productivity and case law causing the number of children with a plan of adoption to reduce.
2.2.2 Number of children being adopted.
The latest national figures report that had been a decrease in the number of children being adopted and this trend is reflected in the East of England and Norfolk.
The table below shows the numbers of adoption orders granted for England, the East of England and Norfolk from April 2010 to March 2014, plus additional Norfolk data for 2014/15:
Area 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 England 3,470 4,010 5,050 - - East of - 360 370 510 England - Norfolk 65 58 81 100 74
[Source: Office of National Statistics (Adoption Orders Granted) and CareFirst Norfolk Data]
In the three years to 31 st March 2016, 255 children in Norfolk were adopted, compared with 239 in the 3 years to 31 st March 2015. The following table shows the percentage of children who leave care via adoption for Norfolk and England:
2011 - 2015 2015/16 England Eastern Average Norfolk Region Norfolk % Children Adopted from Care 15% 17% 16% 17% [Source 2014 to 2015 first statistical release & 2015/16 (Norfolk Only)].
17% of care leavers in Norfolk were adopted between 1 st April 2011 & 31 st March 2015, this in line with the England Average of 15% & Eastern region average of 16%.
2.3 Recruiting Norfolk adoptive families
2.3.1 Since 2013 Norfolk Adoption Service significantly increased the annual marketing budget to attract prospective adopters in Norfolk, which has led to an increase in the number of initial enquiries year on year, till last year.
3 111 2.3.2 On average, Norfolk receives more enquiries and applications from prospective adopters and approves more adopters than local authorities across England as a whole. Last year we received 296 enquiries 59 applications and made 43 approvals.
43 approvals of adopter families was a decrease of 32 families compared with 2014/15. This trend follows national trends of decreasing adopter numbers and a decrease in the number of children with a plan of adoption. National data shows that the number of children with a placement order so they can be matched with adopters fell by 34/% this fall was 15% in Norfolk.
An emerging trend seems to be that prospective adopters are contacting us earlier and after attending an open evening they are choosing to spend more time preparing to become adopters. The conversion rate of enquiries to adopters is similar to other authorities. As a result of open evenings which explain the legal and emotional commitment adoption involves, the majority of prospective applicants decide not to take their intent further.
2.4 Finding adoptive families outside Norfolk
2.4.1 As highlighted earlier in this paper, last year saw a dramatic decrease in the number of children placed for adoption mirroring a national trend and resulting from case law RE BS.
2.4.2 Last year 29 children were placed with families from other local authorities or voluntary agencies – an increase of 2 on the year before. These are the most complex children awaiting adoption in Norfolk and will have special needs or developmental uncertainty. If not adopted it is highly likely that most or all of these children would have spent their childhood in care.
As part of the government reforms the inter agency fee increased to £27,000 for local authorities, to bring in line with the fee paid to voluntary adoption agencies. This has resulted in an increase in the budget required to pay for inter-agency fees. We have been able to claim £310,000 rebate from central government.
2.5 Matching Children with Adopters
2.5.1 Adoption is a key area of focus for the Government. The Department for Education (DfE) publication “An Action Plan for Adoption: Tackling Delay” (2012) has the key objectives of reducing the time it takes to recruit adopters and reducing the amount of time children wait to be adopted. Performance against these objectives is measured nationally through the Department for Education (DfE) Adoption Scorecard. The two key measures are:
• The average number of days between a child entering care and moving in with their adoptive family. In2015/16 this was 394 compared with 2014/15 when this was this was 421 days for Norfolk against a 3 year average target (2011–14) of 547 days • The average number of days between a court granting a placement order (gives consent for local authorities to place the child with an adoptive family) and the local authority deciding on a match with an adoptive family. In 2015/16 was 175 days compared with 2014/15 which was 191 days
4 112 Performance continues to improve with regard to timeliness and is better than the English average at 593 days and 223 days.
2.5.2 In summary, performance is improving with the 2015/16 data showing improvement from the previous year.
2.5.3 For both measures, the 2015/16 performance is better than the 3 year performance to 31 st March 2015 (as published in the DfE Adoption Scorecard 2013).
2.5.4 Although yearly performance is improving the Scorecard, when published, may continue to show that Norfolk is not achieving the DfE targets.
3.1.5 These figures do come with a caveat that the average timescales could increase as Norfolk uses the grant funding made available by the DfE to find adoptive placements for those children who have waited the longest for adoption.
3 Post adoption support
3.1 The Adoption Support team works with adopted children and their families after the adoption order. All adoptive families are encouraged to subscribe to our regular newsletter, Side by Side and invited to our Christmas and summer events and our programme of workshops.
3.2 In addition there is also a specialist Advice line and Consultation service twice a month for parents to meet with two social workers. If families want an on-going service from us then they are entitled to an Assessment of Need and a plan of intervention. As the majority of children have experienced developmental trauma, the intensive casework often involves therapeutic services including Therapy and Developmental Re-parenting. In 2015-16 the Adoption Service worked with 120 post adoption support packages which included 45 new referrals.
3.3 Another area of adoption support provided by Norfolk Adoption Service is the Letterbox contact service where adopters and birth families can exchange messages. Between April 2014 and March 2015, over 2,000 exchanges were made.
3.4 Many queries arise from these exchanges and some have to be reviewed or have direct contacts supervised. Where required, birth parents are also given support to write their contact messages for children who have been adopted.
3.5 The Adoption Support Team provides access to information and intermediary services for adopted adults. In 2015/16, 250 cases were open. Intermediary services are also provided for birth relatives and in 2015/16 the Adoption Support Team handled over 30 cases.
3.6 The Department for Education (DfE) has stated that the support families receive after adoption should be improved and since June 2015 introduced the adoption support fund. Since June 2015 to 1 st August 2015 we have successfully bid for over £615.251 worth of therapy for adopted families in Norfolk.
5 113 4. The regionalisation of adoption services
4.1 In 2015 central government announced its intention that all local authorities should form into Regional adoption agencies taking powers to compel local authorities to regionalise by 2020. Central government is clear that they expect greater efficiencies and benefits from regionalisation particularly as they expect the voluntary sector to be a key partner. Norfolk is working with 6 local authorities: Cambridge, Northampton, Bedford borough, Central Bedfordshire, Milton Keynes and Buckinghamshire and 4 charities Coram I, Coram Cambridge, adoption plus and St Francis Children’s society.
4.2 To date we have: • Successfully bid for central government grants to develop a regional adoption agency • Set up work streams to process map and design a new regional agency 6 114 • Created a model to match difficult to place children At this point Norfolk or any other local authority or charity has formally signed to the regional agency and any key and binding decisions will be made by members via committee paper.
5 Complaints
5.1 Between April 2015 and March 2016, Norfolk County Council received 13 complaints relating to the adoption service, all of which were resolved at an early stage compared with 14 the year before. The 13 complaints are above the average for local authorities in England which is 3, but this is to be expected due to the far higher numbers of enquiries and applications we process in Norfolk compared to the England average for local authorities. Norfolk Adoption Service is four times larger than the average English adoption agency. All complaints related to single, isolated incidents, and no systemic issues were highlighted within the service.
6. Financial Implications
There are no financial implications from recommending this report
7. Issues, risks and innovation
It is critical in performing its duty as a corporate parent that the committee scrutinises the functioning of its adoption service.
8. Background
Please see the attached Statement of Purpose (appendix 1)
Officer Contact If you have any questions about matters contained or want to see copies of any assessments, e.g. equality impact assessment, please get in touch with:
If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with:
Officer Name: Peter Ronan Tel No: 222574 Email address : [email protected]
If you need this Agenda in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
7 115 CONSIDER Adoption
Norfolk County Council Appendix 1 – Norfolk Adoption
Service Statement of Purpose 2016/17 Adoption Service
Statement of Purpose
2016-17
LOCAL AUTHORITY ADOPTION SERVICE REGULATIONS 2003 1161
CONSIDER Adoption
Foreword from the Children’s Services Executive Director, – Michael Rosen Putting children first. Adoption is of critical importance to Norfolk County Council. We have implemented the Government’s Action Plan for Adoption. Putting children first we always guarantee a warm welcome to prospective adopters. If you can demonstrate that you could meet the needs of a child or young person who is in the care of the Local Authority awaiting adoption, then we will consider your application.
Some of the children we need to place in families will have suffered trauma, grief and loss. Some will have experienced or witnessed abuse or lived in chaotic environments, which may have left them feeling vulnerable and unsafe. We are looking for prospective adopters who can provide children with a safe and stable home for them to grow and develop. You will need to help them feel comfortable in your home and their surroundings.
It's important to remember that we are not simply looking for people who have had straightforward lives. We will consider your family history sympathetically. Coming through and learning from difficulties or losses can be helpful experiences for adopting a child.
We welcome applications from adults over 21 years of age, from all walks of life and all ethnic backgrounds and religions. It doesn't matter if you are a home owner, tenant, or on housing benefit, employed or not employed. You need to have a genuine commitment to care for a child and lots of energy, understanding and patience. You need to have a spare bedroom in your home and sufficient time and space in your family to adopt a child.
Once a child has joined your family you will not be on your own. We can provide a range of adoption support services throughout childhood.
Thank you for taking the time to find out more about adopting in Norfolk.
1172
CONSIDER Adoption
Contents
Fo reword from the Children’s Services Executive Director, Norfolk County Council – Page 2 Contents Page 3 Aims & Objectives of Norfolk Adoption Service Page 4 Who Are We Looking For? Page 5 What Skills Do Adopters Need ? Page 5 The procedures for recruiting, preparing, assessing, approving and supporting prospective adopters Page 6 Flowchart of steps in recruiting, preparing, assessing, approving and supporting prospe ctive adopters Page 7 Services provided by Norfolk Adoption Service Page 8 Quality Assurance Mechanisms Page 9 How to Make a Compliment, Complain or Challenge a Decision Page 10 Contact Details for OfSTED and the Children’s Rights Director Page 11 Ado ption Service Management Arrangements Page 12 The organisational structure of the adoption service Page 13 The Structure of Norfolk Adoption Service Page 14 Synopsis of Norfolk County Council Adoption Agency staff qualifications & experience Page 15
Norfolk Children’s Services Vision: Our Vision: Children First
‘Norfolk County Council will be a consistent, caring and responsible parent to all children and young people in our care through to adulthood. We Promise to put Children First and to work with them and the important people in their lives to ensure they are safe, happy and well. We will always be there at the right time to support children and young people to achieve their own personal ambitions by never giving up on them’
1183
CONSIDER Adoption
The aims and objectives of Norfolk County Council Adoption Service are:
V For adopted children and young people to be happy members of a family, confident and achieving to their very best potential. V Whatever their cultural background or disability, to identify and prepare children who need to join, and will benefit from, a permanent and legal adoptive family. V To implement effective strategies for the recruitment of sufficient adopters able to meet the needs of children waiting for adoption. V To aspire to achieving a successful outcome for each child placed with a new family, minimising the number of placement disruptions. V To provide a comprehensive adoption support service to adopted children and their families and also to birth families. V To provide intermediary services to adopted adults and to birth families. V To maintain high standards of practice within the adoption service by, exceeding the National Adoption Minimum Standards and the challenges of timeliness. V To promote opportunities for professional development of adoption workers, both social care and administrative staff, to increase their knowledge of good practice and personal development and to strive constantly for service improvement. V Working to meet the challenges of the Adoption Scorecard.
1194
CONSIDER Adoption
Last year we: This year we will:
V Made 7 foster to adopt placements successfully.
V Applied for over £600,000 worth of therapy from the Adoption support Fund. V Target recruitment on BME groups, those with an offer to large V Attended permanence monitoring groups and permanence panel reclaiming letting groups and children with a disability. permanence for our Looked after Children. V Continue to recruit and champion foster to adopt placements. V Successfully bid with partners for DfE grants for recognition of adoption V Work with Health to Increase Medical Advisor time .. agency agenda. V Ensure procurement process around adoption support applications. V Increased The Adoption Support Team by one social worker. V Further develop attachment friendly schools project. V Held a successful adoption and education conference. V Continue to work with partners to create a reginal adoption agency. V Developed a pilot to deliver attachment friendly schools. V Introduce and deliver Signs of Safety. V Offer workshops to children and social workers on adoption communications with children
1205
CONSIDER Adoption
Prospective Adopters - Who are we looking for?
All sorts of people can make successful adoptive parents. Norfolk adoption service welcomes enquiries from people of any What skills do adopters need? ethnic background, age, religion or sexual orientation and from V As can be seen from the flowchart which follows, Norfolk people with disabilities. Applicants may be single, married or living adoption service prepares and trains prospective adopters for with a partner and may or may not already have children in their the task of looking after, and claiming, children born to family. another family. The process helps applicants think about their strengths and skills and any areas where they may need The important thing is that adopters have the potential to meet the more information or experience. needs of the children who are waiting for secure and trusting V Adoptive applicants don’t have to be perfect. Nobody is. families. Often people who have had difficulties in their lives and have worked through them are stronger as a result.
By the time applicants are ready to adopt, we trust that they will be able to:
V Provide a safe, stable, loving family life V Have plenty of time and energy to spare V ‘Stand in the shoes’ of a child and understand how he or she may be feeling V Help children feel good about themselves V Encourage a child’s education, hobbies and interests V Keep a child safe and promote a healthy lifestyle V Help a child feel a positive sense of who they are and where they have come from V Tell their child about their background and sometimes keep in contact with important birth family members V Be firm sometimes but also be able to negotiate and compromise V Cope with the unexpected V Stay calm and positive when things are not going according to plan V Ask for help if they need it.
1216
CONSIDER Adoption
The procedures for recruiting, preparing, assessing, approving and supporting prospective adopters
The Adoption Service aims to recruit a wide range of families to meet the differing needs of children requiring adoptive homes. The agency will welcome all enquiries. Anyone who uses the adoption service will be treated with respect and honesty.
The agency’s strategy for recruiting prospective adopters is to prioritise applicants to reflect the needs of looked after children waiting for adoption at any one time.
Publicity and recruitment materials and leaflets have been produced to support good communication with prospective adopters and more accurately represent the profiles of children waiting to be adopted.
Details of the process for recruiting, assessing, preparing, approving and supporting prospective adopters are set out in the Adoption Service’s procedures, available on request to the public, professionals and other agencies.
We aim to work in partnership and will seek your views about the assessment process and our relationship with you at regular intervals.
1227
CONSIDER Adoption
Flowchart of steps in recruiting, preparing, assessing, approving and supporting prospective adopters
The Adoption process
1238
CONSIDER Adoption
Services provided by No rfolk Adoption Service
The Adoption Service in Norfolk consists of three social work teams which deliver the following:
• The recruitment, training and assessment of prospective adopters, including Foster to Adopt inter-country and in-family applicants • The preparation of children when required for an adoptive placement
• Placement of children with approved prospective adopters
• Counselling for birth families relinquishing a child for adoption
• Consultation to child care social work teams in respect of adoption
issues • Services to other professionals including facilitation of the independent Adoption Panel and completion of reports for Courts; participation in the Regional Adoption Agency • Provide a range of helpful support to adoptive families • An assessment of need post adoption and planned services in consultation with the family • A Letterbox contact arrangement for exchange of information between adoptive and birth families • Facilitation of any arrangements for direct contact between
adoptive and birth families as appropriate for the child • Access to birth records and information for Adopted Adults • Intermediary services for birth families and Adopted Adults • Therapeutic provision for children where required pre and post adoptive placement.
1249
CONSIDER Adoption Quality Assurance Mechanisms
Norfolk’s Adoption Service receives regular internal and external scrutiny to ensure that services are robust and of good quality.
Internal monitoring is achieved by :
V Collection and scrutiny of data, recording outcomes for children and adopters. V Tracking systems to measure the timescales involved for providing services. V Quarterly performance board which reviews outcomes to allow performance to be checked against key performance indicators and national standards V The three adoption teams meet regularly and take part in practice development together V Gathering of service user feedback at different stages of the We also maintain our quality by: adoption process V Statutory reviews and planning meetings provide a structure for V The independent Adoption Panels which closely examine the quality of the agency to record progress in individual cases cases referred to Panel, with annual review between the Panel Chair V Staff performance is routinely monitored during regular supervision and agency managers and decision-maker sessions and annual appraisals with line managers V Collective scrutiny of regional practice and service delivery through V Elected Members scrutinise the Agency’s output through membership of the Regional Adoption Agency which includes several attendance at adoption panels and the Agency’s Annual Reports other local authority and voluntary adoption agencies and the review of the Statement of Purpose & Function. V Comprehensive, regular inspection by OFSTED which measures the V Auditing of case files. agency’s performance against the adoption national minimum standards and regulations.
12510
CONSIDER Adoption
How to Make a Compliment, Complaint or Challenge a Decision
While Norfolk’s Adoption Service endeavours to get things right first time, every time, there may be occasions where service users wish to make a complaint. This section sets out the procedures in place, should this situation arise. The complaints procedure
Norfolk County Council has a designated Compliments & Complaints Team which coordinates the investigation of representations made by prospective and approved adopters. All compliments and complaints are logged by the team.
Children, young people or their representative can make a compliment or Challenges to decision s regarding suitability to adopt complaint by using the local rate number 0344 800 2020 or accessing the Norfolk County Council website www.norfolk.gov.uk If prospective adoptive enquirers are assessed as unsuitable as adopters before having a formal application accepted, they can The key features of this complaints procedure are: seek to have the decision reviewed by a Team Manager.
V Most issues can be resolved informally by the manager responsible If still negative, the enquirer(s) can ask for the decision to be for the service within 10 working days. referred to the Operational Manager (Adoption, Fostering & Residential Care) for final adjudication. If this reviewing officer V If the case is not resolved, an independent person completes an upholds the original decision, there is no further ground for appeal. investigation within a further 25 working days. If a formal application to adopt is accepted by the adoption V If the issue remains contentious, the Chief Executive’s Department agency, and doubts regarding suitability subsequently arise, the commissions another investigation to make recommendations to be applicants are able to insist that their assessment as adopters is considered by a Panel of three independent people. presented to the Adoption Panel.
Children and young people wishing to make a compliment or complaint If the Panel recommends that the applicants are unsuitable as must either be receiving or seeking a service from Norfolk County Council adopters, the case can be referred to an independent Panel Children's Services. through the Independent Review Mechanism.
Any individual or group, other than children and young people, receiving or seeking a service from Norfolk County Council, who wish to make a complaint, can do so by writing to:
Compliments and Complaints Manager, FREEPOST IH 2076 Norwich NR1 2BR or at www.norfolk.gov.uk 12611
CONSIDER Adoption
Any serious concerns regarding the agency’s practice can be referred to the OfSTED inspectorate. The main office for the OFSTED adoption inspectorate service is:
OFSTED National Business Unit
Royal Exchange Buildings
St Anne's Square
Manchester M2 7LA
Tel: 0300 123 1231 e-mail address: [email protected]
If a child has any serious concerns relating to the adoption agency, they can contact the Children’s Commissioner themselves. The details are:
Children’s Commissioner Tel: 0800 5280731 (free phone) e-mail: rights4me.org website: www.rights4me.org
12712
CONSIDER Adoption
Adoption Service Management Arrangements
The OfSTED named, responsible manager and adoption support services advisor is the head of social work resources Pen picture of Peter Ronan –head of social; work resources - History Honours Degree (University of East Anglia, 1984) - Diploma in Social Worker (CETSW No 41175, 1993) - Certificate in Management (NEBS NC970000221711051098, 1998) - HCPC Council Registered Social Worker (Registration Number SW31989. Renewal Date 13/11/2014) - Enhanced DBS (formerly CRB) issued July 2016
Peter has worked for Norfolk County Council since 1988 beginning in a residential children’s home.
Peter chaired Foster Panels (1997 – 2000) and took on management responsibility for home care. Peter became the responsible individual for Children’s Services Homecare, a service that has been constantly rated as ‘outstanding‘(3 teams) and ‘good’ (one team).
Peter became a key member of Norfolk Children’s Safeguarding Board, acting as Chair of the Southern Local Safeguarding Group and leading and managing 5 child protection teams across the Southern area.
Peter brings a strong understanding of the families Looked After Children came from, detailed working knowledge of child protection and court process in adoption, fostering and residential care.
Since coming into his current post in June 2011, Peter has put continuous improvement at the heart of all three services he manages, and there are active improvement plans for each of the three Children’s Services in place.
12813
CONSIDER Adoption
`
The Adoption Recruitment Team takes a lead role in recruiting, The Adoption Panel , commissioned by the adoption agency, meets assessing, training and approving prospective adopters, including once a week to make independent recommendations on the Foster to Adopt. Other functions include providing the in-family (step- suitability of applicants as adopters and the quality of matches parent) assessment and court service and inter-country adoption. between families and children. The independent chair is a skilled, experienced adoption consultant. The Panel Advisor role is filled by The Adoption Children’s Team specialises in family finding for the Policy & Standards Manager who is also an experienced child children with complex needs, on a regional and national basis. A full care manager. matching, support and court reporting service is provided. These children can require therapeutic input to prepare them for placement The Norfolk County Council Adoption Agency is part of the regional and ongoing support East Anglian Consortium of Adoption Agencies consisting of three neighbouring local authorities and three voluntary adoption The Adoption Support Team provides post-adoption support services agencies. Children who cannot be placed within their ‘home’ area after an assessment of need. Such services can include casework, would be referred to the RAA as an identified priority. provision of therapy, support groups and links with trained ‘buddies’. Counselling adopted adults regarding their personal histories, acting as intermediaries for birth relatives seeking contact with their adopted relations and delivering the ‘letterbox’ exchange of information between adopters and birth family members are vital components of the wider adoption support service.
Norfolk also has service level agreements with development of a regional Adoption Agency and Barnardos for the provision of support services for adopted adults, birth family members as well as adoptive families.
12914
CONSIDER Adoption
Diagram 1: The Structure of the Norfolk Adoption Service
Business Support Adoption Policy & Head of social work resources Standards Manager Team Leader Panel Adviser
Team Manager Team Manager Team Manager Adoption Adoption Family Adoption Support Recruitment Finding
1 Adoption Panel Administrator 8 Adoption Social 6 Adoption Social 5.5 Adoption Social Workers Workers Workers Business Support (FTE) (FTE) (FTE) Officers 1.0 Contact Co- ordinator 1.0 Adoption Support worker
13015
CONSIDER Adoption
Appendix One – Adoption Focussed Staff Employed by Norfolk Adoption Service
POSITION QUALIFICATIONS TOTAL EXPERIENCE SERVICE IN ADOPTION IN CHILD CARE Team Manager, MA DipSW 22 years 13 years Children’s Team Child Care Award
Senior Social MA DipSW (Hons) 17 14 Worker Senior Social Diploma of Higher Education 17 16 Worker in Social Work Studies (1999), Diploma in Social Work (1999), BA (Hons) in Specialist Practice in Social Work- Children and Families (2009) Senior Social Post Graduate Certificate in 17 11 Worker Therapeutic Play Skills, BA Degree in Specialist Practice with Children and Families, Diploma in Social Work, Certified Theraplay Practitioner Senior Social Diploma in Social Work, Post 21 15 Worker Graduate Diploma in Play Therapy, Theraplay Level 1 Social Worker BA Honour’s Social Work, MA 17 4 Social Work, Practice Educator Social Worker BSc Psychological Sciences, 12 5 MA Social Work
13116
CONSIDER Adoption
POSITION QUALIFICATIONS TOTAL EXPERIENCE SERVICE IN ADOPTION IN CHILD CARE Team Manager, DipSW, MA Social Worker 22 14 Recruitment Child Care Award PQ in Team Advanced Practice Senior Social DipSW, (1997) MA in Social 19 15 Worker Work(1997), Child Care Award (2003) BA (Hons) Senior Social BA (Hons), MA, CQSW, 25 16 Worker DASS Senior Social CQSW, NNEB 31 16 Worker Senior Social PA (Psychology), MA Social 17 6 Worker Work Senior Social DipSW, BSc Psychosocial 9 3 Worker Sciences Social Worker BSc Psychosocial Sciences, 5 3 MA Social Worker Social Worker BSc (Hons) Psychology, MA 8 3 Social Work, ABE, ASI Social Worker Diploma in Social Work 30 4 Social Worker Diploma in Social Work, 11 7 Foundation in Art Therapy, Diploma in Learning Disability, Nursing Social Worker BA (Hon) Social Work, BSc 7 3.5 Psychology and Sociology Panel advisor Registered social worker 15 8
13217
CONSIDER Adoption
POSITION QUALIFICATIONS TOTAL EXPERIENCE SERVICE IN ADOPTION IN CHILD CARE Team Manager Masters in Social Work, 17 Masters in Public Health, Post Qualifying Award Senior Social BA Applied Social Studies 2:1 26 Worker and CQSW (26yrs). PQSW (18yrs) Senior Social Dip of Higher Education in 17 Worker Social Work Studies (1999), DipSW (1999), BA (Hons) in Specialist Practice in Social Work- Children and Families (2009), 17yrs, 16yrs Senior Social HE DipSW 12yrs 12 Worker Social Worker MA Social Work 10yrs, 10 Specialist in Children and Families (Degree Lv1) 6yrs Social Worker MA in Social Work 4yrs, BSc 10 Psychology 10yrs Social Worker BSW, BSc Psychosocial Sciences10yrs, Masters in Social Work 6yrs Social Worker BA Hons SW, MA SW 2:1 12 Psychosocial Sciences, MA Social Work, 12yrs- 5yrs Social Worker BA Hons SW, MA SW, 17 Practice Educator 17yrs- 4yrs
13318
Children’s Services Committee Item No
Report title: Structural developments in the Educational System Date of meeting: 13 September 2016 Responsible Chief Michael Rosen Officer: Executive Director Children’s Services Strategic impact Excellence in Education represents one of the key strategic aims of the County Council. The structure of educational provision across Norfolk supports school-level improvement strategies across the County and thus levels of learner achievement. There has been considerable local and national change in the structure of education since 2010 and this report enables the Committee to take an overview of the current situation and its implications for further change in the short and medium term .
Executive summary
Building on reports to Committee in May and June 2016, this report provides a summary of the way in which Norfolk’s educational system has developed structurally since the reforms introduced by Governments since 2010. This snapshot provides the context for Members to consider a number of strategic structural issues which will face the County Council over, say, the next five years, as the system further develops.
In turn these provide the backcloth to the delivery of the Council’s continuing strategies to support a self-improving school system, A Good Education for Every Norfolk Learner.
Some of the issues arise from the recent White Paper ‘Educational Excellence Everywhere’, covered in the earlier reports, others derive from the local context in Norfolk.
The structural context covered in this report includes: • The academy conversion process and the pattern of coverage by Multi-academy Trusts; • Demographic growth and new housing, especially the forthcoming movement of growth into the secondary sector; • The establishment of new free schools to ensure that the needs of housing growth are met; • School reorganisation; • Introduction of the 30-hours childcare entitlement and school-based childcare provision; • Capital investment in the education system; • Post-16 provision.
It is very much part of the County Council’s role as Champion of all Norfolk children to understand the impact of the changing structure of the education system and to challenge partners to ensure that the improvement journey offered to all learners is as coherent and well-resourced as possible. There also has to be clarity about the County Council’s own role and how this is resourced
The report makes a number of strategic recommendations for the Committee to champion 134 with its partners.
Recommendations:
1. That the Committee note the current structural developments in the education system in Norfolk and continue to monitor it, through regular reports, as part of their developing role as Champion for all Norfolk children.
2. That Committee reaffirm its structural policies agreed in May 2015 as follows:
• Promoting school groupings with a minimum of two forms of entry for primary schools, to ensure sufficient capacity and funding for sustainable leadership models. • Where possible, move to all through primary model (including on multiple sites) to reduce the number of transitions for pupils. • Giving preference to models with full forms of entry or, where this cannot be achieved, ensure mixed age classes with no more than two year groups in any one class (e.g. Year 1 and Year 2 or Year 5 and Year 6). • Ensuring that management partnerships move to a single governance model within six terms (two years). • Local Authority capital deployment is aligned to these principles.
3. That Capital Priorities Group be asked to carry out detailed work on affordability risks for growth capital programmes, to report back in January 2017.
4. That the Small Schools Steering Group report back to Committee on its review of policy in Spring 2017.
5. That the delegated arrangements for identifying a preferred provider through the LA Presumption route (Annex E) be approved.
6. That over the next two years the options for reorganisation to primary in the remaining infant/junior areas of the County be mapped out.
7. That joint capital schemes with academy trusts be supported wherever possible
8. That Capital Priorities Group undertake a Task and Finish exercise, in open forum, as follows, reporting back in January 2017
‘To review the gap between long-term condition needs in Norfolk schools and funding available and identify ways in which the County Council might lead a collaborative approach to reducing this gap over the longer term.’
9. That a report on market readiness for the 30 hours entitlement for 3-4 year olds be brought to Committee in November.
135
1. Proposal
1.1 It is proposed that Members consider via this report their relationship with the changed and further changing educational structural landscape in Norfolk. This is the wider context for the County Council’s continued commitment to the strategy ‘A Good Education for Every Norfolk Learner’.
1.2 In previous reports to the Committee the specific implications of the Education and Adoption Act 2016 and the White Paper ‘Educational Excellence Everywhere’ have been considered, including the challenge to local authorities to understand and develop their role as champions for children and all learners.
1.3 This report provides further context on the structural system which has developed since 2010 and how it has impacted on Norfolk, specifically:
• The academy conversion process and the pattern of coverage by Multi- academy Trusts (MATs); • Demographic growth and new housing, especially the movement of growth into the secondary sector • The establishment of new free schools to ensure that the needs of housing growth are met; • School reorganisation; • Introduction of the 30-hours childcare entitlement for working parents and school-based childcare provision • Capital investment in the education system • Post 16 provision and policy developments.
1.4 The development of a strong stakeholder base and its commitment to NCC- sponsored strategies such as ‘Norfolk Better to Best’ and Educator Solutions will continue to be crucial to the success of A Good Education for Every Norfolk Learner. A robust framework of consultation with Headteacher and Governor associations sits around a more formal structure of challenge and support, the latter, with Boards such as the Education Challenge Board and the Small Schools Steering Group, significantly involving elected Members. Strong links have been generated with the office of the Regional Schools Commissioner.
1.5 At its May meeting, the Committee asked the Managing Director to write to the then Secretary of State to express a number of concerns about the developing structural system. The letter and the response received are at Annex A and are relevant to the discussion in today’s report because they set out the Government’s approach to its intention that all schools should become academies within six years – albeit not now enforced by legislation.
1.6 The report takes the six aspects of the structural system mentioned above and makes recommendations for further action by the Committee.
136
2. Evidence – the structural picture in Norfolk
The academy conversion process and the pattern of coverage by Multi- Academy Trusts.
2.1 Academies (which are schools maintained by the Secretary of State rather than local authorities) were originally a targeted secondary school government strategy - there are five secondary academies in Norfolk which were established prior to 2010; each conversion was accompanied by major capital investment funded direct by Government. The Academies Act 2010 introduced a universal strategy, but withdrew the direct capital funding connection.
2.2 The Government has a ‘continued determination to see all schools become academies in the next six years’ (Annex A). It will ‘support good schools to convert and take the lead in supporting other schools as part of Multi-Academy Trusts’ (MATs). The only material change from the White Paper is that the government no longer intends to legislate for universal conversion to academies.
2.3 Norfolk now has a strong internally-managed process for academy conversion, covering the essential areas of finance, HR and (where NCC land is involved) property. A pipeline of seven conversions per month, with eight if one has no property involvement, seems to meet the demand needs of converting schools and the DfE and is manageable within NCC resources. At this rate of processing, all remaining schools could be processed for conversion within the next six years. A charge is levied for NCC/NPLaw/NPS services where these services are normally charged for.
2.4 The lists of academy providers presented to previous Committees have been updated and are at Annex B1. In addition, the maps at Annex B2, by junior/ primary and secondary school catchment area, show the geographical distribution.
2.5 Current national policy suggests that local MATs may grow to consist of 10 to 15 schools with larger MATs categorised as regional or national MATs. Norfolk would require a further 10-20 new sponsor groups to enable all schools to be part of a local MAT as promoted by national policy. Clearly, some schools may not wish to join such a group or seek alternative governance structures.
2.6 Officers continue to play an active role in supporting governors to consider strategically the future of their school. Where schools are interested to take on a leadership role or to apply to set up a MAT, we broker a discussion with the Regional Schools Commissioner. Similarly, where governors recognise the need to work with a strong partner, we support a discussion with the DfE Academy Broker who works to the RSC.
2.7 Schools deemed to be underperforming are expected to work with a strong partner, usually by joining a sponsor MAT. In the case of schools judged inadequate by Ofsted, an academy order must be issued and in the case of schools in receipt of a Warning Notice or those identified as ‘coasting’ an academy order may be issued. Schools may be considered ‘coasting’ if their performance falls below a set of attainment and progress measures for three consecutive years. The performance data expected to be published in
137 December 2016 will complete the first dataset for this measure (2014, 2015 and 2016).
2.8 Officers work closely with schools where the achievement profile suggests they could fall into this group. These schools have an opportunity to consider in advance, whether a strong partner could support them in their improvement. Based on 2014 and 2015 results only, up to 49 Norfolk Schools and academies could be identified as coasting, if their achievement does not sufficiently improve when 2016 performance tables are published in December.
2.9 We will continue to play our role as champion of children and families through both partnership working and key LA functions – e.g. the common admissions arrangements, Basic Need capital funding, limited intervention powers and commissioning for high needs (SEND).
2.10 NCC will pro-actively support the new pattern of school governance, both in terms of the relationships it seeks to build and develop with partners and for its own services. There are a number of ways in which this pattern of school governance and accountability provides a challenge to NCC as it develops and implements its strategies:
• Educator Solutions are adjusting their business model in response to this; • Expectations from parents and others are that the County Council has a greater role in direct service provision than it actually does; • There will be less scope for initiatives such as area-wide reorganisation.
2.11 The proposed Devolution Deal includes a commitment from Government for a joint education committee. This could facilitate effective coordination between both RSC and LA functions related to education provision and infrastructure.
2.12 Members will need, over time, to consider how two particular local democratic roles can be shaped to be both supportive and challenging to the more diverse market-led system – the local Member role and the role of the Committee itself.
Demographic growth and new housing, especially the movement of growth into the secondary sector
2.13 The Committee receives a refreshed Local Growth and Investment Plan each January giving an area-by-area summary of place-planning pressures and planned responses. Looking back over the period since 2010, 6,190 mainstream school places have been (or are currently being) added to the Norfolk system, with 4,657 places re-provided (i.e. made permanent, relocated or otherwise improved). All but a few mainstream places have been in the primary sector. In the special sector, 116 new places have been provided and 220 re-provided over the same period.
2.14 The overall ten year population forecast for the County is given at Annex C.
2.15 The first indication of local secondary age growth is where the forms of entry in the feeder primary sector exceed the forms of intake at the secondary school(s), subject to parental preference. Whilst a school may have capacity as these forms enter and move part way up the school, new accommodation has to be planned from that first year, given the lead time on construction schemes. Overall Norfolk forecasts show numbers will start to rise in 2019. The diagrams 138 at Annex D show, for one high school how forecast numbers impact on present capacity, with and without (in this case) significant planned housing growth. This model can be used for all high schools to show the rate at which they ‘fill up’.
2.16 We have already carried out a number of Master-planning exercises for high schools, essentially assessment and feasibility studies on current supply of general and specialist places and the scope of the school site to take on more pupils. This is proving an excellent partnership tool with Academy Trusts and helps them apply any of their own or EFA-granted funding coherently to an overall agreed plan. Schemes have been carried out at Wymondham High Academy (first and currently second phases) and Masterplans have been commissioned for other high schools. The 2016 NCC submission for capital funding for places to be delivered in September 2020 shows significant Basic Need in Norwich South, King’s Lynn and Wymondham but the actual pressure will depend on parental preference.
The establishment of new free schools
2.17 The Academies Act 2010 put in place a ‘Presumption route’ for the establishment of new schools, whereby the local authority holds a competition to identify the most suited provider for a new school to serve population growth, but with the final decision taken by the Regional Schools Commissioner. Such schools are all academies in law but are designated free schools, contributing to the Government’s target of 500 free schools by the end of this Parliament.
2.18 The DfE has also maintained its separate free school ‘open bidding route’ for MATs to propose new schools. Six-monthly ‘windows’ are opened, the next closing on September 28 th . The DfE has recently refreshed its guidance on the criteria by which bids will be judged; meeting Basic Need, standards and diversity are key criteria.
2.19 There is good liaison between the DfE/RSC and NCC about the case for proposed Free schools coming up through this route in terms of Basic Need pupil place requirements. Nevertheless the powers to decide on a new Free school on the basis of the need to promote higher standards in an area or to give a greater diversity of provision can affect established local schools. Our approach is to maintain close contact with RSC team to gain support for those new schools, we have identified for the Presumption.
2.20 Norfolk has shared with the RSC a list of new schools required to serve population growth in Norfolk and we are discussing those, which we feel would be better established through the LA Presumption route.
2.21 We have submitted to the DfE our documentation for our first Presumption proposal – at White House Farm, Sprowston, with a target decision date of September 2017 and opening after construction in September 2018.
2.22 Committee will need to determine a process to assess applicants bidding to provide new schools to be established under the Presumption provisions. As with school organisation processes, there are no set statutory requirements, but it is assumed that some form of Panel would be involved.
2.23 A more detailed method statement, following closely the delegation model for school organisation decisions, is set out at Annex E and forms part of the recommendations in this report.
139 2.24 Free school capital finance is dealt with at 2.48 below.
School reorganisation
2.25 In May 2015, Committee reaffirmed its preference for the all-through primary model to reduce pupil transitions. LAs have powers to reorganise Community schools but there are now separate mechanisms in place for academies to effect a ‘significant change’ to organisation, year groups or size. This will make the process of any future area reorganisation more complex.
2.26 The areas of Norfolk currently in the process of reorganising are:
• Great Yarmouth – in transition phase after reorganisation in 2014 and 2015, with capital works programme being implemented on a phased basis; • Wymondham – in transition phase after reorganisation in 2014 and 2015, with capital works programme being implemented on a phased basis; • Attleborough – Public Notice to enlarge and reorganise to primary, with a new 630 place primary school building, to be published in September 2016; • Grimston cluster – capital works at Gayton are the only element outstanding and are dependent on planning permission being gained.
2.27 Current numbers of primary, infant and junior schools in the County.
Type Academy Community Foundation V.A. V.C. Total Infant 3 25 0 0 2 30 Infant & Nursery 1 19 4 2 1 27 Junior 13 22 3 1 5 44 Primary 50 76 13 32 33 204 Total 67 142 20 35 41 305
2.28 There are two main patterns of infant/junior provision – the first in the Norwich area and the second in market towns, such as Diss, Aylsham and Fakenham. A number of these market towns, and the northern fringe of Norwich will need to cater for new primary schools as housing develops, and these new schools will need to sit comfortably with the existing organisational structure. We would propose at this stage that in such areas options for a full primary structure, as we have done for Wymondham and Attleborough above, are scoped out and discussed with schools and Trusts over the next two years, at least to set against a continuation of the status quo. Capital Priorities Group have asked for such an appraisal for King’s Lynn to ensure that proposed growth and likely capital investment to meet growth in the town are compatible with the organisational structure of the town, so this will be carried out first.
2.29 The compatibility of the two reorganisation processes for area school organisation has not been tested in practice in Norfolk and this is another area where we will seek agreement with the Regional Schools Commissioner. In the past NCC capital grant allocations have been able to fund the capital implications of reorganisation, but there has been heavy reliance on Capital Maintenance grant, which is diminishing (see below) as more schools become academies.
2.30 In the end, given that the new system places the individuality of the school or the MAT above area-based structures or County-wide coherence, future 140 reorganisation proposals will rely heavily on consensus and a compelling educational and financial case that reorganisation is in the best interests of individual schools and MATs in that area. Securing sufficient capital funding will be a major challenge on top of the challenge of securing local agreement across a number of parties.
2.31 Two small schools have closed in the last year – Brockdish VC Primary and William Marshall VC Primary School, Welney. There were three closures in the school year to July 2015. The Small Schools Steering Group is continuing its annual review of small schools (105 or fewer on roll) so that issues of sustainability and capacity can be monitored and advice offered, especially around increasing strength through collaboration and partnership. This is in line with Committee’s work on the sustainability of small schools from 2014.
2.32 The following issues are likely to impact on small schools in the short or medium term • the new school funding formula, which has currently been put on hold by the Government; • continued demographic decline in some rural areas; • the need for MATs with a number of small schools to have a robust financial model across their portfolio of schools, to include the higher costs of maintenance of (often) older buildings • transport costs, which will fall to the local authority, even though we may not, other than as a consultee, have been part of formal decision-making process for a small rural school.
The Small Schools Steering Group will continue to monitor sustainability in this area of work and is currently committed to a review of its policy.
Introduction of the 30-hours childcare entitlement and school-based childcare provision
2.33 Local authorities have a statutory duty to maintain a balanced childcare market and to stimulate that market to ensure that sufficient places are available to meet take-up demand. From September 2017 this market will need to generate places to ensure availability of 30 hours free childcare for working parents who meet the eligibility criteria – and who wish to take up a place. In this context the number of voluntary run pre-schools has been declining and there is funding pressure on the childminder market.
2.34 There are 193 preschool settings based within school sites. These consist of a range of either charity groups run by voluntary parent committees, settings which come under the school such as traditional maintained nurseries or where the school has lowered its age range and some privately run preschools. Some are nurseries within Independent schools. The breakdown by sector is as follows:
141
2.35 51 Private, Voluntary and Independent childcare providers and schools have contacted the Local Authority in response to the introduction of the entitlement to 30 free hours to say their accommodation does not meet the need for quality or capacity to meet the demand.
2.36 If all places were to be provided, capital Investment of approximately £250,000 – £500,000 (per provider) would be needed to supply new premises (totalling £12,750,000 – £25,500,000) and approximately a further £1,020,000 revenue funding for equipment would be necessary (approximately £20.000 per provider) to fully resource this development. The Government’s first capital bidding round closed on 31 st August and six bids which we believe meet the criteria were submitted to a total bid cost of £1.6 m
2.37 The government has introduced legislative changes to make it easier for academies to change their age range and to take younger children. LA maintained schools still have to follow the statutory Public Notice route. Schools have a choice of opening preschool places by either, lowering their age range and offering a 1:13 child to adult ratio with a teacher, or running under their Community powers on a 1:8 ratio with a Level 3 qualified leader. Children are included in the school number and Ofsted includes the preschool in the school inspection.
2.38 With the introduction of these powers there has been an increase in the number of schools taking over preschools. Often this is prompted by issues which may be attributed to:
• vulnerable governance • low child numbers causing sustainability issues • difficulties with recruitment or • poor quality or safeguarding issues.
2.39 In very small rural communities there has been interest in creating Foundation units in schools where numbers are too low to sustain a preschool.
2.40 The increase of schools transferring to academies, whether sponsored or converted, can also impact on the preschool on those school sites. Technically a school closes when it transfers and the lease is terminated. The Local Authority issues a 125 year lease to the academy and the academy enters into a sub- lease with the preschool if they are happy to do so. In some conversion cases the LA can keep a separate lease with the preschool, especially when it is a stand-alone building on site.
142 2.41 Security of tenure for pre-schools across the schools sector is a key factor for the future sustainability of the balanced market. In the past some arrangements have been direct with the Governing Body by means of a Transfer of Control Agreement – this arrangement, which predates the academy legislation is weak as it ceases when the predecessor school legally closes on conversion. Third party providers are encouraged to seek a proper lease agreement with the MAT, school or NCC to give them security of tenure. This is also important to those preschools which are registered charities when they are seeking funding, as grant making bodies are unlikely to offer funding to a setting with a risk arising from weak tenure arrangements.
2.42 On revenue matters, the Government has just opened consultation on the revenue funding levels for funded places and the amount of funding which Las can retain for their services in support of settings in their area. The consultation states for 3 and 4 year olds an average hourly rate of £4.88, the indicative amount Norfolk will receive is £4.18 with an illustrative amount of £3.82 being paid to providers. Current average rate is £3.71. For 2’s the rate increases from £4.85 to £5.20.
2.43 Actions being taken – the development of the market to meet the 30 hours entitlement in September 2017 is continually being tested and supported through the Achievement and Sufficiency teams’ Early Years specialist officers; these teams are also supporting pre-schools through the process of academy transfer of host schools.
Capital investment in the education system .
2.44 The Committee's current position on the learning environment is as follows : ‘All children and young people should be able to attend their education in accommodation that is efficient, fit for purpose, suitable, age appropriate and which provides conditions conducive to learning. The effective and creative use of ICT which impacts positively on learner outcomes will be encouraged. There should be a commitment to maximise the use of educational buildings for the benefit of the whole community’.
2.45 The new structural landscape of education is changing the way in which capital funding is allocated to schools in Norfolk. The County Council continues to receive annual capital grant funding for all growth/new pupil places (Basic Need) but its annual capital grant for schools’ capital maintenance will diminish year on year as more and more pupils are on the rolls of academies (other than for converting VA schools, whose funding has always been separate).
2.46 The DfE provide the capital funding to support the establishment of free schools and local authorities are encouraged to work together with the RSC and potential free school bidders to use this funding stream for new free schools to meet pupil number growth. Whilst this stream can provide capital funding up- front for new schools, LA capital allocations are subsequently adjusted so that the places are not ‘double-funded’.
2.47 Capital maintenance allocations currently bear no relationship with the relative condition of school buildings, being based on pupil numbers, but the Government uses the results of a national survey it commissioned to prioritise condition bidding rounds.
2.48 MATs with more than 3000 pupils in their school and managing more than 5 schools receive a block allowance which they can use across their whole
143 portfolio; below those thresholds, academies have to bid to the EFA for maintenance funding.
2.49 Overall the changes risk a fragmentation of capital funding, with the system losing the critical mass which in the past has enabled NCC to fund (say) major area reorganisations by combining Basic Need, developer contributions and capital maintenance. On the other hand, there is no ambiguity about who is responsible for the maintenance of school buildings in the academy sector – MATs or self-standing academy trusts – and no ambiguity as to how they are supported – nationally by the EFA.
2.50 The DfE provides from time to time open bidding routes – one has just closed for capital works to support the delivery of 30 hours free childcare for working parents; separately allocations to LAs are expected soon for capital funding for SEN proposals, based on a £200m national allocation for local authorities.
2.51 There are two main implications from the changing pattern of capital funding, in its wider context, all of which have been considered at some level by Capital Priority Group and been the subject of their concern:
2.51.1 Affordability: The required Basic Need growth places have to been mapped out against funding supply. At present the following are factors presenting a risk to affordability, all factors in which pressure is likely to increase: • the insufficiency of formulaic Basic Need and section 106 contributions to meet need on the ground; • the uncertainty around funding supply under the Community Infrastructure Levy arrangements at district level; • indirect development costs – such as utility upgrades, highways improvements and building control/planning requirements • the need for land acquisition to extend schools • the need for condition improvements to schools being expanded.
Actions to mitigate: There are a number of actions we are taking and will need to intensify:
• work with the Corporate Property Team to identify the scope for a capital receipts approach to support new schemes where schools on NCC land are being replaced on new sites, or school land otherwise being disposed of; • work with district councils to secure realistic CIL allocations; • ‘Masterplan’ school sites to ensure that the scale of required work is known well in advance and funding sources understood; • work jointly with academy trusts to pool available funding on single schemes addressing both Basic Need and maintenance.
Examples of joint schemes we are working on are:
• Attleborough Academy – where an EFA grant could be combined with available section 106 funding to enable the first phase of growth to be carried out alongside a mobile replacement project funded by the EFA • Costessey Infant and Junior move to single site using Basic Need and a successful Trust bid to the EFA • Heartsease Primary Academy, a PFI academy, where NCC funding will be used to provide 2-year old places, but where, to protect the integrity of risk, the original contractor will be used 144 • Fakenham Academy – to secure all teaching on a separate site (also involving capital receipts)
We will need to work closely with the Procurement teams in NCC to ensure compliance and transparency in value and procurement where NCC funding is being used in joint schemes.
2.52.2 Long-term condition of school buildings
With the repositioning of responsibility for operational school buildings from governing bodies to academy trusts, and from LAs to the EFA, there is a question over how long term major structural improvement of the overall stock can be implemented. NCC has been able to replace completely old school buildings from time to time in its capital programme, but not systematically – other than in a dedicated and separately funded programme, such as the Norfolk Schools Project (2006-2010), which was funded by an allocation of borrowing credits from Government of around £80m.
The aging building stock, and new demands for present-day curriculum use, is of particular concern in a number of market towns which are likely to grow through future district local housing allocations. Thus in a town such as Diss, with one modern and one Victorian primary phase school, there may not be a future- proofed supply of suitable school buildings without relocation of the older school to a new site.
The use of temporary accommodation, including classrooms still remains an issue. Smaller, rural schools are more likely to be in older accommodation with increased maintenance costs.
2.53 It is quite appropriate, given its role as a champion for all Norfolk children, for the County Council to give a lead to understanding the future implications for all partners of Norfolk’s school building stock, whoever operates the buildings. It will be a shared aspiration across all partners to work for the best possible learning environment for all pupils.
2.54 As an initial step, we propose to Committee establishing a Task and Finish exercise for Capital Priorities Group, working in open forum, to consider these issues and to draw in the views of our partners and the national agencies on the need and opportunity for systematic school building investment across Norfolk. The following broad approach is proposed for CPG to work out full terms of reference and process to deliver the work:
‘To review the gap between long-term condition needs in Norfolk schools and funding available and identify ways in which the County Council might lead a collaborative approach to reducing this gap over the longer term.’
Post 16 Education and Training Provision
2.55 The provision of state funded education and training for students aged 16- 19 is shared between school based sixth forms (28), Sixth Form Colleges (2), University Technical College (1), Further Education Colleges (4) and Work Based Learning Providers (46). The Government is currently conducting Area Based Reviews (principally led by the Education Funding Agency) to ensure that particularly the further education provision is financially sustainable and fit for purpose. Three Norfolk institutions were involved in a pilot in 2015. The
145 remaining parts of Norfolk alongside Suffolk will be subject to a review as part of wave 5 expected to commence in November 2016.
2.56 Part of the Devolution Proposals include an agreement for the Combined Authority to nominate the chair for the Area Based Review. Officers are working closely with colleagues from Suffolk County Council and local stakeholders to prepare for this Review. It provides a significant strategic opportunity to engage all providers in a discussion on how to achieve the best possible provision for Norfolk Learners. The Education Training Strategy Group agreed that we should use the opportunity to include all providers in the discussion. We will seek to engage all schools with sixth forms as well as work based learning providers to ensure consideration is given to all types of provision, quality, accessibility and sustainability.
2.57 In line with the devolution proposals the priorities proposed for the Area Based Review have been agreed provisionally by the shadow combined authority. They are referenced in Annex F.
RECOMMENDATION FROM THIS EVIDENCE
1. That the Committee note the current structural developments in the education system in Norfolk and continue to monitor the situation, through regular reports, as part of their role as Champion for all Norfolk children
2. That Committee reaffirm its systems policies agreed in May 2015 as follows:
• Promoting school groupings with a minimum of two forms of entry for primary schools, to ensure sufficient capacity and funding for sustainable leadership models • Where possible, move to all through primary model (including on multiple sites) to reduce the number of transitions for pupils • Giving preference to models with full forms of entry or, where this cannot be achieved, ensure mixed age classes with no more than two year groups in any one class (e.g. Year 1 and Year 2 or Year 5 and Year 6). • Ensuring that management partnerships 1 move to a single governance model within six terms (two years) Local Authority capital deployment is aligned to these principles.
3. That Capital Priorities Group be asked to carry out detailed work on affordability risks for growth capital programmes, to report back in January 2017
4. That the Small Schools Steering Group report back to Committee on its review of policy in the Spring 2017.
5. That the delegated arrangements for identifying a preferred provider through the LA Presumption route (Annex E) be approved.
6. That over the next two years the options for reorganisation to primary in the remaining infant/junior areas of the County be mapped out
7. That joint capital schemes with academy trusts be supported wherever possible
8. That Capital Priorities Group undertake a Task and Finish exercise, in open forum, as follows, reporting back in January 2017
146 ‘To review the gap between long-term condition needs in Norfolk schools and funding available and identify ways in which the County Council might lead a collaborative approach to reducing this gap over the longer term.’
9. That a report on market readiness for the 30 hours entitlement for 3-4 year olds be brought to Committee in November.
3 Financial Implications
3.1 The evidence in section 2 above includes a number of financial implications which can be summarised as follows:
• The availability and distribution of capital funding for long term strategic development of the school building stock across the County • The affordability of schemes to increase the supply of school places to meet housing growth • The potential use of NCC capital receipts from school sites for forward improvement schemes • The development of joint capital schemes with academy trusts where appropriate • The implications (capital and revenue) of the introduction of the 30 hours entitlement for eligible children and the extent to which the conditions of the necessary places can be influenced by the County Council • Transport. Any relocation or closing of a school or post 16 provision may have significant implications for transport costs.
The response to each is developed/proposed in the relevant part of section 2 and in the recommendations.
4 Issues, risks and innovation
4.1 This report concentrates on structural risks within the education system, by describing recent and likely future developments in sectors, school, post-16 and pre-school, each of which is fragmented in terms of its governance or its market
4.2 All such risks are set out in section 2 and it will be the purpose of the future reports to Committee, set out in the recommendations, to propose options for the mitigation of those risks, as follows:
• Early years and 30 hours entitlement – November 2016 Committee
• Capital Priorities Group task and finish on condition capital – January 2017 Committee
• Local Growth and Investment Plan and Childcare Sufficiency report - January 2017 Committee
• Capital programme proposals – initially November 2016, then final proposals March 2017 Committee
• Small Schools policy review – Summer 2017 Committee
• Further update report on structural situation overall – March 2017 Committee
147
5. Background
White Paper Educational Excellence Everywhere, 17 March 2016 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/educational-excellence-everywhere
May 2015 Children’s Services Committee papers http://norfolkcc.cmis.uk.com/norfolkcc/Meetings/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/ Meeting/317/Committee/8/Default.aspx
November 2015 Children’s Services Committee papers http://norfolkcc.cmis.uk.com/norfolkcc/Meetings/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/ Meet ing/355/Committee/8/Default.aspx
May 2016 Children’s Services Committee papers http://norfolkcc.cmis.uk.com/norfolkcc/Meetings/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/ Meet ing/461/Committee/8/Default.aspx
June 2016 Children’s Services Committee papers http://norfolkcc.cmis.uk.com/norfolkcc/Meetings/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/ Meeting/462/Committee/8/Default.aspx
Consultation on changes to early years funding August 2016 https://consult.education.gov.uk/early-years-funding/eynff
Officer Contact
If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with: Officer Name: Chris Snudden Tel: 01603 222575 Email address : [email protected]
Officer Name: Sebastian Gasse Tel: 01603 307714 Email address: [email protected]
Officer Name: Chris Hey Tel: 01603 223467 Email address: [email protected]
If you need this report in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
148 149 150 151 152 Note: Schools without catchments are not represented on these maps. They (currently) are: King's Lynn Key * Wymondham College (Single-Academy Trust) 1:190,000 Creative Education Academies Trust * Free Schools (The Pinetree - Engage Multi Academy Trust; Charles Darwin Primary, Jane Austen College, Trafalgar College - Inspiration Trust; The Free School Norwich - Single Academy Trust; University Technical College Norfolk - Primary/Junior Catchments by Trust 2016-17 Transforming Education in Norfolk) LA-maintained * Short-Stay School for Norfolk - Engage Multi Academy Trust Academy Transformation Trust * Catholic Schools (Notre Dame, St Augustine's Primary, St Francis of Assissi Primary, St Mary and St Peter Primary) Cherry Tree Academy Trust College of West Anglia Academy Trust Consortium Academy Trust Diocese of Ely Multi Academy Trust Diocese of Norwich Education & Academies Trust East Anglia Schools Trust Norwich Evolution Academy Trust 1:190,000 Inspiration Trust North Norfolk Academy Trust Ormiston Academies Trust Right for Success Trust Sapientia Education Trust Synergy Education Trust The Heart Education Trust West Norfolk Academy Trust Yare Education Trust self / Single-Academy Trust Districts LA-maintained The Apollo Trust The Wensum Trust Transforming Education in Norfolk
B
Yarmouth 1:150,000 B = Beaupre Although in Norfolk, this primary school is managed
© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 by Cambridgeshire LA, but as it feeds to Norfolk 0 2 4 8 Miles Ordnance Survey 100019340 22 August 2016 secondary schools it forms part of West & Breckland.
Last Saved: Primary & Junior Catchments 2016-17 by Academy Trust (as of 1 September 2016) 25 August 2016 Children's Services Business Processes Scale: [email protected] Ref: R:\GISAll\GIS_2016\Catchments\AcademyMATs\Primary&JuniorCatchments2016_AcadTrusts.mxd 153 1:320,000 ® Note: Schools without catchments are not represented on these maps. They (currently) are: King's Lynn Key * Wymondham College (Single-Academy Trust) 1:190,000 Secondary Catchments by Trust 2016-17 * Free Schools (The Pinetree - Engage Multi Academy Trust; Charles Darwin Primary, Jane Austen College, Trafalgar College - Inspiration Trust; The Free School Norwich - Single Academy Trust; University Technical College Norfolk - LA-maintained Transforming Education in Norfolk) Academy Transformation Trust * Short-Stay School for Norfolk - Engage Multi Academy Trust College of West Anglia Academy Trust * Catholic Schools (Notre Dame, St Augustine's Primary, St Francis of Assissi Primary, St Mary and St Peter Primary) Creative Education Academies Trust Inspiration Trust North Norfolk Academy Trust Ormiston Academies Trust Right for Success Trust Synergy Education Trust Norwich The Wensum Trust 1:190,000 Transforming Education in Norfolk West Norfolk Academy Trust Yare Education Trust self / Single-Academy Trust Diocese of Norwich Education & Academies Trust Districts
Yarmouth 1:150,000
© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 0 2 4 8 Miles Ordnance Survey 100019340 22 August 2016
Last Saved: Secondary Catchments 2016-17 by Academy Trust (as of 1 September 2016) 25 August 2016 Children's Services Business Processes Scale: [email protected] Ref: R:\GISAll\GIS_2016\Catchments\AcademyMATs\SecondaryCatchments2016_AcadTrusts.mxd 154 1:320,000 ® Annex C
10 Year Norfolk Population Forecasts Age 0-16
The Office for National Statistics data below indicates that over ten years from 2014 – 2024: • Steady population level for age 0-4 - 1.3% increase over the 10 year period • Continuous growth up to the year 2018 followed by a marginal decrease by 2024 - 9.7% increase over the 10 year period • Systematic follow-on increase into the secondary phase from 2017 -15.1% increase over the 10 year period
Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total Age 47937 47715 47420 47123 47072 47394 47794 48110 48324 48470 48575 0-4 Total Age 63633 65457 67129 68791 69975 70264 70166 70178 70165 70036 69806 5-11 Total Age 45435 44518 44123 44168 44605 45993 47607 48903 50250 51468 52313 12-16
155 Annex D
Sample illustration of capacity increase at Hethersett High Academy The two graphs below show how the school roll increases over time and how future capacity is being established and planned for. The capacity increase at this school is indicating six forms of entry (178 Year 7 admissions) becoming nine (270 Year 7 admissions). A Masterplan has been developed on this basis and additional land secured by means of a section 106 agreement. Graph 1 – Catchment demographic rise with no housing
Graph 2 – Catchment demographic rise plus all new planned housing
156 Annex E: NCC Process for making changes to School Organisation: including process for new schools via the LA Presumption route (Note: this annex is a restatement of existing agreed processes with the new proposal included). Establishing new schools Establishing Who can Approval to Nature of Recommendation Final new schools make the launch process? on preferred determination proposals? competition provider / Decision maker New school Local Education Competition Director Secretary of (free school Authority Planning and and initial State presumption Infrastructure assessment (delegated to process) Group of the Regional (submitted to proposals Schools DfE for followed by Commissioner) approval and panel publication interview*) nationally)
* Interview panel is proposed to comprise the Local County Councillor, the Chair of Children’s Services Committee, a representative of the relevant headteacher association, a representative of Norfolk Governors Network (a serving governor from the relevant phase), and LA Officers. The Regional Schools Commissioner and a DfE official would be invited to participate in the interview process. Prior to the interview a wider Officer group will shortlist the applications if necessary.
Other statutory changes to maintained schools Type of Who can Approval to Informal or Decision Final proposal make consult statutory to determination proposals? consultation? proceed / Decision to publish maker formal proposal Significant Local Education Informal Director or Director changes e.g Authority or Planning and Governors
Governors Infrastructure Enlargement of where Group premises, permitted transfer to a new site, addition, removal or change of SEN provision, addition/removal of sixth form
157 Change of Governors Governors of Informal Governors Director status (VC to of Voluntary the school of the VA) schools school
Alteration of Local Education Informal Director or Director in upper/lower Authority or Planning and Governors consultation age limit by 3 Governors Infrastructure with Chair / years or more where Group (or Vice Chair of permitted governors) Committee
School closure Local Education Statutory Director or Director in ** Authority or Planning and Governors consultation Governors Infrastructure with Chair /
where Group Vice Chair of permitted Committee
** During the statutory consultation period, Children’s Services Committee will be invited to comment on any proposal before the Director of Children’s Services gives consent to proceed to public notice, unless prior agreement NOT to bring to Children’s Services Committee has been agreed with the Committee Spokespersons.
158 Annex F
Post-16 Area Review for Norfolk and Suffolk
In 2015 the Government introduced a national programme of Area Reviews recognising that ‘the post-16 education sector is critical to our strategy of raising productivity and economic growth’ [1] The purpose of the Area Review process is to establish the best institutional structure to offer high quality provision based on the current and future needs of learners and employers within the local area ensuring: • Institutions which are financially viable, sustainable, resilient and efficient, and deliver maximum value for public investment • An offer that meets each area’s economic needs • Providers with strong reputations and greater specialisation • Sufficient access to high quality and relevant training for all • Colleges well equipped to respond to the reform and expansion of the apprenticeship programme • Focus on General Further Education and Sixth Form Colleges with an opportunity for other providers to opt-in • Engagement with a wide range of stakeholders The Norfolk and Suffolk Area Review of post 16 education and training is scheduled to start in November 2016. This will exclude Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft where a review has already been conducted during 2015. A review for Peterborough and Cambridgeshire will run simultaneously. Both are expected to conclude by the end of March 2017. The East Anglia Devolution Agreement states that the local area will have responsibility for chairing the area review, the outcomes of which will be taken forward in line with the principles of the devolved arrangements, and devolved 19+ adult skills funding from 2018/19’ [2] .
Determining Key Priorities for the Area Review The work stream team have drawn together the following draft local priorities for the Area Review which have now been agreed by the Combined Authority Shadow Board, work is underway to compile an evidence base. Key Priorities Strategic Aim Priority 1. High quality and To ensure a high quality post 16 learning offer for Norfolk and financially Suffolk residents and businesses that: sustainable colleges, sixth • Is effective, efficient and sustainable forms and • Performs at or above national success rates training • Can be sustainable as population distribution changes providers and through the projected 10% reduction in the 16-18 cohort over the next 5 years • Is highly responsive to the changing needs of the local and national economy, develop specialisation where appropriate
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/post-16-education-and-training-institutions-review [2] https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=east+anglia+devolution+deal&rls=com.microsoft:en-GB&ie=UTF- 8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1&safe=vss&gws_rd=ssl
159 Annex F
• Is flexible and adaptable to the reforms of post 16 education and Apprenticeships • Provides clear progression pathways within and between academic, technical and professional routes of learning • Ensures a pattern of school sixth form provision that is sustainable and meets student need effectively in terms of breadth or quality.
2. A local learning To ensure that provision is available to meet the needs of all offer that is of learners, in particular the follow aspects are addressed: high quality, offers breadth All providers: and progression • How do the current transport policies and routes for all support the delivery of these ambitions for young people
Colleges & Training providers: • To increase the offer of higher level Apprenticeships to establish strong progression pathways within our priority sectors • To ensure a pattern of Apprenticeship frameworks and study programmes is offered that is responsive to learner and economic need and offers progression routes to higher level learning • To increase the Entry & Level 1 learning offer and the range of engagement and transition pathways for young people not ready to study at L2 and provide improved pathways to work • To develop the local learning offer for 16-25yr olds with special educational needs (SEND) with a focus on quality, breadth and progression to work or work related activity Sixth forms: • To ensure study programmes are of comprehensive and high quality, with robust experiences of the workplace and clear progression pathways into higher education, Apprenticeships and work 3. Provision that is To ensure that the skills and training offer throughout Norfolk responsive to and Suffolk is responsive to the needs of industry and a driver economic need, for economic growth, supporting innovation and increased enables growth Productivity through: and increased productivity - Offering leading edge technical and professional programmes aligned to our key industries/sectors and the NALEP Innovation Strategy - Working closely with sector leaders to deliver on the needs identified within the LEP Sector Skills Plans
160 Annex F
- Increasing the adult learning offer supporting the needs of the unemployed and programmes that support progression towards work - Supporting employers to co-invest in workforce development and in work progression through tailoring the skills offer to meet their needs - Supporting the development of emerging leaders and innovators within small and medium enterprises
161 Children’s Services Committee Item No
Report title: Road Crossing Patrols Date of meeting: 13 September 2016 Responsible Chief Michael Rosen Officer: Executive Director, Children’s Services Strategic impact
At the Children’s Services Committee on 8 March 2016 it was agreed that, given the reduction in budgets, Norfolk County Council would only continue to support those Road Crossing Patrol (RCP) sites that met the national thresholds as laid down in the guidance produced by the local Authority Road Safety Officers Association (LSRSOA) and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents( RoSPA) .
Whilst it is not a statutory service, it is one that has a high public profile, but legally the responsibility for getting a child to and from school safely sits with the parent or guardian not Norfolk County Council.
Executive summary Currently Children’s Services operates 97 RCP sites that provide crossing facilities for 93 schools. At the March Committee it was agreed that a small task and finish group would work with officers to agree the actions that would enable NCC to identify which sites to continue. The members involved were:
Emma Corlett, Labour Dennis Crawford and Jim Perkins, UKIP James Joyce, Liberal Democrats Mark Kiddle-Morris, Conservative
Following a monitoring exercise the sites that continued to meet the national thresholds were identified but does not include costs associated with the Road Crossing Patrol Manager.
Prior to the June 2016 committee there was a change of Leadership at Norfolk County Council and therefore of the Children’s Services Committee and as a result the new Chairperson of the committee, wanted to review this decision and reconsider at the September Committee.
Recommendations:
Members are asked to:
1. Agree to delay the implementation of the review to the Road Crossing Patrol Service.
2. Agree to continue to operate as we currently do i.e. when a member of staff offers their resignation or retires, we re-monitor the site and if it falls below the threshold the site is removed.
3. Agree to another period of monitoring to form proposals for November 2016 committee
162
1. Proposal
1.1 The proposal is that the decision to only fund those Road Crossing Patrol sites that still meet the national criteria is upheld but that it is not implemented until 1 April 2017. This is in recognition of the potential for additional risk to children of road traffic incident during the winter months and to enable us to develop and deliver a programme of Road Safety Awareness events for schools that will be affected. This would require an additional investment to maintain the current level of service, details of costs can be found in section 3.
1.2 A further monitoring exercise is conducted in the first half term of the new academic year to inform final proposals for November’s committee
1.3 If the recommendations are agreed in November we would start a period of consultation in December with appropriate stakeholders. A full schedule will be included in the November paper.
2. Financial Implications
The current budget for the road crossing patrol service is £128,610. This is after the removal of the 2016/17 (current year) saving of £150k. The current forecast for total spend this financial year is around £270k. This means that there will be an over spend in the current financial year of around £141k. All other things being equal, this budget pressure is expected to continue into next year.
This overspend is included as part of the overall overspend for Children’s Services (as reported in the finance and performance report). This is part of the bigger ongoing budget pressure for Children’s Services that we have discussed in CSLT meetings and that we have been looking to address in-year and into future years.
4. Issues, risks and innovation
This is a high profile service that can easily become emotive with citizens. N.C.C. already offers schools training / advice on road safety issues and this includes those schools where we remover the site; this will continue.
There may be concern from some that the removal of the RCP site may lead to incidents involving children and motor vehicles, as part of the monitoring exercise we will review accident statistics at sites that we identify as not meeting the national criteria before making final recommendations in November.
5. Background
The national guidance can be found at: www.rospa.com/rospaweb/docs/advice-services/road-safety/.../strategic-guidance.pdf
Officer Contact If you have any questions about matters contained or want to see copies of any assessments, eg equality impact assessment, please get in touch with:
If you have any questions about matters contained in this paper please get in touch with:
163 Officer Name: Elly Starling Tel No: 01603 223476 Email address : [email protected]
If you need this report in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format or in a different language please contact 0344 800 8020 or 0344 800 8011 (textphone) and we will do our best to help.
164