Pecuniary Interests Relating to Any Items of Business to Be Discussed at This Meeting

Members are reminded that they must declare all relevant pecuniary and non- pecuniary interests relating to any items of business to be discussed at this meeting. If a pecuniary interest is declared a Member must not speak or take part in that agenda item. Any declarations will be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

CABINET

Wednesday, 24 January 2018 at 1000 hours in Committee Rooms 3 and 4, Council House, Birmingham

PUBLIC AGENDA

1. NOTICE OF RECORDING

The Chairman to advise/meeting to note that this meeting will be webcast for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s Internet site (www.civico.net/birmingham) and that members of the press/public may record and take photographs except where there are confidential or exempt items.

2. APOLOGIES

Attached 3. CORPORATE REVENUE MONITORING REPORT MONTHS 7 AND 8

Report of the Corporate Director, Finance and Governance.

Attached 4. COUNCIL TAX TAX-BASE FOR 2018/19

Report of the Corporate Director, Finance and Governance.

Attached 5. BUSINESS RATES INCOME 2018/19

Report of the Corporate Director, Finance and Governance.

Attached 6. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN’S TRUST

Report of the Corporate Director, Children and Young People.

Attached 7. EQUAL PAY AND TUPE – SCHOOLS

Report of the City Solicitor.

Attached 8. ACIVICO LIMITED – PROVISION OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT AND TRANSITION OF ACIVICO SERVICES

Report of the Corporate Director, Finance and Governance.

Attached 9. BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL’S VISION AND STRATEGY FOR ADULT DAY OPPORTUNITIES

Report of the Corporate Director, Adult Social Care and Health.

Attached 10. SCHOOLS PRIVATE FINANCE INITIATIVE & BUILDING SCHOOLS FOR THE FUTURE SAVINGS REVIEW CONTRACT TERMINATION

Report of the Corporate Director, Children and Young People.

To Follow 11. TACKLING AIR QUALITY IN BIRMINGHAM

Report of the Director of Public Health.

Attached 12. EDUCATION BUSINESS AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017-18

Joint report of the Chief Operating Officer and the Corporate Director, Children and Young People.

Attached 13. JOHN WILMOTT SCHOOL CONVERSION FROM COMMUNITY SCHOOL TO ACADEMY STATUS

Report of the Corporate Director, Children and Young People.

Attached 14. TILE CROSS ACADEMY AND BRAYS ACADEMY DEVELOPMENT 2019 – FULL BUSINESS CASE AND CONTRACT AWARD

Report of the Corporate Director, Children and Young People.

Attached 15. SPRINT BUS RAPID TRANSPORT NETWORK DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

Report of the Corporate Director, Economy.

Attached 16. ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGE POINT NETWORK DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME – FULL BUSINESS CASE

Report of the Corporate Director, Economy.

Attached 17. PLANNED PROCUREMENT ACTIVITIES (MARCH 2018 – MAY 2018) AND QUARTERLY CONTRACT AWARD SCHEDULE (OCTOBER 2017 – DECEMBER 2017)

Report of the Director of Commissioning and Procurement.

18. OTHER URGENT BUSINESS

To consider any items of business by reason of special circumstances (to be specified) that, in the opinion of the Chairman, are matters of urgency.

19. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

That in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, which includes exempt information of the category indicated, the public be now excluded from the meeting:-

(Exempt Paragraphs 3 and 4)

PRIVATE AGENDA

Attached 20. EQUAL PAY AND TUPE – SCHOOLS

Report of the City Solicitor.

(Exempt Paragraphs 3 and 4)

Attached 21. ACIVICO LIMITED – PROVISION OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT

Report of the Corporate Director, Finance and Governance.

(Exempt Paragraph 3)

Attached 22. SCHOOLS PRIVATE FINANCE INITIATIVE & BUILDING SCHOOLS FOR THE FUTURE SAVINGS REVIEW CONTRACT TERMINATION

Report of the Corporate Director, Children and Young People.

(Exempt Paragraph 3)

Attached 23. TILE CROSS ACADEMY CAPITAL WORKS 2019

Report of the Corporate Director, Children and Young People.

(Exempt Paragraph 3)

Attached 24. PLANNED PROCUREMENT ACTIVITIES (MARCH 2018 – MAY 2018) AND QUARTERLY CONTRACT AWARD SCHEDULE (OCTOBER 2017 – DECEMBER 2017)

Report of the Director of Commissioning and Procurement.

(Exempt Paragraph 3)

25. OTHER URGENT BUSINESS (EXEMPT INFORMATION)

To consider any items of business by reason of special circumstances (to be specified) that, in the opinion of the Chairman, are matters of urgency.

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET Report of: THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND CORPORATE DIRECTOR - FINANCE & GOVERNANCE Date of Decision: 24TH JANUARY 2018 SUBJECT: CORPORATE REVENUE BUDGET MONITORING 2017/18 MONTH 8 (UP TO 30TH NOV 2017) Key Decision: Yes / No Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 003677/2018 If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved Relevant Cabinet Member(s) or Councillor Ian Ward Relevant Executive Member: Relevant O&S Chair: Councillor Mohammed Aikhlaq Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report:

1.1 This report forms part of the City Council’s robust arrangements for controlling its revenue expenditure.

1.2 Each Directorate’s financial performance to date is shown, together with the risks and issues identified to date in the Corporate Revenue Budget Monitoring document for Month 8, which is appended to this report.

2. Decision(s) recommended: That the Cabinet :-

2.1 Note the City Council’s 2017/18 revenue budget position and the gross pressures identified as at 30th November 2017.

2.2 Note the latest monitoring position in respect of the City Council’s savings programme and the present risks identified in its delivery.

2.3 Approve the writing off of debts over £0.025m as summarised in Appendix 4 of the report.

2.4 Approve granting the extension of the West Midlands Combined Authority’s borrowing powers to align them with the statutory functions of that Authority.

2.5 As accountable body, formally accept the extension offered by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to two Regional Growth Fund awards to an extended defrayal date of 31st January 2021, these being Tooling Loan Fund (£12m) and Debt/Mezzanine Fund (£16m).

2.6 Approve the resource allocation as identified in Section 4 of the attached report.

2.7 Note the increase to Planning Application fees implemented on 17th January 2018.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Clive Heaphy, Corporate Director – Finance & Governance Telephone No: 0121 303 2950 E-mail address: [email protected]

3. Consultation Consultation should include those that have an interest in the decisions recommended

3.1 Internal

3.1.1 Cabinet Members, Corporate Directors, the Acting City Solicitor, Human Resources and Assistant Directors of Finance have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

3.2 External

3.2.1 There are no additional issues beyond consultations carried out as part of the budget setting process for 2017/18.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 The budget is integrated with the Council Financial Plan, and resource allocation is directed towards policy priorities.

4.2 Financial Implications (How will decisions be carried out within existing finances and Resources?)

4.2.1 The Corporate Revenue Budget Monitoring document attached gives details of monitoring of service delivery within available resources.

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 Section 151 of the 1972 Local Government Act requires the Corporate Director – Finance & Governance (as the responsible officer) to ensure the proper administration of the City Council’s financial affairs. Budget control, which includes the regular monitoring of and reporting on budgets, is an essential requirement placed on Directorates and members of the Corporate Leadership Team by the City Council in discharging the statutory responsibility. This report meets the City Council’s requirements on budgetary control for the specified area of the City Council’s Directorate activities.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 There are no additional Equality Duty or Equality Analysis issues beyond any already assessed in the year to date. Any specific assessments needed shall be made by Directorates in the management of their services.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 At the meeting on 28th February 2017, the Council agreed a net revenue budget for 2017/18 of £821.8m to be met by government grants, council tax and business rates payers.

5.2 The base budget forecast variations in each Directorate are detailed in Section 2 of the Corporate Revenue Budget Monitoring document, together with the actions presently proposed to contain spending within cash limits. The position is summarised in tabular form in Appendix 1 which incorporates the forecast year end pressures by Directorate.

5.3 Directorate risks relating to the Savings Programme and measures being undertaken to alleviate these are detailed in Section 2 of the attached report and the position is summarised in tabular form in Appendix 3.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 Corporate Directors, in striving to manage their budgets, have evaluated all the options available to them to maintain balance between service delivery and a balanced budget.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 To inform Cabinet of:

The City Council’s 2017/18 revenue budget position and the level of gross pressures identified as at 30th November 2017.

The latest monitoring position in respect of the City Council’s Savings Programme and the present risks identified in its delivery.

The increase to Planning Application fees from 17th January 2018.

7.2 To approve:

The writing off of debts over £0.025m as summarised in Appendix 4 of the report.

Granting the extension of the West Midlands Combined Authority’s borrowing powers to align them with the statutory functions of that Authority

As accountable body, to formally accept the extension offered by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to two Regional Growth Fund awards to an extended defrayal date of 31st January 2021, these being Tooling Loan Fund (£12m) and Debt/Mezzanine Fund (£16m).

The resource allocation as identified in Section 4 of the attached report.

Signatures Date

Corporate Director – Finance & Governance . ...

Interim Chief Executive .

Leader .. ...

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

1. City Council Financial Plan 2017+ approved at Council 28th February 2017

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

1. Corporate Revenue Budget Monitoring Document – Month 8

Report Version Final Dated 12th January 2018

PROTOCOL PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITY DUTY

1 The public sector equality duty drives the need for equality assessments (Initial and Full). An initial assessment should, be prepared from the outset based upon available knowledge and information.

2 If there is no adverse impact then that fact should be stated within the Report section 4.4 and the initial assessment document appended to the Report duly signed and dated. A summary of the statutory duty is annexed to this Protocol and should be referred to in section 4.4 of executive reports for decision and then attached in an appendix; the term ‘adverse impact’ refers to any decision-making by the Council which can be judged as likely to be contrary in whole or in part to the equality duty.

3 A full assessment should be prepared where necessary and consultation should then take place.

4 Consultation should address any possible adverse impact upon service users, providers and those within the scope of the report; questions need to assist to identify adverse impact which might be contrary to the equality duty and engage all such persons in a dialogue which might identify ways in which any adverse impact might be avoided or, if avoidance is not possible, reduced.

5 Responses to the consultation should be analysed in order to identify:

(a) whether there is adverse impact upon persons within the protected categories

(b) what is the nature of this adverse impact

(d) what mitigating actions can be taken and at what cost

6 The impact assessment carried out at the outset will need to be amended to have due regard to the matters in (4) above.

7 Where there is adverse impact the final Report should contain:

• a summary of the adverse impact and any possible mitigating actions (in section 4.4 or an appendix if necessary) • the full equality impact assessment (as an appendix) • the equality duty (as an appendix).

Equality Act 2010

The Executive must have due regard to the public sector equality duty when considering Council reports for decision.

The public sector equality duty is as follows:

1 The Council must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to:

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by the Equality Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

2 Having due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to:

(a) remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

(b) take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

(c) encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

3 The steps involved in meeting the needs of disabled persons that are different from the needs of persons who are not disabled include, in particular, steps to take account of disabled persons' disabilities.

4 Having due regard to the need to foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to:

(a) tackle prejudice, and

(b) promote understanding.

5 The relevant protected characteristics are: (a) marriage & civil partnership (b) age (c) disability (d) gender reassignment (e) pregnancy and maternity (f) race (g) religion or belief (h) sex (i) sexual orientation

CORPORATE REVENUE BUDGET MONITORING REPORT 2017/18 MONTH 8

(up to 30th November 2017)

Section

1. Executive Summary ...... 3

2. Detailed Revenue Commentaries by Directorate...... 5

3. Corporate Summary of the Savings Programme ...... 18

4. Resource Allocations and Other Corporate Updates...... 19

Appendices

1. Financial Position analysed by Directorate ...... 22

2. Policy Contingency. 24

3. Overall Savings Programme ...... 25

4. Write offs...... 29

Section 1

1. Executive Summary

1.1 Birmingham City Council (BCC) set its net revenue budget of £821.8m on 28th February 2017. This included a savings programme of £70.9m in 2017/18, growing to £171.4m in 2020/21. In addition there are savings from 2016/17 of £14.4m where delivery still needs to be monitored, including where they were met on a one-off basis. Total savings to be met in 2017/18 are therefore £85.3m.

1.2 At Month 8, a high level forecast projection indicates underspends of £19.0m in the base budget delivery and £22.1m of savings that are not fully achieved in 2017/18, giving a combined net pressure of £3.1m at year end on the budget of £821.8m. The overall position is summarised in Table 1 overleaf.

1.3 The net overspend of £3.1m is primarily related to the Future Operating Model (FOM) (£14.6m), Children and Young People Directorate (£2.7m), Place Directorate (£3.4m) and Acivico (£1.8m). These have been offset by planned mitigations of £18.1m.

1.4 There are forecast underspends in Economy of £0.2m and in Finance & Governance of £1.1m.

1.5 Adult Social Care and Health (ASC&H) and Strategic Services are forecasting a balanced position. Delays in delivering the savings in ASC&H can be partially mitigated by the application of one off funding from the Improved Better Care Fund (iBCF) and the residual challenge can be accommodated by underspends in the base budget.

1.6 There is a reduction of £10.5m in the overall forecast position since Month 6. This relates largely to corporately funded Pension Fund Strain (PFS) of £9.6m, additional income in Planning and Development of £0.9m.

1.7 It is recognised that this position still presents a challenge to the Council and work is ongoing to address this. The position is receiving close scrutiny by the Corporate Leadership Team (CLT) and is being reported to Budget Board on a monthly basis and to Cabinet on a bi-monthly basis.

1.8 Further analysis of the Base Budget position can be seen in Appendix 1 and the Savings Programme in Appendix 3.

1.9 Section 2 of this report details the overall position on the Base Budget and Savings Programme by Directorate.

1.10 Section 3 of this report details the summary position on the Savings Programme.

1.11 Section 4 of this report details other corporate mitigations and resources allocations.

Section 1 Table 1 - Summary forecast position of base budget and risks relating to savings programme

Current Net Base Budget Savings not Deliverable (after Total Forecast Overspend Budget Overspend/(Underspend) mitigations) as at as at as at Directorate Month 8 Month 6 Movement Month 8 Month 6 Movement Month 8 Month 6 Movement £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m

Adult Social Care & Health Directorate 335.733 (3.103) (1.088) (2.015) 3.103 1.088 2.015 0.000 0.000 0.000

Children & Young People Directorate 210.895 0.723 0.112 0.611 2.034 2.034 0.000 2.757 2.146 0.611

Place Directorate 141.552 1.783 2.114 (0.331) 1.632 1.632 0.000 3.415 3.746 (0.331)

Economy Directorate 71.135 (0.969) 0.000 (0.969) 0.775 0.695 0.080 (0.194) 0.695 (0.889)

Strategic Services Directorate 20.873 0.012 0.012 0.000 (0.016) (0.016) 0.000 (0.004) (0.004) 0.000

Finance & Governance Directorate 23.862 (1.114) (0.818) (0.296) 0.000 0.000 0.000 (1.114) (0.818) (0.296)

Sub-total Directorates 804.050 (2.668) 0.332 (3.000) 7.528 5.433 2.095 4.860 5.765 (0.905)

Policy Contingency (9.779) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Corporately Funded Pension Fund Strain 0.000 (9.600) 0.000 (9.600) 0.000 0.000 0.000 (9.600) 0.000 (9.600) Other Corporate Items 27.532 (6.728) (3.428) (3.300) 14.610 11.310 3.300 7.882 7.882 0.000 City Council General Fund 821.803 (18.996) (3.096) (15.900) 22.138 16.743 5.395 3.142 13.647 (10.505)

Notes: 1. The total forecast overspend position at Month 8 is £3.1m, an improvement of £0.4m compared with Month 7 (£3.5m).

Section 2

2. Detailed Revenue Commentaries by Directorate

The following paragraphs comment on the major financial issues identified at this point in the year. Detailed figures for each Directorate are shown in Appendix 1.

2.1 Adult Social Care & Health

The Directorate is forecasting a balanced position (overall no movement since Month 6). This is made up of net savings deemed to be not fully achieved in 2017/18 of £8.1m offset by base budget underspends of £3.1m and additional income including the use of £5.0m from the iBCF, which had not been budgeted for. The increases in income from the Base Budget mean that the requirement for use of the iBCF in 2017/18 has reduced by 3.3m since Month 6. The conditions for iBCF allow this funding to be carried forward to 2018/19 and this will be available to support the Directorate’s Vision and Strategy development.

Although the overall net position has remained the same since Month 6, there have been movements within the overall position. These are largely due to a reduction in the base budget pressure relating to external placement as a result of reviewing cost sharing arrangements with health on a package by package basis offset by additional income on Mental Health Joint Funding and other underspends across the Directorate.

Base Budget forecast

There is a forecast year-end underspend of £3.1m at Month 8 (Month 6 £1.1m underspend). This relates to the following:

• Mental Health Joint Funding – £2.1m additional income (Month 6 £1.6m) This relates to Health contributions in relation to Mental Health care packages that are exceeding the budgeted level. There has been a further increase in Mental Health joint funded arrangements for Month 8

• Direct Payments (DP) – Recoupment of surplus income £1.5m (no movement since Month 6) The service has been proactive in reviewing and recouping surplus funds in individual accounts, this work is anticipated to continue although this is largely a one-off mitigation. Levels of Direct Payment assessments are steadily increasing

• Business Change – £1.2m underspend (Month 6 £1.1m underspend) This relates largely to underspend on staff vacancies across the service

• Mitigation from iBCF Fund – £1.2m (no movement since Month 6) In addition to mitigating savings, iBCF funding of £1.2m is being used at Month 8 to offset the continuing increasing demand for Older Adult Services from both the Acute settings and Enhanced Assessment Beds (EAB) and Community settings

• Commissioning Centre of Excellence – £1.2m underspend (Month 6 £0.8m underspend) 5

Section 2

This underspend is mainly due to staff vacancies across the service.

• Review of Non-pay costs – £0.5m underspend (no movement since Month 6) The Directorate is reviewing all non-pay budgets including energy, transport, training and other areas in order to mitigate the shortfall in savings delivery.

• Review of income – £0.5m underspend (no movement since Month 6) The Directorate is reviewing all charging policies across the full range of service areas. Further work is being done to clarify the benefit from this work and it continues to be work in progress.

• Care Packages/External Placement – £2.8m overspend (Month 6 £3.8m) There continues to be a significant pressure on external placements budgets, particularly in relation to residential and nursing placements for Older Adults. Additional pressures in recent months have been due to increasing prices for services particularly for clients with Learning Disabilities

Other cost pressures continue, including a higher than anticipated increase in average prices across all of Adult Social Care for all client groups.

The Directorate has been successful in mitigating some of these increases through reviewing cost sharing arrangements with health on a package by package basis.

Decisions have been made to utilise some of the iBCF funding to offset the continued growth in Older Adults placements from the Acute and EAB settings and this has been continued in Month 8.

• Extra Care Block Contract – £1.8m overspend (no movement since Month 6) The current arrangements for providing care where additional services are required are leading to these unbudgeted costs. The Directorate Budget Board has commissioned a review of this area which will report back in future monitoring report.

• Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) – £0.3m overspend (Month 6 £0.5m) In Period 8 there has been a reduction in the pressures associated with DoLS due to a number of factors. The service area has changed the emphasis and prioritised cases most at risk rather than the blanket approach used previously following guidance from Association of Directors of Adults Social Services (ADASS). As a result of this the service area has been able to decommission an external service and show a reduction in costs.

• Other Minor Variations – £0.2m overspend (Month 6 nil) There are other minor variations of £0.2m across the Directorate

Savings Programme forecast

There is a net forecast of £3.1m savings not achievable in 2017/18 at Month 8 (Month 6 £1.1m). This is made up of £8.1m of savings considered not fully achieved in 6

Section 2

2017/18 offset by the use of £5.0m from the iBCF as identified in Appendix 3. These unachievable savings are summarised below:

• £1.5m Enablement (no movement since Month 6) – A refreshed business case has been produced and the main risk associated with this saving continues to be challenge from the unions. Changes to the service delivery model are due to be implemented from February 2018 onwards. Corporate VR should contribute significantly towards the savings and the total value is being worked up based on likely pension strain cost. Given the risks associated with this saving, £1.5m of the £2.0m saving has been identified as part of £5.0m iBCF mitigation funding.

• £4.3m Integrated Community Social Work and Review (Month 6 £4.5m) – There is a risk that the anticipated in year savings may be overly ambitious. Mitigations have been identified from the iBCF to enable a review to take place. Plans are being developed to deliver savings for future years.

The review work is now progressing to implement a Neighbourhood Networks Model that will build capacity in the community and divert demand. Similarly an Asset Based assessment model is being developed. This is anticipated to reduce the cost of packages of care by acknowledging the needs that are met through family and community resources. A Local Area Coordination approach is also being developed to further assist in building and supporting local resources. Further work is required to quantify the level of savings that can be achieved through the implementation of these models.

• £0.9m Supporting People (Month 6 £2.0m) – The budget savings target for Supporting People / Third Sector is £3.2m for 2017/18. A review has identified £2.3m of savings (£1.2m at Month 6). Proposals have been agreed to utilise the balance from the iBCF towards this pressure. Wider plan is being developed as part of the iBCF to build community capacity and utilise community assets to support to enable vulnerable adults to live healthy, happy and independent lives.

• £0.8m External Day Centres (no movement since Month 6) – A plan is in place to deliver £0.2m. Actions are being taken to explore other ways to deliver the remaining savings of £0.6m. These require a new plan and link to proposals which will require full public consultation and will not therefore be deliverable in 2017/18. Further work has been carried out to ensure a consistent approach across internal and external provision with a view to identifying efficiencies across both. Work is progressing on introducing the Interim Contract.

• £0.2m Residential Care (Residential Block Contracts) (no movement since Month 6) – There is a risk of delays due to legal issues. There may not be sufficient time for the mitigating action to deliver the in year required savings of £1.0m. The Extra Care Sheltered Housing service is being reviewed for additional savings. The existing gap in EAB is now being funded via the iBCF.

• £0.4m Internal Care Review (Care Centres) (no movement since Month 6) – This is unlikely to make savings in 2017/18. The closure of one centre has been completed and work is underway to lease the building. A short term lease has been agreed and plans are being progressed with regards to the longer term 7

Section 2

lease arrangement. Further work is being carried out to generate efficiencies across the remaining care centres. Audit has identified recharge arrangements, staffing costs and review of the use of facilities as areas for further potential savings.

The unachieved savings have been offset by the use of £5.0m from the iBCF to stabilise the current Adult Social Care position which is a reduction of £3.2m since Month 6 as a result of underspends in base budget pressures. This includes actions to support communities and community based organisations to develop offers that support diversion and avoidance from social care services and to channel shift all Carers assessments to community based Carers’ Hubs, with associated support embedded within communities. It will also develop a more citizen centred approach to social work that develops the community model, alleviates some of the pressures in the health economy, reconfigures the enablement services that focus on those with the greatest reablement potential and align care pathways for both community and out of hospital care.

The Directorate has developed a contingency list to further mitigate against shortfalls in savings delivery and establish a robust financial position for future years. Initial estimates of these mitigations have been included in the Month 8 position.

2.2 Children & Young People

The Directorate is forecasting an overspend of £2.7m. (Month 6 £2.1m) The adverse movement of £0.6m since Month 6 primarily relates to increased costs in Travel Assist.

Base Budget forecast

The base budget pressure of £0.7m (Month 6 £0.1m) relates to the following:

• Education General Fund – £1.4m pressure (Month 6 £0.7m)

o PFI / BSF contracts £0.1m (no movement since Month 6) – There is a forecast net deficit of £0.1m after taking into account mitigations from specific contingencies for inflation.

o Travel Assist 0.6m (Month 6 nil) – The mitigations that were put in place to manage the deficit have not had the impact expected as a result of an increase in the number of transport placements. There is a rise in costs related to agency guides and issues with the main contractor for transport. Any new transport provision arranged increases the cost of delivery.

o Unattached Playing Fields £0.1m (no movement since Month 6)– Progress has been slow due to the complex legal and regulatory issues which need to be taken into account and these can vary by playing field. Earmarked resources have now been identified to accelerate the work on an invest to save basis and come up with funding / cost reduction solutions. The full

Section 2

year benefit will only be realised in 2018/19. As such, for 2017/18 there are anticipated unfunded net costs of approximately £0.1m

o Early Years £0.3m (Month 6 £0.1m) – There is net unfunded costs in day nurseries of £0.3m, residual pressures arising from a four month delay in implementing the new Health and Well Being Contracts of £0.1m partly offset by staffing savings of £0.1m

o Education Infrastructure Team £0.1m (Month 6 nil)– The overspend arises from a combination of less income from a reduced level of academisation than anticipated and buy back of the Education Infrastructure Team traded offer being less than expected.

o Other Minor Overspends £0.2m (Month 6 £0.4m)– A net deficit of £0.2m arising from a mixture of minor variations

• Early Help & Children's Social Care - £0.7m underspend (Month 6 £0.6m)

o No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) £0.7m pressure (no movement since Month 6) - In recent months there has been an increase in the number of families who are presenting as having no recourse to funds. The pressure represents the forecast costs of providing accommodation and subsistence support for 2017/18 assuming there are no changes to volumes or cost of cases. Several actions are being taken in an attempt to mitigate the position including: - Implementation of credit checks on presenting families (Islington model) - A review of families granted leave to remain but without recourse to public funds which are still being supported by NRPF team - Work with Children’s Advice and Support Service (CASS) managers to achieve ‘point of contact’ savings with accommodation costs being no longer than one night - Work with BCC Fraud Team to undertake a review of sample cases to see what support can be provided to address any possible fraud not identified through the current assessment process.

The full financial impact of these actions continues to be assessed and is not reflected in the forecast above.

o Secure Remand Custody Cost £1.1m pressure (Month 6 £1.0m) - Judges and Magistrates determine if a young person is to be remanded to custody in order to protect the public or protect the young person from self-harm or suicide. Based on the vulnerability assessment of the young person the Youth Justice Board (YJB) then allocates a bed for the remand placement. There are three bed types; Youth Offending Institute (YOI), Secure Training Centres (STC) and Secure Children’s Homes (SCH) with STC and SCH beds costing significantly more than YOIs. Any under 15 is remanded to a STC or SCH, as is any young person over 15 assessed as vulnerable

Section 2

The forecast pressure arises due to: - A further decrease in the YJB Secure Grant for 2017/18, with the grant for bed nights having decreased by £0.4m – 54% over the past five years - An increase in the actual price to be charged by YJB for each of the three bed types - A shift in the profile of bed night usage with more young people being accommodated in STCs and SCHs, thus at higher costs o Legal Disbursement £1.0m pressure (Month 6 £0.9m) This relates to the budget allocation not being adequate to cover the actual costs of disbursements following an exercise to re-base budgets. This exercise is being revisited as part of the budget setting for 2018/19. In addition there is an increase in costs relating to several cases in court. o Disabled Children’s Services £0.6m pressure (Month 6 £0.5m) There are cost pressures of £0.6m for placements and costs of alternative community support packages for disabled children. In April, a new formula was agreed to share residential placement with education costs with Special Educational Needs Assessment Review (SENAR). This resulted in additional costs of £1.3m previously charged to Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) being charged to this budget

These pressures have been offset by a number of mitigations as below:

- A delay in the opening of a specialist three bedded remand home, not now expected to open until 2018, will result in an underspend of £0.4m (no movement since Month 6)

- The overall costs of all current fostering, residential, supported accommodation and secure welfare placements currently indicate a forecast underspend of £1.0m (Month 6 £0.7m underspend). Additional income of £0.4m (Month 6 £0.3m) will be received in respect of contributions to specific complex care packages

- There is a delay in planned staffing recruitment within the Youth Offending service which will result in an underspend of £0.5m (no movement since Month 6) if all vacancies are not filled for the remainder of the year. This situation will be reviewed on a month by month basis based on the emerging risks and activities within the service

- There has been a reduction in the number of externally commissioned residential and community based assessments resulting in an expected underspend of £0.1m (no movement since Month 6)

- There has been a reduction in the costs of commissioned training activities of £0.4m (no movement since Month 6)

- Additional income of £0.5m (no movement since Month 6) has been received in respect of several Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children

Section 2

(UASC) cases which have been retrospectively approved by the Home Office following the provision of additional information

- An underspend of £0.6m (Month 6 £0.7m) is expected in relation to costs of support packages and financially assisted order payments as alternatives to care

- Other non-pay underspends across various services total £0.2m (Month 6 £0.1m underspend)

The service continues to review service budgets and activities in order to identify further mitigations to deliver a balanced budget.

Savings Programme forecast

There are forecast savings not fully achieved in 2017/18 of £2.0m (no movement since Month 6) as summarised below.

• £1.9m Travel Assist (no movement since Month 6) – There has been a delay on delivery of the savings, in part due to a delay in the introduction of a new ICT routing system and ongoing costs related to an increase in demand and the provision of travel guides. Sickness absences and one to one transport has put increased pressure on this part of the service. A full review has been commissioned by the Assistant Director and strong action will be required to control spend.

• £0.1m Education Playing Fields (no movement since Month 6) – Progress has been slow due to the complex legal and regulatory issues which need to be taken into account and can vary by playing field. Earmarked resources have now been identified to accelerate the work on an ‘invest to save’ basis and come up with funding / cost reduction solutions. However, the full year benefit will only be realised in 2018/19. As such for 2017/18 unfunded net costs will still be incurred

2.3 Place (excluding Housing Revenue Account)

The Directorate is reporting a forecast net overspend of £3.4m (Month 6 £3.7m). This includes base pressures of £1.8m (£2.1m at month 6) after taking into account a corporate mitigation of £6.6m that has been reported previously. There is also forecast non-delivery of savings of £1.6m (no movement since Month 6).

There has been a net decrease of £0.3m since Month 6 as a result of anticipated improvements in Regulatory Services (£0.2m) and Neighbourhood & Community Services (£0.1m).

Base Budget forecast

A net base budget pressure of £1.8m (Month 6 £2.1m) is forecast at Month 8 relating to pressures of £3.2m offset by mitigations/underspends of £1.4m as outlined below:

Section 2

• Waste Management Services - £1.8m pressure (no change since Month 6 when pressures of £8.4m were reported before £6.6m of corporate funding). Following the conclusion of the industrial dispute the overall estimated cost of this is £6.6m which has been wholly offset by corporate funding. However, the new operating model is not expected to be fully implemented until February 2018 and so there is a potential risk of further pressures that are not yet quantifiable. The residual pressure of £1.8m relates primarily to operational costs on the transport fleet (mainly lower income and additional repairs and maintenance expenditure) and is unchanged since month 6.

• Community Sport & Events- £0.7m net pressure (no movement since Month 6) This relates to the externalisation of Alexander Stadium of £1.1m and pressures of £0.3m for Tiverton leisure centre that has not yet been closed pending the completion of the new Northfield centre. This has been offset by £0.7m relating to additional management fee income from Sparkhill Pool along with non- domestic rate relief and the use of maintenance reserves at Harborne Pool

• Regulatory Services- £0.4m net pressure (Month 6 £0.6m) There is a £0.3m pressure on the Coroners’ Service, a net pressure of £0.2m relating to Environmental Health (underspend £0.4m) and Pest Control (overspend £0.6m) and an underspend of £0.1m relating to Trading Standards.

• Other variations- £0.3m pressure (no movement since Month 6) There are other variations on a range of services including Markets of £0.1m and Equalities and Community Cohesion of £0.2m.

• Net Mitigations- £1.4m A number of mitigations/underspends are anticipated to offset the above pressures including: o Parks self-funded borrowing savings of £0.1m (no movement since Month 6) o Bereavement Services maintenance savings plus additional income from car parking and grave sales of £0.4m (no movement since Month 6) o Use of non-grant reserves in Adult Education of £0.2m (no movement since Month 6) o Use of Culture and Visitor Economy Reserves of £0.3m (no movement since Month 6) o Resilience and Other Services £0.4m

Place Directorate continues to investigate a number of residual savings options from programmes that have been implemented that could be used to reduce the base budget pressures and non-delivery of savings.

Savings Programme forecast

The 2017/18 Savings Programme has savings of £1.6m that may not be delivered at Month 8 (no movement since Month 6). These are summarised below.

Section 2

• £0.1m Local Car Park Charges – Charges are implemented but there is a potential price sensitivity

• £0.7m Parks – Relating to Cofton Nursery income targets of £0.3m from 2016/17 and the disposal of unwanted / underutilised parks land of £0.4m

• £0.2m Waste Management – This is part of the proposed new operating model

• £0.1m Asset and Property Disposal Programme – There is slippage in the identification of suitable properties

• £0.2m Health and Wellbeing Centres – Decommissioning of centres is behind schedule

• £0.3m Markets – There are legal constraints on changes to leases

2.4 Economy

Economy is forecasting a net underspend of £0.2m at Month 8 (Month 6 £0.7m overspend). The improved position is primarily due to higher than anticipated income in planning applications and identification of one off mitigations for savings not yet in place.

Base Budget forecast

The Directorate is reporting an underspend of £1.0m on the base budget position (Month 6 balance position) which includes:

• £0.9m underspend in Planning and Development in relation to additional income from planning applications and other underspends • £0.3m Highways and Infrastructure underspend • £0.2m Other minor underspends

Partly offset by: • £0.4m pressure within Birmingham Property Services (BPS).

Savings Programme forecast

Savings not anticipated to be fully achievable in 2017/18 are set out below:

• InReach £0.8m (£0.7m at Month 6) for whom the responsibility has been transferred from Place to Economy Directorate. • BPS £0.3m (nil Month 6) delayed implementation of the service restructure.

These are offset by: • £0.3m use of the BPS FOM reserve

Section 2

2.5 Strategic Services

The Directorate is forecasting a balanced position at Month 8, no change from the position reported at Month 6.

Base Budget forecast

A break-even position has been forecast on the base budget. (no movement since Month 6).

Savings Programme forecast

The savings which are not expected fully achievable of £2.8m in 2017/18 are identified below (no movement since Month 6).

• £0.2m – Residual Human Resource savings undelivered

• £0.3m – Contractual Workforce proposals which required changes to terms and conditions

• £2.1m – Unallocated/undelivered efficiency savings from 2016/17

• £0.1m – Transfer of the out of hours service from Customer Services

• £0.1m – Cost recovery of Council Tax and Business Rates summons not deliverable due to legal challenges

These have been offset by £2.8m of mitigations relating to the following:

• £0.5m – Housing Benefit Subsidy

• £0.3m – Surplus in advertising

• £0.8m – Use of balances from 2016/17

• £0.1m – Annual impact of accounting for the recoupment of legal fees plus interest as a result of Council Tax Debt being secured by charging orders

• £0.1m – Contribution from reserves

• £1.0m – Invest to Save proposals from council tax collection fund as a result of reduced single person discounts being claimed following reviews. This is being funded from reserves in 2017/18 to be repaid from the associated Council Tax surplus

Section 2

2.6 Finance & Governance

The Directorate is forecasting an underspend position of £1.1m at Month 8 (Month 6 £0.8m underspend). There is a favourable movement of £0.3m since Month 6 relating to Shared Services of £0.2m and other minor underspends in the base budget of £0.1m.

Base Budget forecast

There is a forecast underspend of £1.1m on the base budget (Month 6 £0.8m underspend). This relates largely to an underspend of £1.0m on the SAP Development budget and £0.1m other minor underspends.

Savings Programme forecast

The forecast savings are expected to be fully achieved (no movement since Month 6).

2.7 Housing Revenue Account

A balanced HRA Budget was approved for 2017/18 (expenditure of £281.7m funded by equivalent income). The budget was based on the continuing national rent policy of -1% that will be implemented in each year from 2016/17 to 2019/20.

The current budgets and the forecast year-end financial position are summarised in Table 2 below:

Table 2: HRA Current Budget and Forecast Position Service Current Year End Year End Change Budget Projection Projection (Month 6) (Month 8) £m £m £m £’m Rent/Service Charges (281.7) - - - (Net of Voids) Repairs and 64.5 (3.0) (4.1) (1.1) Maintenance Contributions for 54.0 - - - Capital Investment

Capital Financing 76.5 4.4 4.3 (0.1) Costs

Local Office / Estate 86.7 (1.4) (0.2) 1.2

Services / Equal Pay

Net Position 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

A balanced position is projected for the year-end, although the projections have been reviewed and updated at Month 8. In summary, the position on repairs has improved (lower expected contractual claims from contractors and performance related payments

Section 2

are expected to be lower) and reduced on local housing/estate services (due to additional expenditure on voluntary redundancy costs).

The overall strategy for debt repayment is considered appropriate as this is prudent and considered value for money (as interest payments on debt outstanding are greater than interest received on balances). It is also in line with the HRA Self-financing Business Plan for the repayment of debt (the debt repayment has already been re-profiled to take into account the new national rent policy and is expected to be significantly higher by 2025/26 compared to the original plans that were established in April 2012).

The HRA Business Plan is being reviewed and this will incorporate all new national legislation implications (rent policy beyond 2020/21, universal credit, funding for health and safety work in tower blocks). This will be reported for approval to Cabinet/City Council in February 2018.

2.8 Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG)

Work is ongoing to make the necessary savings and cost reductions within the High Needs area of DSG. A £5.7m year-end deficit is currently forecast. This will not impact on the General Fund.

There are issues around the funding of school deficits where they convert to academies under a sponsor Trust. Allied to this are redundancy costs incurred by schools. While there is some DSG funding, it is limited and ultimately the funding responsibility will fall onto the Council. The position is being closely monitored with a strong focus on holding schools to account.

2.9 Collection Fund

The monitoring arrangements for the Collection Fund include reporting on the in-year position for Council Tax and Business Rates. However, for the most part, the impact on the budget is as set out in the Council Financial Plan 2017+, with any surplus or deficit being required to be carried forward and taken into account as part of the 2018/19 budget setting process.

Council Tax

The overall net budget for Council Tax income is £310.4m in 2017/18. In addition, the Council collects the precepts on behalf of the Fire and Police Authorities. A surplus is forecast for the year of which the Council’s share is £2.0m (£2.2m in year less £0.2m deficit brought forward from 2016/17), which will be taken into account in setting the budget for 2018/19. This is a small reduction on the position reported previously of £2.1m. The in year surplus of £2.2m is made up of £0.8m of additional net growth in Council Tax over and above the budget and £1.4m due to the review of Single Person Discounts as part of a Revenues Service invest to save project. This will have an ongoing positive impact on the Council Tax base in future years which will be taken into account in the budget setting process for 2018/19.

Section 2

£1.0m of the total surplus is planned to be used to mitigate savings delivery issues in Strategic Services in 2017/18. This assumption is reflected in the Strategic Services monitoring position elsewhere in the report.

Business Rates

Under the Business Rates Pilot that came into effect on 1st April 2017 the Council retains 99% of all Business Rates collected under the Business Rates Retention Scheme with 1% being paid over to the West Midlands Fire Authority. The overall budgeted level of Business Rates in 2017/18 is £403.3m (excluding the Enterprise Zone), of which the Council’s retained share is £399.3m.

An in-year surplus has previously been reported of which the Council’s share is £0.2m. However, the latest data set from the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) indicates that the majority of anticipated appeals against the 2017 Valuation list will not be lodged until future years, although it is expected that these will eventually be lodged as originally forecast. As a result the Council anticipates a smaller provision for appeals will be created in 2017/18 and so it is now expected that a further surplus of £17.7m will be realised relating to the Council’s share. However, it is expected that this resource will be needed in future years.

As previously reported, a further £3.7m of in year resource is anticipated to be received relating to additional compensatory grants from Central Government as a result of policy decisions that would otherwise reduce Business Rates income such as additional support for small businesses due to the effects of revaluation.

The overall in year forecast position on Business Rates related resources is a surplus of £21.6m (£0.2m in year surplus reported previously plus £17.7m for appeals and a further £3.7m of additional government grants).

In addition to the in-year position, a cumulative deficit was brought forward from 2016/17 (over and above that budgeted for) which has previously been reported in the 2016/17 Outturn Report. The Council’s share is £1.8m.

Therefore, an overall forecast surplus of £19.8m relating to the Council’s share of Business Rates related resources is anticipated to be taken into account in setting the Budget for 2018/19 (£21.6m in year surplus less £1.8m deficit brought forward).

Section 3

3. Corporate Summary of the Savings Programme

3.4 The Month 8 analysis of the Savings Programme shows that Directorates consider £54.6m (64.0%) of the savings forecast will be delivered in 2017/18 and £118.1m (68.9%) is still considered to be a reasonable estimate of savings by 2020/21. At this stage, £30.7m (36.0%) is not fully achieved in 2017/18, with £8.6m of mitigations identified. The overall Directorate position at Month 8 is summarised for the Council in Tables 3 and 4.

Table 3 – Analysis of 2017/18 Savings Programme On Track One Off At Risk Delayed Undeliverable Total £m £m £m £m £m £m Adults Social Care & Health 6.189 2.218 1.230 0.000 8.103 17.740 Children and Young People 8.528 0.000 0.836 0.000 2.034 11.398 Economy 8.233 0.230 0.000 0.000 0.775 9.238 Place 13.630 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.632 15.262 Strategic Services 12.746 0.550 0.000 0.000 2.794 16.090 Finance & Governance 0.066 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.790 0.856 Cross Cutting 0.144 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.610 14.754 Total Savings 49.536 2.998 2.066 0.000 30.738 85.338 Mitigations 8.600 Net delayed and undeliverable after mitigations 22.138

Table 4 – Savings not fully achieved 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 £m £m £m £m Adults Social Care & Health 3.103 2.466 5.300 2.280 Children and Young People 2.034 1.676 11.796 10.815 Economy 0.775 0.366 0.250 0.250 Place 1.632 3.138 2.913 3.639 Strategic Services (0.016) 0.000 0.000 (0.039) Finance & Governance 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Cross Cutting 14.610 33.021 36.813 36.740

Net undeliverable and delayed savings after mitigations 22.138 40.667 57.072 53.685

3.5 The summary is based on a detailed review of each of individual saving. An overview of forecast savings not fully achieved on an ongoing basis by project for each Directorate is shown at Appendix 3.

3.6 There are £14.6m of cross cutting savings that are considered to be not fully achieved in 2017/18. These relate to the Future Operating Model.

Section 4 4. Resource Allocations and Other Corporate Updates

4.1 General Policy Contingency

The balance on the General Policy Contingency at Month 8 is £1.7m.

4.2 Other Corporate Mitigations

Corporate mitigations on the base budget of £8.5m include: • £3.7m for Treasury Management as a result of revised projections for the amount and level of interest rates of the borrowing requirement since the budget for 2017/18 was set. • £1.5m underspend on Specific Policy Contingency following a detailed review of commitments. • £3.3m of savings represented as a corporate item rather than being directly attributed to the FOM.

These have been partly offset by a £1.8m pressure relating to Acivico, which includes non-distributable profit of £1.5m, a shortfall in profit share of £0.1m and pressures relating to Highbury Hall £0.1m and the Security / Portering Service £0.1m. It is understood that Acivico’s auditor considers that Acivico may be precluded from declaring a dividend and thereby distributing any profits, which may mean that it cannot be assumed that any return will accrue this year (budget of £0.7m income). This may also have an impact on previous years’ assumptions of profit sharing through dividend distribution where there are debtor balances outstanding of £0.8m. This is because Acivico identified in its draft financial statements a significant deficit on its profit and loss account (now in excess of £7m) due to pension liabilities.

There are £14.6m of savings not deliverable in 2017/18 relating to the FOM.

4.3 Combined Authority Borrowing Powers

West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) was established in June 2016 following a Parliamentary Order which effectively dissolved the West Midlands Passenger Transport Executive (WMPTE) and the West Midlands Integrated Transport Authority (WMITA), both of which were replaced by the newly established West Midlands Combined Authority, but which had wider legal powers than the two predecessor transport bodies.

The two statutory bodies which preceded the Combined Authority existed to promote and deliver public transport. As such, those entities held the necessary powers to undertake borrowing for transport related purposes. When WMCA was established, the borrowing powers were not extended to align with the newly acquired functions.

Whilst currently WMCA has powers across a broad range of areas, it only has the legal ability to borrow in relation to transport related expenditure. This issue manifests itself in a number of ways, predominantly relating to the investment programme, with individual authorities having to borrow on behalf of the WMCA (including Birmingham for the Collective Investment Fund) and some schemes being prevented from being approved.

Section 4 The Cities and Devolution Act 2016 amends previous legislation so that in addition to borrowing for transport functions, a Combined Authority may borrow in relation to “any other functions of the authority that are specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State”. Such functions include Mayoral and non-Mayoral functions. Such regulations may only provide borrowing powers for a particular function of the Mayoral WMCA if all the Constituent Councils consent.

The Government now intends to introduce the necessary regulations, subject to the introduction of a debt cap and securing the necessary approvals. Agreement has been reached whereby WMCA will be able to borrow for all of its functions.

This will facilitate the more efficient conduct of the WMCA’s financial affairs, including facilitating the financing of the investment programme, and will also avoid the need for Constituent Councils to increase their debt by borrowing on behalf of the WMCA. It puts its borrowing powers on a par with those of other local authorities. Therefore, it is recommended that approval is granted on behalf of the City Council to this extension to the WMCA’s borrowing powers.

4.4 ICT Landing Team

The Service Birmingham Transition programme will be a major undertaking for the Council. It will be the biggest transition of ICT services in the Local Government Sector and will present a significant risk to the Council, both in terms of the changes in operational services, the achievement of a step change to improve how the Council uses technology and deliver the savings, if it is not appropriately supported. It is not unreasonable therefore for the Council to expect to spend an assumed £4.7m through to 2020/21. This expenditure would cover the following activities:

• Costs of consultancy support - specialist advisory support (which cannot be funded from capital funded investments) • Costs of specialist legal, commercial, finance and procurement support - there is no specialist ICT procurement support available to the Council and there may be other support required to negotiate the various contracts that cannot be handled by the available resources. • Team training and support – to provide additional training and support to the in-house team as they take on the full responsibilities of the service • Programme management of the transition itself

The costs in 2017/18 are anticipated to be £0.547m and these will be funded by the Organisational Transition Reserve.

4.5 Regional Growth Fund – Accountable Body Role

The City Council currently acts as accountable body for a number of loan and grant funds which are managed by our partner Fund Manager (Finance Birmingham Group). This includes a Tooling Loan Fund and Debt/Mezzanine Funds.

Permission has been received from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (DBEIS) to continue the delivery of these two Regional Growth Funded award, being Tooling Fund (£12m) and Debt/Mezzanine Fund (£16m), to an extended defrayal date of 31 Jan 2021. The Council will continue to act as the accountable body for these funds and Finance Birmingham Group will continue to act as Fund Manager. 20

Section 4

Demand continues for the schemes with the original funds having been fully utilised by successful applicants. Both schemes will continue to provide funding to applicants through recycling of the repaid commercial awards. Council approval is sought to accept extensions of the two awards to 31 Jan 2021 with the possibility of a further continuation from DBEIS beyond this date.

The Council is able to recover some costs of accountable body role, including treasury management costs from the fund. Such costs are charged annually. There are no financial implications for the Council as a result of the recommendation to redeploy the returning funds, including interest. The retention of the funds for general council use has been explored but is not allowable within the original award letter. This view has been endorsed by DBEIS.

Cabinet is recommended to endorse the Council continuing its accountable body role for this extended period

4.6 Increase in Planning Application Fees

In February 2017, as a response to their White Paper “Fixing our broken housing market”, the Department for Communities and Local Government asked all Planning Authorities if they would consider a 20% increase in Planning Application fees, subject to the proviso that the additional income was ringfenced to increase the existing Planning service revenue budget from an agreed baseline, in order to increase service capacity and performance. This income was anticipated in the ongoing affordability of the new Economy Directorate Future Operating Model (FOM). Planning Authorities in favour were required to make a formal certification and in February 2017, the Acting Section 151 Officer confirmed that the Council would accept the proposal, subject to executive authority, and approved the base line budget.

The Town and Country Planning Act 2017 was amended on 20th December 2017 to this effect by Statutory Instrument 2017 No. 1314, The Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications, Deemed Applications, Requests and Site Visits) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2017. This came into force on the twenty eighth day after the day the regulations were made; in this case the 17th January 2018. The ability to require the revised fees from this day was confirmed in a letter to local authorities from the Department for Communities and Local Government dated 21 December 2017.Whilst the increase has been delayed from the originally anticipated date, arrangements have been put in place to implement the revised fees from the due date in line with government advice.

Appendix 1

Financial Position analysed by Directorate - budget pressures (including budget savings) FULL YEAR BUDGET YEAR END

Base Budget Savings Pressures / Programme Division of Service Area Original Budget M'ments Revised Budget (Savings) not Deliverable Total £'m £'m £'m £'m £'m £'m Corporate Director 9.877 (6.473) 3.404 (1.688) (1.688) Adult Packages of Care 166.167 7.675 173.842 (1.372) 2.703 1.331 Assessment & Support Planning 37.358 (0.187) 37.171 0.279 0.279 Specialist Care Services 40.972 (1.300) 39.672 2.034 0.400 2.434 Commissioning Centre of Excellence 40.621 0.029 40.650 (1.207) 0.000 (1.207) Business Change 40.929 0.065 40.994 (1.230) (1.230) Public Health 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.080 0.000 0.080 Adults Social Care & Health Directorate Total 335.924 (0.191) 335.733 (3.103) 3.103 0.000 Education and Skills 65.455 9.876 75.330 1.464 2.034 3.498 Schools Budgets (152.219) (9.116) (161.335) (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) Children With Complex Needs 107.589 0.692 108.280 0.000 0.000 0.000 Early Help & Childrens Soc Care 162.753 (0.105) 162.648 (0.739) 0.000 (0.739) Business Change 33.571 (0.381) 33.190 (0.000) 0.000 (0.000) Accounting Adjustment/MRP Component of Contract Payments (7.219) 0.000 (7.219) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Children and Young People Directorate Total 209.929 0.965 210.895 0.723 2.034 2.757 Community Sports & Events 6.503 0.730 7.233 0.660 0.230 0.890 Fleet and Waste Management 57.843 (0.292) 57.551 1.800 0.167 1.967 Parks and Nature Conservation 12.408 0.037 12.445 (0.094) 0.706 0.612 Bereavement Services (3.236) 0.023 (3.213) (0.434) 0.000 (0.434) Markets (0.926) 0.451 (0.475) 0.075 0.300 0.375 Business Support 1.049 (0.004) 1.045 0.000 0.000 0.000 Equalities, Cohesion & Safety 0.413 0.001 0.414 0.183 0.000 0.183 Engineering & Resilience Services 0.888 0.006 0.894 (0.099) 0.099 0.000 Regulatory Services 7.469 0.668 8.137 0.410 0.000 0.410 Private Sector Housing (1.239) 0.956 (0.284) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Neighbourhood Community Services 28.594 0.333 28.927 (0.063) 0.030 (0.033) Birmingham Adult Education (0.130) 0.020 (0.110) (0.200) 0.000 (0.200) Central Support Costs 15.720 (0.449) 15.271 (0.155) 0.100 (0.055) Housing Revenue Account 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Culture & Visitor Economy 10.730 0.610 11.340 (0.300) 0.000 (0.300) City Centre Management 0.059 0.000 0.059 0.000 0.000 0.000 Housing Options 4.987 0.057 5.044 0.000 0.000 0.000 Shelforce (0.100) 0.000 (0.100) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Capital Financing (2.626) 0.000 (2.626) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Other funds 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Place Directorate Total 138.405 3.147 141.552 1.783 1.632 3.415 Planning & Development (City Centre, EZ & BDI) 2.452 0.450 2.902 0.000 0.000 0.000 Planning & Development (Strategy & Planning) 4.793 (0.291) 4.502 (0.878) 0.000 (0.878) Business and Customer 9.459 1.772 11.230 0.000 0.000 0.000 Transportation and Connectivity 47.949 0.706 48.655 0.000 0.000 0.000 Housing Development (0.026) 0.462 0.436 (0.094) 0.775 0.681 Highways and Infrastructure 37.831 (0.793) 37.039 (0.284) 0.000 (0.284) Birmingham Property (1.933) (0.329) (2.262) 0.374 0.000 0.374 Employment Services 4.005 2.316 6.321 (0.087) 0.000 (0.087) GBSLEP Executive 0.177 (0.199) (0.022) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Accounting Adjustment/MRP Component of Contract Payments (37.666) 0.000 (37.666) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Economy Directorate Total 67.041 4.094 71.135 (0.969) 0.775 (0.194)

Appendix 1 FULL YEAR BUDGET YEAR END

Base Budget Savings Pressures / Programme not Division of Service Area Original Budget M'ments Revised Budget (Savings) Deliverable Total £'m £'m £'m £'m £'m £'m Corporate Strategy 2.383 (0.012) 2.371 0.000 (0.001) (0.001) Procurement (1.643) 0.075 (1.568) 0.000 (0.250) (0.250) Human Resources 7.052 0.518 7.570 0.000 0.876 0.876 Elections Office 1.775 0.000 1.775 0.000 0.000 0.000 Revenues & Benefits (1.088) 0.070 (1.018) 0.000 (0.743) (0.743) Core ICT 0.203 0.148 0.351 0.000 0.000 0.000 Charities & Trusts 0.050 0.030 0.080 0.000 0.000 0.000 Customer Services 9.606 (0.058) 9.548 0.012 0.102 0.114 Communications 1.763 0.000 1.763 0.000 0.000 0.000 Strategic Services Total 20.102 0.771 20.873 0.012 (0.016) (0.004)

City Finance 8.053 (0.626) 7.427 (1.100) 0.000 (1.100) Birmingham Audit 2.158 (0.056) 2.102 (0.014) 0.000 (0.014) Business Transformation 39.740 0.000 39.740 0.000 0.000 0.000 Directorate Wide Rec (34.146) 0.000 (34.146) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Shared Services Centre 2.119 0.000 2.119 0.000 0.000 0.000 Insurance (0.006) 0.000 (0.006) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Legal & Democratic Services 5.330 0.010 5.340 0.000 0.000 0.000 Corporate Resources 1.613 0.042 1.655 0.000 0.000 0.000 Major Projects 0.063 0.000 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.000 Business Loans & Other (0.582) 0.150 (0.432) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Finance & Governance Total 24.342 (0.480) 23.862 (1.114) 0.000 (1.114)

Total Directorate Spending 795.743 8.306 804.049 (2.668) 7.528 4.860

Policy Contingency (1.980) (7.799) (9.779) 0.000 0.000 0.000 Other Corporate Items 28.040 (0.507) 27.533 (16.328) 14.610 (1.718) Centrally Held Total 26.060 (8.306) 17.754 (16.328) 14.610 (1.718) Proposed Transfers to / (from) reserves 0.000 0.000 0.000 Net Budget Requirement 821.803 (0.000) 821.803 (18.996) 22.138 3.142 0.000 Housing Revenue Account 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Appendix 2 Policy Contingency Month 8 Monitoring to 30th November 2017

Table 1 Original Budget Approvals / Revised Budget Approvals / Proposals Underspend Remaining 2017/18 Adjustments in 2017/18 Allocations not awaiting on Policy Contingency if Voyager yet in Voyager as approval at 30th Contingency proposals at 30th Nov Nov approved £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 Car Park Closure Resources 252 252 252 Carbon Reduction 1,034 1,034 1,034 Auto-enrolment in Pension Fund 300 300 300 Inflation Contingency 7,542 7,542 (1,385) (1,500) 4,657 Highways Maintenance 1,000 1,000 (661) 339 Improvement Expenditure 6,951 6,951 (206) (6,745) 0 Apprenticeship Levy 1,303 1,303 (1,303) 0 Capital Receipts Flexibility (8,740) (8,740) 8,740 0 Subtotal Specific Contingency 9,642 0 9,642 (206) (1,354) (1,500) 6,582 General Contingency (see Table 2) 2,988 (1,152) 1,836 (150) 0 1,686

Total Contingency excluding Future Operating Model savings 12,630 (1,152) 11,478 (356) (1,354) (1,500) 8,268 Future Operating Model - savings to be allocated (14,610) (14,610) (14,610)

Total Contingency including Future Operating Model savings (1,980) (1,152) (3,132) (356) (1,354) (1,500) (6,342)

Table 2 - General Policy Contingency £'000 Budget for 2017/18 2,988 Carry forward of underspends from 2016/17 16 Less: Allocations to date Commonwealth Feasibility Study (300) Wholesale Market Relocation (448) Harborne BID (20) CITR / SITR Art Loan (150) Moseley Pool (400) Sub-total revised budget 1,686

Appendix 3 Directorate Savings Programme – Position at Month 8

Adults Social Care and Health savings not forecast to be achieved ongoing 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Ref Description Undeliverable Shortfall / Shortfall / Shortfall / £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m Improved Better Care Fund (5.000) (9.300) (2.000) 0.000 HW3 Enablement 1.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 HW5 Better Care at Home (Single handed Project) 0.000 2.700 2.280 2.280 MYR1 Integrated Community Social Work & Review and 4.342 5.500 5.020 0.000 audit of Care First payments system HW1 Supporting People 0.873 1.898 0.000 0.000 HW8 External Day Centres 0.800 0.000 0.000 0.000 HW9 Residential Care (Residential Block contracts) 0.188 0.188 0.000 0.000 HW10 & MYR6 Adults - Eligibility (Top ups) 0.000 1.480 0.000 0.000 Adult Social Care High Cost Provision MIA18* Internal Care Review - Care Centres 0.400 0.000 0.000 0.000 Grand Total 3.103 2.466 5.300 2.280

Children’s and Young People savings not forecast to be achieved ongoing 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Ref Description Undeliverable Shortfall / Shortfall / Shortfall / £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m P22* Step up of previous Early Years savings 0.000 (0.270) (0.150) (1.131) MIA2* Design and Implement a new approach to 0.000 0.000 10.000 10.000 Transitioning children with complex needs and Disabilities [SEND] and move away from a high dependency model MIA3 (16/17) Promote independent travel and reduce reliance 1.946 1.946 1.946 1.946 on council funded transport. P24 (15/16) Partial Development of Education Playing Fields. 0.088 0.000 0.000 0.000

Grand Total 2.034 1.676 11.796 10.815

Appendix 3

Place savings not forecast to be achieved ongoing 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Ref Description Undeliverable Shortfall / Shortfall / Shortfall / £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m EGJ7* Business Support Commercial Model 0.000 0.052 0.072 0.092 JS1 & EGJ6 Museum & Heritage Service 0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 JS5 & PL40ga Local Car Park Charges 0.099 0.000 0.000 0.000 SN45* Disposal of unwanted/under utilised parks land (8 0.200 0.000 0.000 0.000 acres per year) HN5 Street Cleaning & Refuse Collection (Waste Mgm 0.062 0.000 0.000 0.000 Efficiency & Income Targets Prog) HN3 Charging for traders to access Household 0.075 0.000 0.000 0.000 Recycling Centres - (Waste Management Efficiency Savings and Income Targets Programme) SN6* Reduce Reuse Recycle - Reconfiguration of 0.075 0.000 0.000 0.000 waste collection services including review management arrangements for waste collection service once current waste disposal contract expires in 2019 - Waste Management Efficiency Savings and Income Targets Programme (Waste Disposal Contract)

SN7* Reduce Reuse Recycle - Reduce failures/failed 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 waste collections - Waste Management Efficiency Savings and Income Targets Programme

SN15* Reduce Reuse Recycle - Align Clinical Waste 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.000 collections with NHS policy - Waste Management Efficiency Savings and Income Targets Programme SN21* Removal of Universal Superloos (0.101) (0.101) (0.101) 0.605 HN7 Asset & Property Disposal Programme 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.000 HN8 Library of Birmingham (& Rep Theatre) 0.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 HW2 Review future options for Wellbeing Centres and 0.000 1.500 0.900 0.900 Community Hubs SN26* Discontinue Non Framework Contract at Health 0.230 0.000 0.000 0.000 and Wellbeing Centres SN43* Community leisure centres 0.000 0.071 0.426 0.426 SN26 (16/17) Discontinue subsidies Non Framework Contract 0.000 0.316 0.316 0.316 at Health and Wellbeing Centres SN32 (16/17) Income Generation from Cofton Nursery 0.306 0.000 0.000 0.000 SN45 (16/17) Disposal of unwanted/under utilised parks land (8 0.200 0.000 0.000 0.000 acres per year) PL26 (16/17) Markets 0.300 0.300 0.300 0.300 Grand Total 1.632 3.138 2.913 3.639

Appendix 3

Economy savings not forecast to be achieved ongoing 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Ref Description Undeliverable Shortfall / Shortfall / Shortfall / £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m JS4b Combined Authority contribution reduction 0.000 0.250 0.250 0.250 Expansion of City Centre on-street parking, SN35 concessions and restrictions 0.000 0.116 0.000 0.000 CC26 Council administrative buildings reduction 0.000 1.983 2.400 2.400

MYR4 InReach - Extension of Market Renting Scheme 0.271 0.000 0.000 0.000 Extension of the INReach housing programme HN11 (up to 200 homes) 0.204 0.212 0.447 0.587 Options for extending Council's rented property SN40 office (INReach housing programme) 0.300 0.000 0.000 0.000 CC26* Mitigation TBC 0.000 (1.983) (2.400) (2.400) HN11 Mitigation TBC 0.000 (0.212) (0.447) (0.587) Grand Total 0.775 0.366 0.250 0.250

Finance & Governance savings not forecast to be achieved ongoing 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Ref Description Undeliverable Shortfall / Shortfall / Shortfall / £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m E25 (16/17) Support Services 0.700 0.700 0.700 0.700 CC22 (16/17) Pay suppliers faster in exchange for discounts 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.060

WOC2 (16/17)* Improving Efficiences 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 MITE25GRIR Mitigation of E25 (16/17) - GR/IR income (0.500) (0.500) (0.500) (0.500) collection MITE25DUP Mitigation of E25 (16/17) - Duplicate payments to (0.200) (0.200) (0.200) (0.200) suppliers recovery. CC22 (16/17) - Mitigation - Pay suppliers in exchange for (0.060) (0.060) (0.060) (0.060) Mitigation discounts WOC2 (16/17)* - (0.030) (0.030) (0.030) (0.030) mitigation Mitigation - Improving efficiencies Grand Total 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Cross cutting savings not forecast to be achieved ongoing 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Ref Description Undeliverable Shortfall / Shortfall / Shortfall / £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m WOC1* Workforce proposals requiring changes to terms 0.000 0.333 0.466 0.571 and conditions 14.610 32.688 36.347 36.169 Future Operating Model / Improving efficiencies - CC2 / WOC2 / Future year step-up's yet to be allocated / ISS E20/E24/E25* Savings - (excluding WOC implementation costs) Grand Total 14.610 33.021 36.813 36.740

Appendix 3

Strategic Services savings not forecast to be achieved ongoing 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Ref Description Undeliverable Shortfall / Shortfall / Shortfall / £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m (Surplus) £m Proposed mitigations in 2017/18 (2.550) (0.216) (0.216) (0.216)

WOC1* Workforce proposals requiring changes to terms 0.281 0.281 0.281 0.281 and conditions E22 Revenues 0.150 0.150 0.150 0.150 MIA22* Transfer out of hours calls from the Contact 0.138 0.138 0.138 0.138 Centre to housing repairs contractors and third party service providers E20b (16/17) Human Resources 0.156 0.000 0.000 0.000 E20d.9 (16/17) Corporate Strategy 0.006 0.039 0.039 0.000 WOC2 (16/17)* Improving efficiencies 1.415 1.348 1.348 1.348 WOC2 (16/17) Improving efficiencies 0.648 0.648 0.648 0.648 MIA22* Mitigation Proposed mitigations in 2017/18 (0.110) (0.138) (0.138) (0.138) E22 mitigation Proposed mitigations (0.150) (0.150) (0.150) (0.150) Subtotal (0.016) 2.100 2.100 2.061 Review of Single Person Discount to generate (2.100) (2.100) (2.100) income from Council Tax Collection Fund Grand Total (0.016) 0.000 0.000 (0.039)

Appendix 4 1. Write Offs

1.1 Sundry Debt Write-off

Cabinet is requested to approve the writing off of debts greater than £0.025m due to the Council, totalling £0.475m. Table 1 details the nature of the debt and the actions undertaken to seek its recovery.

Table 1: Sundry Debt Write-off Directorate/ Invoice Amount Nature of the Debt Service Area Date(s) or (£) Liability period Adult Social Care Oct 2010 – 75,925.03 Social care charges for residential care and Health / Client Jan 2014 supplied. Financial Services Adult Social Care July 2009 – 84,981.26 Social care charges for residential care and Health / Client Oct 2013 Financial Services Adult Social Care Aug 2006 – 54,954.54 Social care charges for residential care and Health / Client Apr 2013 Financial Services Adult Social Care Sept 2009 – 26,852.15 Social care charges for residential care and Health / Client Jan 2011 Financial Services Adult Social care April 2002 – 69,156.50 Social care charges for residential care and Health / Client Dec 2003 Financial Services Adult Social Care April 2013 – 54,870.63 Social care charges for home support and Health / Client Dec 2017 Financial Services Place Directorate / April 2015 – 82,165.20 Collections: waste compactor; general Trade Waste Mar 2016 waste and mixed multi material over 46 weeks Economy Mar 2015- 26,280.24 Commercial rent arrears /Birmingham Sep 2016 Property Services

1.2 Write-off of Irrecoverable Housing Benefit, Council Tax and Business Rates

a. Irrecoverable Housing Benefit

In circumstances where Housing Benefit overpayments are identified as not being recoverable, or where recovery is deemed uneconomic, the City Council’s Financial Regulations and delegated powers allow for these overpayments and income to be written off. All possible avenues must be exhausted before such write offs are considered. Amounts already written off will still be pursued should those owing the Council money eventually be located or return to the city.

The cost to the Council of writing off these irrecoverable sums will be charged to the City Council's provision set up for this purpose, which includes sums set aside in previous years to meet this need. There is no direct effect on the revenue account. 29

Appendix 4

In 2017/18, from 1st October 2017 to 30th November 2017, further items falling under this description in relation to Benefit overpayments have been written off under delegated authority. The table below details the total approved gross value of these amounts written off of £0.3m, which Members are asked to note.

Up To 2012/13 to 2015/16 to Age analysis Total 2011/12 2014/15 2017/18 £m £m £m £m Benefit 0.010 0.049 0.252 0.311 Overpayments

Total 0.010 0.049 0.252 0.311

Section (d) of this Appendix gives a more detailed age analysis of overpayments and income written off. b. Irrecoverable Council Tax & Business Rates

All Council Tax and Business Rates are due and payable. However, there are certain instances where the amount of the bill needs to be either written off or reduced (e.g. where people have absconded, have died, have become insolvent or it is uneconomical to recover the debt).

If an account case is subject to this, then consideration is given to write the debt off subject to the requirement to consider all options to recover the debt, prior to submitting for write off. However, once an account has been written off, if the debtor becomes known to the Revenues Service at a later date, then the previously written off amount will be reinstated and pursued.

In respect of Business Rates, where a liquidator is appointed, a significant period of time is taken to allow for the company’s affairs to be finalised and to subsequently determine if any monies are available to be paid to creditors. Once it is established this is not to happen, a final search of Companies House is undertaken to confirm the company has been dissolved.

Cabinet are requested to approve the writing off of business rates debts to the Council which are greater than £0.025m, totalling £2.0m as detailed in Section (c) of this Appendix. Further information in respect of these is available on request.

In 2017/18, from 1st October 2017 to 30th November 2017, further items falling under this description in relation to Council Tax have been written off under delegated authority. The table below details the total approved gross value of these amounts written off of £2.0m, which Members are asked to note.

Appendix 4 Age Up To 2012/13- 2015/16- Total analysis 2011/12 2014/15 2017/18 £m £m £m £m Council 1.994 - - 1.994 Tax TOTAL 1.994 - - 1.994

Section (e) of this Appendix gives a more detailed age analysis of overpayments and income written off.

Appendix 4 c. Write Offs

Business Rates

Supporting Information Case Business Rates Total Debt No. Further information in respect of the Business Rates Write Offs listed below is available on request. Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 1 Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 29/12/04 to 08/04/06 – 6003727799 - £35,972.24 £43,327.54 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 06/01/08 to 30/09/08 – 6004318896 - £7,355.30 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 2 £26,700.39 Business Rates due for the period 04/01/08 to 30/03/11 - 6004665018 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 01/01/06 to 31/12/10 – 6005755786 - £3,534.08 3 £67,635.41 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 13/07/07 to 31/08/10 – 6005309540 - £64,101.33

Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 4 £37,849.29 Business Rates due for the period 19/03/08 to 04/03/12 - 6005320734 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 5 Business Rates due for the period 17/03/08 to 24/10/14 – 6005331322 £40,812.47

Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 6 £30,708.72 Business Rates due for the period 28/06/07 to 21/11/12 - 6005398678 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 7 £25,616.34 Business Rates due for the period 02/08/08 to 23/08/11 - 6004882051 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 8 Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/07 to 31/03/09 – 6004329315 - £110,620.00 £139,619.00 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/07 to 31/12/08 – 6004332921 - £28,999.00 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 9 £43,966.06 Business Rates due for the period 01/04/07 to 02/08/10 - 6004366243 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 10 £40,471.11 Business Rates due for the period 21/12/07 to 21/08/08 - 6004384585 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 11 £27,588.64 Business Rates due for the period 25/12/07 to 28/09/09 - 6004407634 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 12 £32,769.75 Business Rates due for the period 14/01/2008 to 31/08/09 - 6004535077 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 13 Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 01/08/07 to 24/03/11 – 6004367973 - £33,136.76 £92,708.68 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/07 to 31/12/08 – 6004686484 - £59,571.92 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 23/07/07 to 30/11/12 – 6004372472 - £4,216.44 14 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/08 to 30/11/12 – 6003453658 - £18,865.89 £38,339.43 Property 3 - Business Rates due for the period 11/08/10 to 04/04/13 – 6004676639 - £6,071.72 Property 4 - Business Rates due for the period 01/03/11 to 30/09/13 – 6004733297 - £9,185.38

Appendix 4 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 15 £64,775.62 Business Rates due for the period 01/03/2008 to 05/12/13 - 6004355337 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 16 £51,333.19 Business Rates due for the period 11/11/04 to 19/09/05 - 6003655041 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 17 £49,808.21 Business Rates due for the period 01/04/05 to 07/01/09 - 6004334325 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 18 £67,530.93 Business Rates due for the period 01/04/05 to 04/04/10 - 6004503886 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 19 £37,988.12 Business Rates due for the period 10/01/06 to 08/01/09 - 6004552123 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 20 £47,097.22 Business Rates due for the period 02/12/05 to 31/03/10 - 6004737028 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 21 £27,421.73 Business Rates due for the period 01/04/06 to 18/10/06 - 6003567251 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 22 £33,675.48 Business Rates due for the period 16/11/06 to 31/03/18 - 6004144396 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 23 £32,535.59 Business Rates due for the period 29/09/06 to 24/06/08 - 6004163891 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 01/03/06 to 30/10/08 – 6004197613 - £24,708.72 24 £56,027.41 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/08 to 09/04/08 – 6004598081 - £213.60 Property 3 - Business Rates due for the period 23/07/08 to 30/06/09 – 6004427983 - £31,105.09 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 25 £33,788.05 Business Rates due for the period 12/11/05 to 11/01/11 - 6004740178 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/05 to 27/06/12 – 6004651114 - £41,758.09 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/12 to 27/06/12 – 6004502690 - £229.06 Property 3 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/12 to 27/06/12 – 6003353982 - £51.69 Liability incurred after 28/06/12: 26 £83,655.83 Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 28/06/12 to 05/09/13 – 6004887614 - £21,476.56 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 28/06/12 to 05/09/13 – 6004887647 - £6,705.95 Property 3 - Business Rates due for the period 28/06/12 to 16/08/12 – 6005018580 - £7,504.83 Property 4 - Business Rates due for the period 01/02/13 to 05/09/13 – 6005094659 - £463.64 Property 5 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/13 to 05/09/13 – 6005010780 - £5,466.01 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 27 £29,642.96 Business Rates due for the period 18/07/06 to 03/03/09 - 6004134585 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 28 £32,727.41 Business Rates due for the period 01/03/07 to 05/02/09 - 6004233372 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 29 Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/07 to 16/03/10 – 6004242340 - £52,190.55 £63,342.71 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 01/03/07 to 03/11/08 – 6004242339 - £11,152.16 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 30 Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 09/03/07 to 08/01/09 – 6004406891 - £30,691.24 £31,128.68 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 16/08/08 to 08/01/09 – 6004380630 - £437.44

Appendix 4 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 31 £35,930.02 Business Rates due for the period 05/03/07 to 31/01/09 - 6004439778 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 32 £25,514.69 Business Rates due for the period 10/01/07 to 09/01/09 - 6004683430 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 33 £34,006.92 Business Rates due for the period 16/06/06 to 12/06/14 - 6004709555 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 34 Property 1 - Business Rates due for the period 01/11/07 to 15/05/14 – 6004584267 - £106,426.81 £106,872.80 Property 2 - Business Rates due for the period 01/04/13 to 20/06/13 – 6004477654 - £445.99 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 35 £131,305.15 Business Rates due for the period 20/08/07 to 21/09/11 - 6005274015 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 36 £122,187.41 Business Rates due for the period 18/02/08 to 31/07/10 - 6005532778 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 37 £37,662.01 Business Rates due for the period 01/04/08 to 19/10/09 - 6004508643 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 38 £29,625.31 Business Rates due for the period 01/10/08 to 31/08/09 - 6004523624 Liability Period(s)/Account Ref Number(s) 39 £35,978.56 Business Rates due for the period 18/06/08 to 04/07/09 - 6004342696 TOTAL £1,989,674.84

Appendix 4 d. Age analysis of Overpayments and Debts written off under delegated authority by Revenues and Benefits Division

No of Detail 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 20010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Total Debtors

Housing Benefit debts written off £0 £5 £2,002 £0 £359 £7,570 £15,414 £6,578 £27,343 £41,161 £80,367 £129,937 £310,736 699 under delegated authority

Debt Size Small Medium Large Total Cases >£1,000 Cases £1,001- £5,000 Cases £5,000- £25,000 Cases 627 £133,925 66 £131,564 6 £45,247 699 £310,736

Appendix 4

e. Age analysis of overpayments and debts written off under delegated authority by Revenues and Benefits Division

Detail 1997-2006/7 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 Total

Council tax written off - - - - £1,031,877 £961,978 - - - - - £1,993,855 under delegated authority

TOTAL - - - - £1,031,877 £961,978 - - - - - £1,993,855

Debt size analysis of overpayments and debts written off under delegated authority by Revenues and Benefits Division

Small (<£1,000) Medium (£1,000 - £5,000) Large (>£5,000) TOTAL Grouped by value Value Cases Value Cases Value Cases Value Cases

Council Tax written off under delegated authority £1,678,612 18,256 £315,243 1,703 - - £1,993,855 19,959

TOTAL £1,678,612 18,256 £315,243 1,703 - - £1,993,855 19,959

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET Exempt information paragraph number – if private report: Report of: Corporate Director Finance & Governance Date of Decision: 24th January 2018 SUBJECT: COUNCIL TAX BASE FOR 2018/2019

Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 004401/2018 If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved Relevant Cabinet Member(s) or Cllr Ward, Leader Relevant Executive Member: Relevant O&S Chair: Cllr Mohammed Aikhlaq, Corporate Resources and Governance Overview & Scrutiny Committee Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report:

1.1. This report seeks approval to the Council Tax base for 2018/2019 for the City Council, New Frankley in Birmingham Parish Council and Sutton Coldfield Town Council. This forms an important part of the calculation of next financial year’s income from Council Tax.

1.2 The report sets out the basis of the calculation and the assumptions which have been included.

2. Decision(s) recommended:

2.1. To approve a Council Tax base for Birmingham of 248,838 Band D equivalent properties, for 2018/2019, as calculated in Appendix 2, in accordance with The Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012.

2.2. To approve a Council Tax base for the New Frankley in Birmingham Parish Council of 1,339 Band D equivalent properties for 2018/2019, as calculated in Appendix 3.

2.3. To approve a Council Tax base for the Sutton Coldfield Town Council of 37,047 Band D equivalent properties for 2018/2019, as calculated in Appendix 4.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Ian Harris, Senior Business Analyst Telephone No: 0121 464 9367 E-mail address: [email protected]

3. Consultation Consultation should include those that have an interest in the decisions recommended

3.1 Internal

3.1.1 Officers in the Strategic Services Directorate have been consulted in determining the Council Tax Base. The Service Director – Customer Services and the Leader of the Council have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

3.2 External

3.2.1 No public consultation is required on the Council Tax base. It is a statement of fact supplemented by the City Council’s forecast of likely changes to the tax base in 2018/19.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 The completion of the Council Tax base does not have any direct implications for the City Council’s Corporate Policy Priorities.

4.2 Financial Implications (How will decisions be carried out within existing finances and Resources?)

4.2.1 The Council Tax base in conjunction with the Council Tax level (to be approved at the Council meeting on the 27th February 2018) will determine the total income from Council Tax in 2018/19 to be included in the approved budget for next year.

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 The Council is required to set the tax base under the Local Government Finance Act 1992. The tax base is a factor in the determination of the planned level of Council Tax income which can be collected next year. The Local Government Act 2003 removed the requirement for this to be a matter reserved for approval by Full Council. The report does not have any other direct implications.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 There are no specific Equality Duty or Equality Analysis issues relating to the proposals set out in this report.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 The Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012, requires local authorities to determine their tax base for Council Tax setting purposes before 31 January each year. This enables billing authorities, like Birmingham, to calculate the number of properties where Council Tax is payable and to inform other precept bodies (in our case the West Midlands Police & Crime Commissioner, the Fire and Rescue Authority, New Frankley in Birmingham Parish and Sutton Coldfield Town Councils) and other levying bodies, by 31 January, of this figure for precept/levying purposes.

5.2 The City Council is required to determine the tax base for tax setting purposes for 2018/19. The calculation in this report is based upon the valuation list as at 30th November 2017 and also takes into account forecasts of discounts, exemptions and other changes likely to affect the number of properties on which full Council Tax will be payable and is inclusive of those changes which are predicted to happen by the end of 2018/19 e.g. successful appeals against valuation bands. Details of these factors are included within Appendix 1.

5.3 There has been a net increase of 2,742 (0.6%) in the total number of domestic properties in the past year to 30th November 2017, compared with an increase of 2,744 (0.6%) during the previous 12 month period. The table in Appendix 1 shows the number of properties by band in Birmingham as at 30th November 2017 and highlights the changes since November 2016. The valuation list shows that 82.8% of all domestic properties in Birmingham have been allocated to “below average value” categories (i.e. Bands A-C), a marginal reduction from last year (82.9%), indicating that there has been no real overall change in the average banding of properties.

5.4 The final part of the calculation is the application of the anticipated tax collection rate. A budgeted eventual composite collection rate of 97.1% was approved for 2017/18. This consisted of an assumed collection rate of 98% for the majority of taxpayers but lower rates for those in receipt of Council Tax Support (CTS) discounts, (in accordance with previous decisions). It is recommended that the overall eventual composite rate of collection should remain unchanged at 97.1% in 2018/19. On this basis, the tax base for setting Council Tax for 2018/19 will be 248,838 Band D equivalent properties. However, whilst being prudent in its planning assumptions, the Council will seek to maximise the rate of collection. In the event that collection performance exceeds the assumed rate, the resultant surplus will become available to be taken into account in setting future years’ budgets.

5.5 The 2018/19 Council Tax base is an increase of 4,883 (2.0%) Band D equivalent properties from 2017/18. The main reasons for this are an increase of 2,504 (1.0%), before allowances for non-collection, new Band D equivalent properties forecast for the period up to 31st March 2019, plus a further 1.0% primarily due to a combination of a reduction in the level of CTS discounts anticipated to be awarded based on historical trends, a reduction in Single Person Discounts as a result of targeted reviews of claimants during the year and further reviews to be carried out over the next 6 months. The anticipated reduction in the CTS scheme reflects the analysis included within the Review of Birmingham’s Council Tax Support Scheme 2017/18 report, presented to Council on Tuesday 9th January 2018 which recommended that, overall, the scheme remains unchanged for 2018/19.

The table below provides a breakdown of the total number of discounts including CTS included within line vi of Appendix 2.

Line vi Appendix 2 - Total no. of discounts (including Council Tax Support)

Discount Total Band D Equiv. Council Tax Support (89,812) (66,361) Support for Care Leavers (90) (66) Single Person Discounts (35,921) (27,992) Discount Disregards (258) (290) Empty Homes Premium 1,036 793 Total (125,045) (93,916)

5.6 Cabinet is asked to approve the tax base for Birmingham of 248,838 Band D equivalent properties. Once formally determined, this tax base cannot subsequently be altered, and will be used when the City Council sets the Council Tax for 2018/19.

5.7 Cabinet is asked to approve the tax base for the New Frankley in Birmingham Parish Council which, after applying the collection rate described above, produces a taxbase figure of 1,339 Band D equivalent properties. This is an increase of 14 on the Band D equivalent properties for 2017/18.

5.8 Cabinet is asked to approve the tax base for the Sutton Coldfield Town Council which, after applying the collection rate described above, produces a tax base figure of 37,047 Band D equivalent properties. This is an increase of 358 on the Band D equivalent properties for 2017/18.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 Not Applicable

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 The Council Tax base for 2018/19 must, by law, be set and communicated to preceptors and levying bodies by no later than the end of January, each year.

Signatures Date

Cabinet Member

. ...

Chief Officer .. ...

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

CTB Form (Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG)

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

1. Further details of the Council Tax base calculation 2. Calculation of Council Tax base for Birmingham 3. Calculation of Council Tax base for New Frankley in Birmingham Parish Council 4. Calculation of Council Tax base for Sutton Coldfield Town Council

Report Version 1.0 Dated

Equality Act 2010

The Executive must have due regard to the public sector equality duty when considering Council reports for decision.

The public sector equality duty is as follows:

1 The Council must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to:

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by the Equality Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(a) remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

(b) take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

(c) encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

(a) tackle prejudice, and

(b) promote understanding.

Appendix 1 Further details of the Council Tax base Calculation

The calculation of the tax base for 2018/19 commences with the total number of properties on HM Revenue & Customs valuation list at 30th November 2017, as follows:

Band 2018/19 2017/18 Annual Movement No. Properties Proportion Cumulative No. Band D No. Properties No. Band D No. Band D 2018/19 in Band % Proportion % Equivalent 2017/18 Equivalent No. Properties Equivalent A 157,972 35.9% 35.9% 105,314 157,293 104,863 679 451 B 128,643 29.2% 65.1% 100,056 128,119 99,648 524 408 C 77,653 17.7% 82.8% 69,025 76,929 68,381 724 644 D 39,324 8.9% 91.7% 39,324 38,797 38,797 527 527 E 20,889 4.8% 96.5% 25,531 20,712 25,315 177 216 F 8,797 2.0% 98.5% 12,707 8,713 12,585 84 122 G 5,791 1.3% 99.8% 9,652 5,769 9,615 22 37 H 876 0.2% 100.0% 1,752 871 1,742 5 10 Total 439,945 100.0% 363,361 437,203 360,946 2,742 2,415

The following additional factors have been then taken into account and have to be calculated for each of the property bands (A to H):

• An estimate of the number of properties which will be exempt from Council Tax; • An estimate of the number of properties that will be reallocated to a lower tax band under the “disabled relief” scheme; • An estimate of the number of appeals against valuation that are likely to succeed; • An estimate of the number of new properties which will become liable for tax before 1 April 2019, together with any properties which will cease to be liable - and the proportion of the year for which that liability is likely to exist; • An estimate of the number of properties for which discounts will apply, and the number of discounts for each property. This includes the Council Tax Support Scheme which includes a discount of up to 80%. The number of Council Tax Support recipients has been assumed to fall by 1,060 Band D equivalents compared with the budgeted figure for 2017/18. This takes account of an assessment of the expected number and level of Council Tax Support discounts, drawing on experience of discounts awarded in 2017/18 and previous years. • An estimate of the number of properties which will be classed as long term empty and therefore will attract a premium of 50%.

The calculations for the assumptions above for each tax band are set out in Appendix 2 to this report. The equivalent information for New Frankley in Birmingham Parish Council is shown in Appendix 3 and for Sutton Coldfield Town Council Appendix 4. These also show how the number of taxable properties in each band has to be adjusted to produce a value expressed as an equivalent number of “Band D” properties, as required by legislation. Appendix 2

Council Tax Base - Birmingham 2018/19 Band D Total Equivalent Property Band Band AR Band A Band B Band C Band D Band E Band F Band G Band H Properties Properties

i) Dwellings on valuation list 0 157,972 128,643 77,653 39,324 20,889 8,797 5,791 876 439,945 363,361

ii) Estimated Exemptions 0 (5,213) (4,713) (2,605) (2,605) (1,114) (160) (85) (32) (16,527) (13,860)

iii) Net adjustment in respect of 255 311 (87) (171) (105) (110) (10) (34) (49) 0 (279) estimated disabled relief

iv) Net adjustment in respect of 0 (605) (618) (349) (176) (86) (24) (15) (3) (1,876) (1,541) estimated successful appeals and other adjustments

v) Net adjustment in respect of 0 1,093 889 534 269 143 60 40 6 3,034 2,504 estimated new properties

No. of chargeable dwellings 255 153,558 124,114 75,062 36,707 19,722 8,663 5,697 798 424,576 350,185

vi) Total no. of discounts (including Council Tax Support) (94) (67,161) (35,524) (14,779) (4,946) (1,691) (528) (289) (33) (125,045) (93,916)

Equivalent no. of chargeable 161 86,397 88,590 60,283 31,761 18,031 8,135 5,408 765 299,531 256,269 dwellings net of discounts

Statutory proportion 5/9 6/9 7/9 8/9 1 11/9 13/9 15/9 18/9

Equivalent Band D properties 90 57,598 68,903 53,585 31,761 22,038 11,751 9,013 1,530 TOTAL = 256,269 (the "Relevant Amounts")

ALLOWANCE FOR NON- COLLECTION (2.9%) (3) (1,670) (1,998) (1,554) (921) (639) (341) (261) (44) TOTAL = (7,431)

TOTAL 87 55,928 66,905 52,031 30,840 21,399 11,410 8,752 1,486 TOTAL = 248,838

Appendix 3

Council Tax Base - New Frankley in Birmingham Parish Council 2018/19 Band D Total Equivalent Property Band Band AR Band A Band B Band C Band D Band E Band F Band G Band H Properties Properties

i) Dwellings on valuation list 0 1,557 1,591 104 58 1 0 0 1 3,312 2,429

ii) Estimated Exemptions 0 (18) (9) 0 0 0 0 0 0 (27) (19)

iii) Net adjustment in respect of 3 3 (5) (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1) estimated disabled relief

iv) No. of chargeable dwellings 3 1,542 1,577 103 58 1 0 0 1 3,285 2,409

v) Total no. of discounts (including Council Tax Support) (2) (852) (564) (18) (6) 0 0 0 0 (1,442) (1,030)

Equivalent no. of chargeable 1 690 1,013 85 52 1 0 0 1 1,843 1,379 dwellings net of discounts

Statutory proportion 5/9 6/9 7/9 8/9 1 11/9 13/9 15/9 18/9

Equivalent Band D properties 1 460 787 76 52 1 0 0 2 TOTAL = 1,379 (the "Relevant Amounts")

ALLOWANCE FOR NON- COLLECTION 2.9% 0 (13) (23) (2) (2) 0 0 0 0 TOTAL = (40)

TOTAL 1 447 764 74 50 1 0 0 2 TOTAL = 1,339

Appendix 4

Council Tax Base - Sutton Coldfield Town Council 2018/19 Band D Total Equivalent Property Band Band AR Band A Band B Band C Band D Band E Band F Band G Band H Properties Properties

i) Dwellings on valuation list 0 3,309 5,523 7,535 9,466 8,583 4,138 2,588 372 41,514 44,190

ii) Estimated Exemptions 0 (68) (63) (91) (100) (52) (32) (17) 0 (423) (413)

iii) Net adjustment in respect of 3 15 19 16 39 (49) (15) (17) (11) 0 (52) estimated disabled relief

iv) No. of chargeable dwellings 3 3,256 5,479 7,460 9,405 8,482 4,091 2,554 361 41,091 43,725

v) Total no. of discounts (including Council Tax Support) (2) (1,557) (1,488) (1,241) (1,011) (609) (221) (107) (10) (6,246) (5,572)

Equivalent no. of chargeable 1 1,699 3,991 6,219 8,394 7,873 3,870 2,447 351 34,845 38,153 dwellings net of discounts

Statutory proportion 5/9 6/9 7/9 8/9 1 11/9 13/9 15/9 18/9

Equivalent Band D properties 1 1,133 3,104 5,528 8,394 9,623 5,590 4,078 702 TOTAL = 38,153 (the "Relevant Amounts")

ALLOWANCE FOR NON- COLLECTION 2.9% (0) (33) (90) (160) (244) (279) (162) (118) (20) TOTAL = (1,106)

TOTAL 1 1,100 3,014 5,368 8,150 9,344 5,428 3,960 682 TOTAL = 37,047

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET Exempt information paragraph number – if private report: Report of: Corporate Director Finance & Governance Date of Decision: 24th January 2018 SUBJECT: BUSINESS RATES INCOME 2018/2019

Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 004400/2018 If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved Relevant Cabinet Member(s) or Cllr Ward, Leader Relevant Executive Member: Relevant O&S Chair: Cllr Mohammed Aikhlaq, Corporate Resources and Governance Overview & Scrutiny Committee Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report:

1.1. This report seeks approval to the City Council’s Business Rates income projection for 2017/18 for submission to the Government. This forms the calculation of next financial year’s income from Business Rates.

1.2 The report sets out the basis of the calculation and the assumptions which have been included.

2. Decision(s) recommended:

2.1. To approve the 2018/19 Business Rates income for Birmingham as shown in Appendix 1.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Ian Harris, Senior Business Analyst Telephone No: 0121 464 9367 E-mail address: [email protected]

3. Consultation Consultation should include those that have an interest in the decisions recommended

3.1 Internal

Officers in the Strategic Services Directorate have been consulted in determining a forecast for Business Rates in 2018/19. The Service Director – Customer Services and the Leader of the Council have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

3.2 External

No consultation is required on the Business Rates income projection. It is a statement of fact supplemented by the City Council’s estimate of likely growth and other changes in Business Rates in 2018/19.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 The completion of the Business Rates income projection does not have any direct implications for the City Council’s Corporate Policy Priorities.

4.2 Financial Implications (How will decisions be carried out within existing finances and Resources?)

4.2.1 This Business Rates income projection will determine the income retained from Business Rates in respect of 2018/19, and will feed into budget calculations for next year. The City Council calculates the level of Business Rates in the City based on the latest information available from the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) and also projects forward the level of additional Business Rates that will be collected up to 31 March 2019. Under the Business Rates Pilot, which will now be in its second year, the City Council will be able to plan for the retention of 99% of this income (£418.064m) in 2018/19 when setting its budget.

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 As a result of the introduction of the Business Rates Retention Scheme through the Local Government Finance Act 2012, each billing authority is required to give formal approval to the Business Rates income projection due to its strong links with the budget setting process. The calculation and approval of the Council Tax Base will similarly be considered by Cabinet elsewhere on this agenda.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 There are no specific Equality Duty or Equality Analysis issues relating to the proposals set out in this report.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 The Valuation Office Agency (VOA) provided the City Council with an updated version of the valuation list as at 29th November 2017. This has been used in calculating the Business Rates income projection. The Government continues to set the Business Rates multiplier which determines the level of Business Rates that each business pays. The City Council has forecast the levels of growth, appeals and non-collection that are expected to occur in 2018/19. This forecast is based on developments that are ongoing and planning approvals that are in place and expected to be completed in 2018/19.

5.2 In any year a proportion of the billed Business Rates cannot be collected, for example due to businesses going into liquidation. The City Council has made an assumption of 2% for non- collection in line with local historical experience. Should this collection rate be improved, the resulting surplus will become available to assist in budget setting in future financial years.

5.3 Each year appeals are made against the rateable value of properties as determined by the Valuation Office Agency. Appeals that are upheld are backdated to the beginning of the ratings list period, or when the change in circumstances came into existence if later than this date. It is prudent for the City Council to make an assumption about the level of successful appeals that will be made each year and set aside adequate provision for repaying appeals. The level of appeals received so far has been very low. Whilst the Council does not expect the total cost of appeals to reduce, this does mean it has been able to re-profile when these fall due.

5.4 In its Spring Budget the Government announced a package of measures designed to cushion the impact of revaluation that came into effect on 1st April 2017. These measures, which were implemented during 2017/18, provide additional relief to small businesses that would have suffered significant increases in Business Rates as a result of revaluation plus support for public houses and will continue in 2018/19. In its recent spending review in the Autumn the Government brought forward the use of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), replacing the Retail Price Index (RPI) in calculating the level of inflation to be applied to the multipliers on which Business Rates Income is based. CPI will now be used from April 2018, two years earlier than originally anticipated. These changes impact both on the level of retained Business Rates generated along with the general unringfenced grants paid to compensate local authorities for loss of income.

5.5 After allowing for these changes, the City Council’s total projected retained income for 2018/19 from Business Rates is expected to be £418.064m. This is an increase of £18.762m when compared with 2017/18. In addition, the City Council expects to receive compensatory grants of £35.669m which is an increase of £7.162m compared to 2017/18. Taking this into account, overall income from Business Rates related funding is expected to be £453.733m as summarised in the table below. This is an increase of £25.924m or 6.3% when compared with 2017/18 and is a combination of an increase in the Business Rates multiplier of 3.0% and associated compensation of 0.9% for the use of CPI instead of RPI, plus real terms net growth of 2.4% made up of forecast net new developments (1.3%) and changes in anticipated reliefs, mainly for empty properties (1.1%).

5.6 The value of Business Rates growth over and above a pre- determined baseline expected to be collected from the Enterprise Zone is required to be calculated separately from the City Council’s element of total income as this resource is ring fenced in its entirety to the Enterprise Zone.

Outside the Enterprise Enterprise Retained Income Zone Zone Total Resources before Funded Reliefs 418,063,804 2,683,933

Enterprise Zone Relief retained in full (included in discretionary relief) 0 722,308 Section 31 Grants: Small Business Relief 24,877,283 513,558 Supporting Small Business Relief 526,473 2,640 Local Discretionary Relief 1,365,354 0 Public House Relief 190,141 5,215 Inflation (Multiplier Cap) 8,709,663 55,915 Total 35,668,914 577,328

Total Resources Including Funded Reliefs 453,732,718 3,983,569

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 There are no alternative options to the calculation of the Business Rates Income Projection.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 The Business Rates income projection is a key component in calculating the resources available to the City Council when setting its budget. It will also inform the key Business Rates Return (NNDR1) to Central Government which must, by law, be approved and communicated to Central Government and West Midlands Fire Authority no later than 31st January, each year.

Signatures Date

Cabinet Member

. ...

Chief Officer .. ...

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

1. Business Rates Income 2018/19

Report Version 1.2 Dated 8th January 2018

Equality Act 2010

The Executive must have due regard to the public sector equality duty when considering Council reports for decision.

The public sector equality duty is as follows:

1 The Council must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to:

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by the Equality Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(a) remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

(b) take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

(c) encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

(a) tackle prejudice, and

(b) promote understanding.

5 The relevant protected characteristics are: (a) marriage & civil partnership (b) Age (c) Disability (d) gender reassignment (e) pregnancy and maternity (f) Race (g) religion or belief (h) Sex (i) sexual orientation

Appendix 1

Calculation of Business Rates Income 2018/19

Outside the Enterprise Enterprise Zone Zone Number of hereditaments on the rating list 29th November 2017 45,261 2,382 £ £ Aggregate rateable value on the rating list 29th November 2017 1,084,670,276 29,236,535 Small Business Non-Domestic Rating Multiplier 0.480 0.480 Gross Calculated Rate Yield 520,641,732 14,033,537 Less: Mandatory Reliefs (82,980,965) (3,468,314) Less: Discretionary Reliefs (2,960,080) (739,485) Plus: Forecast for Growth 5,768,240 4,649,732 Gross Rate Yield after Reliefs and Growth 440,468,927 14,475,470 Less : Estimate of Losses in Collection for Current Year at 2% (9,031,235) (67,653) Less : Allowance for Cost of Collection (1,879,843) 0 Enterprise Zone Baseline 11,092,822 (11,092,822) Less: Estimate of Rates to be Retained due to Renewable Energy Schemes 0 0 Net Rate Yield 440,650,671 3,314,995 Less: Allowance for Appeals and Prior Years Adjustments (18,364,000) (631,062) Net Rate Yield after Allowance for Appeals to be distributed 422,286,671 2,683,933 0% of Business Rates to be paid over to Central Government 0 99% of Business Rates to be retained by Birmingham 418,063,804 1% of Business Rates to be retained by West Midlands Fire and Rescue Authority 4,222,867 100% of Business Rates to be retained by GB&S Local Enterprise Partnership 2,683,933 Total Business Rates Redistributed through Rates Retention Scheme 422,286,671 2,683,933

Birmingham City Council

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET

Report of: INTERIM CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND CORPORATE DIRECTOR, CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE

Date of Decision: 24 January 2018

SUBJECT: BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN’S TRUST

Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: N/A

If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved

Relevant Cabinet Member: Cllr Carl Rice – Children, Families and Schools

Relevant O&S Chair: Cllr Susan Barnett – Schools, Children and Families

Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report: 1.1 To brief Cabinet on the progress in implementing the Birmingham Children’s Trust.

2. Decision(s) recommended: That Cabinet:

2.1 Notes the progress on establishment of the Birmingham Children’s Trust and the decisions made to date based on the delegations provided in the July 2017 Cabinet Report (Appendix 1).

2.2 Notes that there will be a formal Joint Cabinet Member/Chief Officer decision report in early March 2018 agreeing the Service Delivery Contract and establishing the Trust, subject to satisfactory progress on Trust matters.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Colin Diamond Corporate Director, Children & Young People

Telephone No: 0121 464 2808

E-mail address: [email protected]

Birmingham City Council

3. Consultation:

Consultation should include those that have an interest in the decisions recommended

3.1 Internal

As this is an information report the detail contained in reports to Cabinet in 2016 and 2017 is not repeated here.

3.2 External

As this is an information report the detail contained in reports to Cabinet in 2016 and 2017 is not repeated here.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 Establishment of the Trust is consistent with the Council’s priorities of protecting children and ensuring Birmingham is a safe city for them to learn and grow in, as set out in the Council Business Plan and Budget 2017/18. Appraisal of options and development of the Trust has had regard for the design principles agreed by the City Council in June 2016 and Cabinet in July 2016.

4.2 Financial Implications

4.2.1 As this is an information report the detail contained in reports to Cabinet in 2016 and 2017 is not repeated here. However, the Trust budget will be in the order of £190m: c£164m for core services, c£16m for professional support, commissioning etc and c£10m for services purchased from the Council. The final detail will be agreed between the Council and the Trust and set out in the financial mechanism. Around 1790 staff will TUPE into the Trust.

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 As this is an information report the detail contained in reports to Cabinet in 2016 and 2017 is not repeated here.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 The Full Assessment included children and young people as service users and staff and considered age, disability, gender and race as protected characteristics. The principal potential impact of the Trust identified to date has been that upon staff. The Council has sought and continues to seek to minimise any impact upon staff through its TUPE negotiations and contract with the Trust.

Birmingham City Council

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 Cabinet approved in January 2017 the creation of the Birmingham Children’s Trust to provide children’s social care and related support services (via a commissioned relationship with the Council) under a Service Delivery Contract.

5.2 The Trust was to be established as a wholly owned company model and as a community interest company (CiC) and was to be established for a shadow period (from April 2017 to March 2018) to test the governance arrangements between the Council and the Trust prior to full transition (go-live) at April 2018.

5.3 Cabinet reports on the Trust in 2016 and 2017 agreed:

• the scope of the proposed services. • work to commence on formal consultation with the recognised unions and affected staff. • the production of an agreed Service Delivery Contract between the Council and the Trust. • the indicative 2018/19 Trust budget, prior to Council budget and planning decisions 2018/19. • the TUPE approach for the transfer of staff from the Council to the Trust at April 2018. • delegation to the Council’s Chief Executive and the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools, in liaison with the Trust Chair, authority for full transition (go- live) at April 2018. • delegation to the Council’s Chief Executive and the Director for Children’s Services (DCS) jointly with the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools agreement of the Service Delivery Contract between the Council and the Birmingham Children’s Trust and all implementation steps to ensure the transition of services from the Council to the Trust by April 2018, including the final TUPE arrangements. • delegation to the City Solicitor the novation of all necessary Council contracts to the Birmingham Children’s Trust. • authorisation for the City Solicitor to enter into and to affix the Council’s Seal to all contracts and agreements that may be necessary to give effect to recommendations of the July 2017 Cabinet Report (as outlined above).

5.4 The Trust has been incorporated based on a wholly owned company model, to be converted to a community interest company by April 2018. The Chair is its sole director and the Council its sole member.

5.5 The Trust now has in place its Board, including the Chair, six Non-Executive Directors one of whom is appointed by the Council, and the Chief Executive. It has been line managing all in scope staff (in shadow mode) since August 2017 noting that all staff are still Council employees until April 2018 when they will be transferred over to the Trust.

Birmingham City Council

5.6 In terms of communication and engagement:

• there has been regular engagement with unions. • since the TUPE letters were issued to affected staff in August 2017 consultation has been ongoing. • there have been joint engagement events for all staff in the main offices. The sessions have been jointly run by the Council and the Trust and, based on feedback, have been well received. These will continue during the shadow period.

5.7 A draft Service Delivery Contract was approved by the Children’s Trust Steering Group on 19 December 2017 as a fit for purpose vehicle for testing the commissioning arrangement between the Council and the Trust during the final three months of the shadow period. The Deputy Leader, Chief Executive and Director of Children’s Services are members of the Steering Group.

5.8 The Children’s Commissioner has also indicated satisfaction with the position reached by all parties.

5.9 The Council’s Chief Executive and the Deputy Leader, in liaison with the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools and the Trust Chair, continue to drive the transition programme and implementation steps.

5.10 The Council and Trust are ready to enter the shadow testing period and complete all the implementation steps to be ready for 1 April 2018.

5.11 The Council is working to establish an Intelligent Client Function to oversee and manage the commissioning arrangement with effect from 1 April 2018. Elements of this will be tested during the final three months of the shadow period to ensure readiness for April.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 The range of options for voluntary development of a Trust model were evaluated throughout 2016. Cabinet agreed, in January 2017, creation of the Trust based on the wholly owned company option and as a community interest company.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 To provide information and assurance to Cabinet on the positive progress made towards the full implementation of the Trust.

Birmingham City Council

Signatures Date

Cabinet Member, Children, Families and Schools: Cllr Carl Rice

Interim Chief Executive: Stella Manzie .

Corporate Director, Children & Young People: Colin Diamond 10 January 2017 .

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

1. Report of the Improvement Quartet to City Council 14 June 2016. 2. Cabinet Reports 26 July 2016, 20 September 2016, 24 January 2017 and 25 July 2017 – Voluntary Children’s Trust.

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

1. Cabinet Report 25 July 2017, Birmingham Children’s Trust (covering report only)

Report Version: Final Dated 9 January 2018

Appendix 1

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC REPORT Report to: CABINET Report of: INTERIM CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND INTERIM CORPORATE DIRECTOR , CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE Date of Decision: 25 July 2017 SUBJECT: BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN’S TRUST Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 003514/2017 If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "tick" box) O&S Chairman approved Relevant Cabinet Member: Cllr Brigid Jones – Children, Families and Schools Relevant O&S Chairman: Cllr Susan Barnett – Schools, Children and Families Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report: 1.1 This report seeks Cabinet approval for: • the proposed children’s social care and related support services required by the Birmingham Children’s Trust as the basis for formal consultation and for negotiation between the Council and the Trust to agree the Service Delivery Contract. • the indicative 2018/19 Trust budget. • the approach to the transfer of staff from the Council to the Trust at April 2018. 1.2 This follows Cabinet approval in January 2017 to create the Trust as a wholly owned company model and as a community interest company (CIC) and put in place a shadow period (from April 2017 to March 2018) to test the governance arrangements between the Council and the Trust prior to full transition (go-live) at April 2018. 2 Decision(s) recommended: That Cabinet: 2.1 Agrees the proposed services required by the Trust as the basis for commencement of formal consultation with staff affected and recognised trade unions and for negotiation between the Council and the Trust to agree the Service Delivery Contract (Appendix 1 – Birmingham Children’s Trust: Proposed Trust Services). 2.2 Notes the indicative budget for the Trust at 4.2. This will inform Council budget planning and decisions for 2018/19. 2.3 Agrees TUPE as the preferred option for transfer of staff (Appendix 2 – Birmingham Children’s Trust: Transfer Approach Options Appraisal) and that the staff so affected transfer to the Trust at April 2018 following formal consultation. 2.4 Agrees the Memorandum of Understanding (Appendix 3) between Birmingham City Council and the DfE setting out the intention and understandings between the parties in respect of establishing the Trust and related matters. 2.5 Notes the high level milestones at section 10.1 of the MoU for full establishment of the Trust and agrees delegation to the Council’s Chief Executive and the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools, in liaison with the Trust Chair, authority for full transition (go-live) at April 2018. 2.6 Delegates to the Council’s Chief Executive and the Director for Children’s Services (DCS) jointly with the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools agreement of the Service Delivery Contract between the Council and the Birmingham Children’s Trust and all implementation steps to ensure the transition of services from the Council to the Trust by April 2018, including the final TUPE arrangements. 2.7 Delegates to the City Solicitor the novation of all necessary Council contracts to the Birmingham Children’s Trust. 2.8 Authorises the City Solicitor to enter into and to affix the Council’s Seal to all contracts and agreements that may be necessary to give effect to recommendations at 2.1 to 2.7.

Lead Contact Colin Diamond Officer(s): Interim Corporate Director, Children & Young People Telephone No: 0121 464 2808 E-mail address: [email protected]

3. Consultation 3.1 Internal

In advance of consultation in accordance with TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings [Protection of Employment] Regulations) 2006, there has been engagement with service users, affected employees, trade unions and Elected Members. This has included potential Trust models, staff transfer approach and the scope of services to transfer to the Trust. Outcomes of this process have informed preparation of this report.

There has been engagement with staff including face-to-face information and engagement sessions. A Staff Reference Group has helped shape discussions and thinking. There has been support from staff, based on recognition of the potential benefits of a Trust model including a single focus on children’s social care.

This is set alongside an emphasis on the need for transparency in responding to staff uncertainty and anxiety during transition to the Trust, and the need to adhere to the Council’s principle on not being distracted from already secured and planned improvement work.

There have been commitments and support from partners for the proposal and its potential to facilitate more effective joint working, and all-party support from the respective group leaders.

Trade union consultation so far has focused on the model for transfer of staff and union involvement in Trust governance arrangements.

Officers from Children’s Social Care, Legal, Finance, Corporate Procurement and HR have contributed to the production of this report.

3.2 External

Engagement has included strategic partners and stakeholders from health, police, the voluntary sector, the Birmingham Safeguarding Children Board, the Children’s Strategic Leaders Forum, the Department for Education (DfE) and Birmingham’s Commissioner for Children’s Social Care.

There has also been direct liaison with other local authorities (Doncaster, Slough, Kingston- Upon-Thames, Richmond and Sunderland) where Trust arrangements exist or are being developed and learning from this has been taken into account.

4. Compliance Issues: 4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies? Establishment of the Trust is consistent with the Council’s priorities of protecting children and ensuring Birmingham is a safe city for them to learn and grow in, as set out in the Council Business Plan and Budget 2017/18. Appraisal of options included consideration of the design principles agreed by the City Council in June 2016 and Cabinet in July 2016.

4.2 Financial Implications

4.2.1 One of the design principles agreed by the Council in June 2016 was that the current financial plan and Council priority must be maintained through to at least 2020. This position is also confirmed in the Memorandum of Understanding at Appendix 3.

4.2.2 The scope of services to be included in the Children’s Trust is shown in Appendix 1. Section 2

of Appendix 1 outlines the core services in scope to transfer to the Trust. The recurrent revenue funding (net revenue budget) for the confirmed core services is shown below. This excludes support services.

2017/18 £162.5m 2018/19 £160.8m 2019/20 £158.4m 2020/21 £157.4m

These figures include planned savings for future years approved in March 2017 in the Council’s Financial Plan 2017+.

4.2.3 Work has been undertaken to calculate and disaggregate the costs of support services across the Council and those that would transfer into or be purchased by the Trust. An agreed baseline ‘As-Is’ position between the Council and the Trust is shown in Appendix 1. An initial baseline budget of £20.928m has been identified for the Trust to deliver or purchase support services.

4.2.4 However, the Council budget requires the delivery of support services cost savings as approved in the Council budget planning for 2017/18 and beyond. As a result the Trust will be required to achieve minimum savings of £1.79m, in line with the overall profile of the Council’s savings target, from the budget it will receive to deliver support services.

4.2.5 Furthermore, a saving of at least £1.3m will be required from the support services that the Trust will purchase from the Council in line with reductions in posts across frontline and corporate services. It will be the Council’s responsibility to deliver these savings in negotiation with the Trust and to ensure this does not prejudice the outcomes agreed by the Council and the Trust.

4.2.6 It is expected that the cost of any redundancy payment to staff who leave the organisation as a result of any reorganisation to achieve the above-mentioned cost savings up to the point of the Trust go live in April 2018 will be paid by the Council. The cost of any future redundancy payments to staff incurred as a result of any structural reorganisation within the Trust, and consequent pension strain, will be the subject of discussion between the Council and the Trust, to be concluded and finalised by agreement with the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools, the Chief Executive and the Chief Financial Officer, as part of the negotiation of the Service Delivery Contract.

4.2.7 The Trust will operate from a number of existing Council buildings under a lease arrangement. As a result the Trust will receive an equivalent budget, currently estimated to be £1.9m to pay the Council for the space it uses. The overall impact of this will be cost neutral with the Council receiving an equivalent income for the space being used. Clarification of the exact space to be utilised will form part of the detailed discussions to be had between the Trust and the Council during the shadow period.

4.2.8 Children’s services are currently provided by the Council and the Council is able to reclaim VAT costs. VAT is a significant consideration for the creation of the Trust and is a matter that continues to require clarification, not just for Birmingham but in a wider national context for local authorities which are voluntarily pursuing alternative models for delivery of children’s services. DfE has been seeking a resolution with HMRC with regard to the VAT treatment for Children's Trusts generally and Birmingham specifically. Pending further progress on that the Secretary of State has agreed to meet any additional costs arising from the VAT treatment of the Birmingham Children’s Trust. Currently, the council are advised by external tax advisors that the Trust will incur a liability of approximately £5m for core services and up to £3m for support services. The Council is continuing to liaise closely with the DfE.

4.2.9 The contractual arrangements between the council and the Trust will be designed to ensure that the Trust receives sufficient income to meet the costs of service provided to the Council. It is required that the Trust will live within its financial means. There will be no expectations for the Trust to make surpluses, nor will the Trust operate with the intention of doing so. Notwithstanding this the Trust will be potentially liable for Corporation Tax on any taxable surpluses that it makes. Professional tax advice has been received advising how the risk of a

corporation tax liability might be mitigated.

4.2.10 The Trust is required to obtain admitted body status to the West Midlands Pension Fund within the Local Government Pension Scheme (Fund) to maintain existing pension terms and conditions for transferring staff. The Council will be required to act as guarantor for the Trust’s liabilities to the Fund. The contribution rate to be paid by the Trust to the Fund to meet future and past service pension liabilities is dependent upon the age profile and other demographics of the staff to be transferred. An actuarial assessment of the liabilities attributable to the staff to be transferred to the Trust is required (this will provide an overview of the scale of the liabilities, and costs, which relate to the transferring staff). It is the intention that at the point of transfer the overall financial impact of the pension costs between the Council and the Trust will be cost neutral. Thereafter, under the applicable Local Government Pension Scheme regulations, the Trust is responsible for funding the liabilities to the Fund attributable to the transferring staff. The detailed arrangements will be negotiated between the Trust and the Council during the shadow period.

4.2.11 The Council and the Trust will use the indicative figures as above to form the basis of negotiations of the financial mechanism under the Service Delivery Contract during the shadow period. It is anticipated that the budget for each financial year of the Service Delivery Contract will be agreed annually between the Council and the Trust based on a set of assumptions that will be agreed as part of the negotiations.

4.2.12 The Trust will receive income through payments made by the Council pursuant to the Service Delivery Contract. As such, a detailed financial mechanism will need to be agreed as part of the Service Delivery Contract negotiations, which recognises that the Trust will be dependent on such payments from the Council to run the services, but also requires the Trust to deliver the services in a financially prudent manner in line with the agreed mechanism.

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 The Trust facilitates the discharge of a range of local authority functions under Part III and Schedule 2 Children Act 1989, the Children Act 2004, the Children and Families Act 2014 and the Adoption Act 2002. Section 111 Local Government Act 1972 allows the local authority power to do anything which is calculated to facilitate, or is conducive or incidental to, the discharge of any of their functions. As a local authority in intervention and subject to direction from the Secretary of State the current Children’s Commissioner relationship will continue whilst the Trust is developed and implemented and the DfE will continue to hold the Council to account for improvements in delivery and outcomes.

4.3.2 The Council will remain accountable for the welfare and wellbeing of children and young people and for improving outcomes. Through a Service Delivery Contract with the Council the Trust will be responsible for determining how those outcomes of most relevance to its work are achieved and also for the day-to-day running of Children’s Services. This will be a legally binding contract by which the Trust will agree to provide children’s services functions on behalf of the Council and which, by its terms and conditions (including a service specification and performance framework), will seek to ensure the Children’s Trust is meeting the Council’s statutory duties. It is proposed that the contract length is for five years, with a provision to extend for a further five years, following a review. The contract will include DfE third party rights whilst the local authority remains in intervention (meaning some decisions, for example, termination of the contract, would require agreement with the DfE).

4.3.3 The Council will continue to hold the statutory remits of the Director of Children’s Services (DCS) under Section 18 Children Act 2004 and Lead Member for Children’s Services under Section 19 Children Act 2004. The Council will be the body held accountable by Ofsted. The Council has agreed a principle covering wide accountability of the Trust. That includes the role of the Lead Member, responding to relevant queries and casework from Members, all Councillors exercising their corporate parenting responsibilities and the Trust Chair and senior Trust managers reporting to the relevant Scrutiny Committee and others as appropriate.

4.3.4 The Birmingham Safeguarding Children Board retains its role in ensuring the effectiveness of co-operation between agencies in safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children and

young people. This recognises that the development of the Trust sits within a wider outcomes framework that must have regard for the wellbeing of all Birmingham’s children and young people and for the associated outcomes to which all agencies, including the Trust, will contribute.

4.3.5 A key principle of assurance is that the Council, DCS and the Trust have a shared understanding of the wider outcomes framework for children and young people and the outcome focus of the contract. That needs to be expressed in a commitment to put in place actions that enable the experiences of children and young people who receive services to be understood and improved in order to achieve best outcomes. Implementing the principle requires effective and comprehensive arrangements to be outlined in the contract between the Council and the Trust that enable the quality, effectiveness and impact of services to be monitored and evaluated. The Trust will be required to develop and maintain an effective performance management capability that will enable up-to-date information on the volume, quality and effectiveness of services to be available at a child level basis. In addition, the Trust will have a programme comprising audit, dip sampling and other means of evaluating the quality and impacts of services that will demonstrate the overall effectiveness of services and their impact upon outcomes for children and young people. Ofsted monitoring visits will be another important source of evidence of progress. This information will be available to the DCS and periodically subject to scrutiny by council members and the DCS when required.

4.3.6 A memorandum of understanding has been agreed between the City Council and DfE covering the shadow period (Appendix 3). This provides a roadmap and key milestones to establishment of the Trust by April 2018. The MoU is a non-legally binding agreement between the Secretary of State and the Council setting out the intentions and understandings between the parties in respect of establishing the Trust and related matters including, for example, the appointment or removal of the Chair.

4.3.7 Under domestic legislation in order for an employee of one gender to claim that they are receiving differential pay compared to comparators of another gender, they must be employed by the ‘same employer’ or ‘associated employer’ on the ‘same terms and conditions’ and at the ‘same establishment’. The legislative provisions that govern pay and reward are set out in the provisions of domestic and European legislation including the Equality Act 2010. Employers are "associated" if one directly or indirectly controls the other, or if a third person directly or indirectly controls both. Therefore, the Council and the Trust are likely to be determined as an ‘associated employer’ for employment matters including liability for equal pay. To protect both the Council and the Trust against any liability accruing to the Council or the Trust and specifically as a result of changes to pay and reward in either organisation, then appropriate provisions will need to be included in the Service Delivery Contract.

4.4. Public Sector Equality Duty

The Full Assessment (Appendix 4) has included children and young people as service users and staff. Consideration of age, disability, gender and race as protected characteristics have been considered. The principal potential impact of the Trust identified to date has been that upon staff. The Council will seek to minimise any impact upon staff through its TUPE negotiations and contract with the Trust.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events: 5.1 The Council has been rated as inadequate in the delivery of its responsibilities to children for some years and, following the September/October 2016 Ofsted inspection, remains inadequate (though some improvements have been recognised and some areas are graded more highly). The Council therefore remains in intervention pending a further full inspection which can be anticipated by early 2019.

5.2 On 24 January 2017 Cabinet agreed the establishment of the Trust based on it offering: • an opportunity to develop and consolidate changes and improvements already underway. • a sole focus on children’s social work and the ability to tailor ways of working to support best practice.

• a greater focus on service delivery and securing the best conditions for great social work. • wider experience and expertise brought to bear through the Board and its leadership. • a strong and clear voice – including the voice of children - to the Council, partners and the city. • a clean break with the past. • an opportunity to design strong staff engagement into the governance arrangements. • clarity about the Council as place leader – holding the ring for children with credibility. • a single locus with partners about shared responsibility for children and families with highest needs. • clarity in communicating the work of the Trust.

5.3 That decision also took account of a range of key challenges and considerations included the longstanding issues with the sustained delivery of children’s services in Birmingham by the Council; serious structural, practice and governance issues affecting children’s services in Birmingham as identified by Professor Julian Le Grand in 2014; and, as identified in the July 2016 report ‘a case for change’, six key ‘root causes’ which challenged the Council’s ability to deliver a sustainable and improved children’s service at pace. 5.4 The Trust has now been incorporated based on a wholly owned company model, to be converted to a community interest company by April 2018. The Chair is its sole director and the Council its sole member. 5.5 The agreed model was considered most likely to secure the conditions for sustainable improvement and meet the strategic objectives (eg. accommodating the scope, providing independence, commissioner/provider split, reflecting the City Council’s principles), minimise risk (complexity, market gaps) and relative affordability. 5.6 The services required by the Trust are set out in Appendix 1 – Birmingham Children’s Trust: Proposed Trust Services. Subject to further Council/Trust discussions these will be transferred to the Trust, purchased or secured via a mix of these models. 5.7 An appraisal of the TUPE and secondment options for transfer of staff to the Trust has been undertaken and is attached at Appendix 2. This concluded that TUPE is the preferred and recommended option. A key consideration in proposing TUPE as the model of transfer is the need to demonstrate operational independence. TUPE will protect employees’ existing terms and conditions of employment when social care functions transfer from the Council to the Trust. Employees who are in-scope for the transfer automatically become employees of the Trust as the new employer on the same terms and conditions. Continuity of service and all other contractual and statutory rights of transferring Council staff are all preserved.

5.8 With respect to the Trust Board, Andrew Christie was appointed Chair Designate on 25 November 2016 in accordance with the all-party appointments procedures of the Council. The Trust Chief Executive has been recruited and will start on 14 August 2017. Once the new Chief Executive has commenced in post, line management of some internal posts will change on the run up to becoming a Children’s Trust. Five non-executive directors have been appointed. The Director of Resources will be the next senior post to be filled and initially this will be on an interim basis in order to secure this input as soon as possible.

5.9 Membership of the Board is based on: • a Chair. • a Chief Executive. • a Director of Resources. • a Director of Operations. • a Director of Commissioning and Development • up to six non-executive directors, including a Council-appointed representative, with social work, finance, HR and legal expertise and experience and knowledge of Birmingham and partner agencies.

5.10 The Trust, through its governance arrangements, is committed to and will develop mechanisms for strong staff and union engagement. It is committed to nurturing good employee relations with employees and trade unions including examining a range of options which will include Board

representation. 5.11 In regular meetings since Summer 2016 with representatives from health, police, education and the voluntary sector, partners have indicated support for the Trust as an opportunity for better integration and collaborative working. Partners have been involved in programme management and shadow governance arrangements (the independent Chair of the Birmingham Safeguarding Children Board is a member of the Steering Group and the Design Authority) and they have contributed to the appointments of the Chair Designate and the Chief Executive. Recognising that the Trust would be part of a wider system of agencies and partners which share the aim of securing better outcomes for children and young people, there is a commitment to building stronger relationships and behaviours around a shared vision, values and leadership of the system. 5.12 The next key work within the programme is to establish the Intelligent Client Function within the Council to hold the Trust to account (for example, contract management) and to draft and agree the Service Delivery Contract between the Council and the Trust and this work is scheduled to commence from August 2017. 5.13 The programme is on schedule to ensure that the Trust implementation achieves the April 2018 date.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s): 6.1 The range of options for voluntary development of a Trust model were evaluated throughout 2016. Cabinet agreed, in January 2017, creation of the Trust based on the wholly owned company option and as a community interest company.

7. Reasons for Decision(s): 7.1 To secure formal support for the full implementation of the Trust, services to transfer or be purchased and the model of staff transfer at April 2018. 7.2 To address longstanding failures, to consolidate changes and improvements already underway, and to secure the greater agility and focus required to deliver excellent social work in an effective and sustainable way.

Signatures Date Cabinet Member, Children, Families and Schools: Cllr Brigid Jones .. ..

Interim Corporate Director, Children & Young People: Colin Diamond .. ..

Interim Chief Executive: Stella Manzie .. .

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report: Report of the Improvement Quartet to City Council 14 June 2016. Cabinet Reports 26 July 2016, 20 September 2016 and 24 January 2017 – Voluntary Children’s Trust.

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any): 1. Birmingham Children’s Trust: Proposed Trust Services. 2. Birmingham Children’s Trust: Transfer Approach Options Appraisal. 3. Birmingham Children’s Trust: Memorandum of Understanding between the Secretary of State for Education and Birmingham City Council. 4. Birmingham Children’s Trust: Equality Analysis – Full Assessment. Report Version FINAL Date 13 July 2017

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET Exempt information paragraph number – if private report:

Joint Report of: Chief Operating Officer and Corporate Director – Finance & Governance Date of Decision: 24th January 2018 SUBJECT: ACIVICO LTD – PROVISION OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT AND TRANSITION OF ACIVICO SERVICES Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 004299 / 2017 If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved Relevant Cabinet Member(s) or Cllr Brigid Jones, Deputy Leader of the Council and Relevant Executive Member Cllr Majid Mahmood, Cabinet Member for Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management Relevant O&S Chair: Cllr Mohammed Aikhlaq, Corporate Resources and Governance Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report:

1.1 The Private report deals with the confidential and / or exempt information not covered in the Public report. The two reports, private and public, must be read together as this Public report does not repeat information contained in the Private report.

1.2 To inform Members of the further work undertaken to assess options for the Civic Catering service, Birmingham City Laboratories service and Security Management service (see Appendix 1 for the scope of these services).

1.3 To note the intention to agree a variation to the existing contract with Acivico Design Construction and Facilities Management Limited (Acivico (DCFM) Ltd) to bring the Civic Catering service back in-house; to deliver a number of improvements to the service in the short-term; and to scope and develop a longer-term trading improvement and transition programme regarding the service, aligned with the Council’s commercialism approach and to explore options to work with other trading services within the Council.

1.4 To note the intention to remove Birmingham City Laboratories (BCL) from the scope of the current Acivico (DCFM) Ltd procurement which will be subject to a further Cabinet report in the second quarter of 2018 on the exact nature of the future delivery model.

1.5 To note the intention to agree a variation to the existing contract with Acivico (DCFM) Ltd to bring the Security Management service back in-house and support the citywide review of security provision regarding Council premises.

2. Decision(s) recommended: Page 1 of 16

That Cabinet:-

2.1 Notes the contents of this report.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Mike Smith – Head of Commissioning Corporate Procurement Services Strategic Services Directorate

Telephone No: 0121 303 7519 E-mail address: [email protected]

Additional Contact Officer: Martin Stevens, Head of City Finance Accounts Finance & Legal

Telephone No: 0121 303 4667 Email address: [email protected]

3. Consultation

3.1 Internal

3.1.1 The Leaders of both the Conservative and Liberal Democratic groups have been consulted on the options and recommendations set out in this report.

3.1.2 Members of the Corporate Resources Overview and Scrutiny members have been undertaking an overview of the procurement for DCFM services process and the findings from that on-going work have fed into these recommendations.

3.1.3 The Directors of Acivico (DCFM) Ltd have been consulted regarding the preparation of this report.

3.1.4 Acivico (DCFM) Ltd are having on-going discussions with affected staff and trade unions regarding the commissioning process and recommendations for the Civic Catering, Birmingham City Laboratories (BCL) and Security Management services. The Council and Acivico (DCFM) Ltd will conduct further consultations (with early engagement where possible) with staff and trade unions in accordance to the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (“TUPE”).

3.1.5 Officers from Legal Services, Finance, Corporate Procurement and HR have been involved in the preparation of this report.

3.1.6 Further consultation, including statutory consultation obligations, will be undertaken by Birmingham City Council (the Council) and Acivico (DCFM) Ltd concerning all affected employees and trade unions, as the transition proceeds.

Page 2 of 16

3.2 External

Not applicable.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 This proposed arrangement will support the following specific objectives:

- Investing in priorities and addressing pressures

The Council’s Vision and Forward Plan priorities: - Health – A great City to grow old in - Jobs and Skills – A great City to succeed in

4.1.2 The services coming under the direct control of the Council will have to adhere to all of the usual council policies including the Living Wage. They will also be required to ensure that when they let contracts they ensure their suppliers are charter accredited subject to the tiered approach.

4.1.3 Commercialism – the Council is embarking on a Commercialism approach that seeks to maximise the financial value of assets that the Council holds with the aim of creating a surplus to protect and invest in services. The recommendations in the private report will support the Commercialism approach by enabling Civic Catering to focus on more advantageous areas of business, which will maximise the ability for the business to make a surplus that can be reinvested in other core Council services

4.2 Financial Implications (How will decisions be carried out within existing finances and Resources)

4.2.1 The Council provides cashflow support to the company through advance payments for the provision of services. As part of the assurance letter given to Acivico Limited’s external auditor the Council has historically provided a letter of assurance confirming that the Council will make cash flow available in advance to ensure that Acivico Limited can meets its liabilities as they fall due for the foreseeable future.

CIVIC CATERING

Detailed in the private report.

BIRMINGHAM CITY LABORATORY SERVICES (BCL)

The financial implications for BCL shall be set out in a report that details the options appraisal.

MANAGEMENT OF SECURITY SERVICES

The management of Council security staff located in Birmingham Property Services is Page 3 of 16

provided by Acivico (DCFM) Ltd and funded by the Council via a dual arrangement which is partly by staff secondment from Acivico (DCFM) Ltd into the Council and a management fee for other resources. The commissioning of security for Council Premises and the procurement of guarding services are subject to a separate report that will go to Cabinet in March 2018.

4.3 Legal Implications for Civic Catering, Birmingham City Laboratories and Security Management

4.3.1 The Council is in a contractual relationship with Acivico (DCFM) Ltd regarding the provision of certain services and including Civic Catering, Birmingham City Laboratories and Security Management.

4.3.2 In view of the contractual relationship between the Council and Acivico (DCFM) Ltd the Council is obligated to agree with Acivico (DCFM) Ltd to agree the transfer of the Services back to the Council, save in the event of Acivico (DCFM) Ltd failing to comply with certain obligations as set out in the contract which entitles the Council to pursue legal action for termination of the Services.

4.3.3 Subject to paragraph 4.3.2 without the specific agreement of Acivico (DCFM) Ltd the Services cannot be transferred to the Council until the end of the extended contract.

4.3.4 There are approximately nine permanent Civic Catering service employees based at the Council House and the Pause cafes and 2 FTEs providing Security Management. The Council will ensure compliance with the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Act 2006 (TUPE) when making the migration of the services back in-house. The Council is experienced at undertaking TUPE proceedings and will ensure that any activity is undertaken in line with the Council’s best practice processes.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

The assessment did not highlight the need to undertake a stage 2 assessment on the basis the it did not highlight the need to undertake a stage 2 assessment for the transition of Civic Catering, Security Management on the basis that there is no negative impact on staff or service users.

Further analyses will accompany subsequent Cabinet Reports covering for example BCL.at there would be no adverse effect on end users.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

Civic Catering

5.1 In April 2015, the Council entered into an agreement with Acivico (DCFM) Ltd for the undertaking of three additional services, Building Cleaning Services, Civic Catering and Birmingham City Laboratories (collectively termed the Integrated Services) for a period of 2 years and in March 2017, the Integrated Services contract was extended for a further 2 years.

5.2 In the interim period the Council undertook a commissioning review of Acivico (DCFM) Ltd services. In July 2017 a recommendation was approved that the Civic Catering service Page 4 of 16

would not form part of the procurement of a third party organisation to provide the services currently provided by Acivico (DCFM) Ltd and would be subject to a further Cabinet report on the exact nature of the delivery model at a later date.

5.3 As part of the Commercialism agenda at the Council and building on the Councils existing assets and position within the market a significant opportunity within the food and beverage market has been identified. It is felt that the current position where the Councils assets are dispersed across different business units does not provide an environment conducive to growth in to new markets. This will be considered as part of the new arrangements for Civic Catering.

Birmingham City Laboratories (BCL)

5.4 BCL was one of those services that was transferred into Acivico (DCFM) Ltd in April 2015 and was initially included in the scope of the procurement of the services provided by Acivico (DCFM) Ltd, in order to obtain potential supplier views on how they could best be delivered through that contract. Respondents were given an overview of BCL as part of the procurement documentation and were asked to detail their experience of taking on specialist businesses like BCL.

5.5 Almost all of those who responded failed to understand the opportunity, simply advising their experience of delivering FM services into laboratory environments. One respondent advised that they have a similar business on the European mainland which offers BCL type services, but even with this example there was no evidence that those services were integrated with the FM business services, but rather were stand-alone. This response does not give the Council confidence that the bidders for services currently provided by Acivico (DCFM) Ltd have the experience or knowledge to take on and manage BCL.

Security Management service

5.6 The Security staff did not transfer into Acivico (DCFM) Ltd; however the officer with line management responsibility did transfer into Acivico (DCFM) Ltd as part of the role included in Cleaning Services. A secondment arrangement from Acivico (DCFM) Ltd to the Council was put into place for this role with further funding for additional resource. With the DCFM services being delivered by a third-party provider following the DCFM procurement, there is a need for the Security Management element of these services to come back in-house.

Facilities Management Service

5.7 The Cabinet report of December 2016 agreed to extend the current DCFM contract for a period of 2 years from April 2017 and in the case of some Facilities Management services for a period 12 months. To ensure continuity of service until the DCFM contract is awarded externally approval is sought to extend this exclusivity for a further 12 months until March 2019 along the terms of the extended agreement other than where an exemption is agree.

Programme Approach

5.8 Following the decisions taken in July 2017, the Chief Operating Officer and Director for Commissioning and Procurement have initiated the application of a programme management approach to oversee the required activity set out in the report Page 5 of 16

recommendations.

5.9 The Corporate Programmes and Projects Team have been commissioned to provide programme and project management support and the programme design has been undertaken during December 2017. Proposals for the programme have been presented to the Corporate Leadership Team in January 2018 and a summary of these can be found in Appendix 3.

5.10 In summary, ‘the Acivico Transition Programme’ will be formed of four key components;

5.1.1 The Council is supported to deliver the activities to achieve the commissioning intentions set and approved by Cabinet in July 2017;

5.1.2 The Council is supported to maintain and improve upon the existing service provision of the services currently provided by Acivico;

5.1.3 The Council is supported to effectively fulfil its responsibilities as sole Shareholder of Acivico; and

5.1.4 The Council considers what arrangement are required to suitably oversee and manage the provision of the Services in the future, learning from experiences to date and drawing upon best practice.

5.11 The Programme will establish suitable governance arrangements to oversee the activities that fall within these components, which will ultimately be overseen by the Chief Operating Officer and have formal reporting arrangements to the Corporate Leadership Team and Elected Member bodies, such as the Corporate Governance Committee, relevant Scrutiny Committees and Cabinet. A summary of the proposed governance is also included in Appendix 3.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 CIVIC CATERING

The Civic Catering options appraisal was undertaken with officers from Finance, the Commercialism team and Legal, The Options appraisal shows option 2 scoring the strongest on Overarching Considerations and Service Priorities, the Financial implications of the options appraisal and their impact on the recommended way forward are set out in the Private Report. The Civic Catering options appraisal is set out in Appendix 2.

A summary of the alternative options is as follows:

6.1.1 Option 1 - Create an independent WOC / LATCO

It is likely that due to the size of the service alone it would not be cost effective to establish a wholly owned company (WOC) in its own right, as the cost of overheads would in all probability be disproportionally high. This would represent a high risk strategy for the Council.

6.1.2 Option 2 – In-House solution

Bringing the Civic Catering service back in-house will enable the Council to deliver a Page 6 of 16

number of improvements to the service in the short-term; and to scope and develop a longer-term trading improvement and transition programme regarding the service.

6.1.3 Option 3 – Outsource

Initial discussions with suppliers in a market sounding exercise regarding the services currently provided by Acivico (DCFM) Ltd concluded that there would not be an interest to deliver Civic Catering services as part of a facilities management contract, and it is believed that there are opportunities for the Council to work within its own resources to deliver a more efficient, effective service.

6.2 BCL An options appraisal for BCL will be undertaken to establish the best delivery model for that service, the outcome of which will be reported back to Cabinet.

6.3 SECURITY MANAGEMENT SERVICE

The alternative would be for the Security Management service to remain with Acivico, however as the security function they manage is an in-house operation, that those managing staff are already seconded back to the Council, and that it would not be prudent to have an in-house function managed by a third-party provider, this option has been discounted.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 Bringing the Civic Catering service back in house will enable the Council to deliver a number of improvements in the short-term; and to scope and develop a longer-term trading improvement and transition programme with the potential to include other trading services within the Council.

7.2 Bringing security Management back in house will support the implementation of the Council’s planned security strategy.

7.3 In both instances, it will enable the Council to consider the best location and reporting line for these services. Signatures Date

Cllr Brigid Jones, Deputy Leader of the Council . .

Cllr Majid Mahmood, Cabinet Member for Commercialism, Commissioning and . . Contract Management

Angela Probert , Chief Operating Officer Strategic Services Directorate .. .

Page 7 of 16

Clive Heaphy Corporate Director – Finance & Governance.

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any): Appendix 1. - Scope of services Appendix 2. - Options Appraisal Appendix 3 – Programme Approach Appendix 4 – Public Sector Equality Duty

Report Version 4 Dated 09 JAN 18

Page 8 of 16

Appendix 1 – Scope of Services

Civic Catering

- Restaurant and café facilities, incl. offering a café court layout within a comfortable and relaxed environment; that offers an ideal setting for informal meetings and social activities. The Service delivers a choice of beverages and nutritionally balanced meals, snacks and packed lunches appropriate to the Service Users and environment of the individual catered locations - Bar service, incl. the provision of bar services at the Council House, Highbury Hall and the Library of Birmingham. - Internal and external hospitality, incl. For formal lunches, dinners, receptions and special events/functions providing a silver service or other type of formally prescribed service - Vending incl. a comprehensive vending service, that includes offering hot and cold beverages, cold snacks and confectionary - Food purchasing agent - The Council has an established contract with a food purchasing agent. Civic Catering use this arrangement for the purchase of all its food & beverage items required to provide the Services. The contract with the food purchasing agent offers the Council competitive rates due to a large economy of scale.

Key aspects of the Civic Catering service include: - Venue hire, management and provision of refreshments for events taking place in the Banqueting Suite

- Venue hire, management and provision of refreshments for events taking place at Highbury Hall

- Catering for Lord Mayor civic events in the Lord Mayor’s Parlour/Suite and Banqueting Suite

- Catering for Committee Rooms

- Catering for Members/Committees at meetings

- Catering provision at staff restaurant facilities at Lancaster Circus, Woodcock Street and a take-away service at Acivico HQ, Quay Place (due to close in 2018)

- Contract caterer at Sutton Coldfield Town Hall

The Service works with multiple agencies / organisations and some of their key contracts include:

- Contract between Acivico and Sutton Coldfield Town Hall (1-year contract)

- Pending contract between Acivico and Birmingham Moseley Rugby Club and Unique Venues Birmingham to be an approved caterer for venue hire events organised by the venue

- Contract/agreement in place for Acivico to act on behalf of BCC/Chamberlain Highbury Trust in terms of the management/hire of the venue and provision of catering

- Service level agreement in place for the Pause Cafés at Lancaster Circus and Woodcock Street plus prudential borrowing commitment for 10 years from opening. Approx £3200 per month between two units. Lancaster opened circa August 2010 and Woodcock Street circa November 2011.

Page 9 of 16

BCL

Birmingham City Laboratories (BCL) is part of Acivico’s group of services. BCL is an independent consultancy and United Kingdom Accreditation Services (UKAS) accredited laboratory which has been in existence for over 100 years. Some of the main sectors of work and services provided are as follow:

• Asbestos identification, surveying and air clearance certification • Building defect and safety surveys • Concrete condition surveys • Building material analysis and failure investigation • Site investigation and contaminated land surveys • Preconstruction surveys and desktop studies • Food and environmental chemical analysis • Toxicology analysis • Consumer protection product testing

5.7.2 As well as UKAS accreditation BCL hold certification or membership of Contractors Health and Safety Assessment Scheme (UK) - CHAS, Asbestos Testing and Consultancy Association ATAC and The Concrete Repair Association (CRA).

Specific Service Information

5.7.3 Asbestos Analytical Service - BCL is a UKAS accredited laboratory and Type C Inspection Body holding accreditation to ISO/IEC 17020: 2012 and ISO/IEC 17025: 2004. Accredited services include surveying for asbestos in premises in accordance with HSG 264 and sampling of bulk materials for asbestos fibre identification, sampling of asbestos fibres in the air and fibre counting to HSG 248. We currently hold a category “A”RICE rating and a “Satisfactory” AIMS standard.

5.7.4 BCL is a member of the Asbestos Testing and ATAC, CHAS and all our site-based staff hold the appropriate Construction Skills Certification Scheme card - CSCS. Services include:

• Surveying to determine if asbestos is present; management, refurbishment, demolition and sampling surveys;

• Sampling asbestos fibres in the air for reassurance purposes or undertaking 4- stage clearance certification when asbestos is subject to licensed removal;

• Bulk analysis of samples to identifying if a material contains asbestos and the types of asbestos which may be present and

• Management of the safe removal of asbestos from your building using an approved licensed removal contractor.

5.7.5 Building Investigation - BCL’s building investigation team can provide expert advice in relation to the performance and quality of the materials used in buildings and structures. The skilled team has an in-depth knowledge of construction related materials and components ensuring that the building surveys carried out are always of the highest standard.

5.7.6 The team provides surveys to assess that buildings and structures are constructed as designed and are performing well; which is essential when a purchase or major investment Page 10 of 16

is being considered:

• Investigate construction related faults and structural issues;

• Building Pathology;

• Diagnose building material failures;

• Assess the condition of reinforced concrete structures and

• Rope access surveys to safely examine and test all areas of a building or structure.

5.7.7 Chemistry - Chemical analysis, reports, advice and assistance in areas such as food safety, environmental investigations, consumer protection and trade descriptions. Toxicological analyses for a wide range of drugs and intoxicants on body fluids and tissues as a service to coroners, pathologists, hospitals and individuals. Results can be presented in an interpretive report indicating the significance of the findings.

5.7.8 Site Investigation and Surveys - The site and team has 35+ years of experience in the field of site investigation and surveys. The team holds a unique and non-readily available archive and historical information that have been complied through the service undertaking ground investigations over the last 65 years. BCL provides a one- stop-shop for a range of site investigation and other surveys on both large and small schemes. Security Management

The operational management of the cohort of staff employed by Birmingham City Council who undertake the Customer Support Officer, Porter/Security, Customer Security Supervisor and Porter roles. These staff work in the Corporate Admin Buildings and Non Corporate Admin Buildings; note this does not include Security Staff at the Library of Birmingham.

GR6 – currently 0.4FTE seconded to the Council for Security (0.6FTE retained by Acivico for Cleaning)

GR4 – currently 1.0 FTE seconded to the Council

GR4 –currently 0.2 FTE seconded to the Council (0.8FTE retained by Acivico for Cleaning)

Page 11 of 16

Appendix 2

Civic Catering Options Appraisal

Overarching Considerations Service Priorities

BBC4SR (supporting Provide Flexibility to Time to go live Risk to Reputation and Increase external Potential to apprenticeship, innovative and meet - ease of stakeholders brand work from 80/20 develop income / local food Criteria flexible changing TOTAL transition and end users management to 90/10 growth producers, local solutions demand small businesses, local employment)

Weighting 4 4 5 3 4 5 5 5 Option

56 36 50 36 60 75 75 70 458

Option 1. Independent WOC / LATCO Both in-house and an independent stand alone would Both in-house and a WOC offers opportunity to rebrand and improve image provide an opportunity to stimulate growth and develop an improved approach to marketing.

56 56 75 45 64 65 75 80 516

Option 2. In-house most flexible as able to influence without being bound by a contract it will In-house solution also allow future flexibility to meet changing needs of social value etc. In-house There may be an issue with private sector trading via an in-

likely to benefit end users as could enable development / investment from other house model but this is expected to be surmountable BCC parties

56 40 40 36 44 60 50 40 326

Option 3. Commission the market to Outsourcing would lose the Councils ability to impact and / or deliver the service outcomes Outsource could be lengthy and complicated. benefit from growth

Appendix 3

Appendix 3: Summary of Programme Approach

Programme Objective: The Council commissions suitable Design, Construction and Facilities Management services that are of good quality, promote innovation achieve best value for the Council and its citizens. Core deliverables required to achieve the Strategic Objective: A. The Council delivers its Commissioning Intentions for the Services, which are based upon a suitably robust strategic plan and set of fully appraised options;

B. The Council appropriately manages and maintains the existing provision of services, securing improvements where identified whilst supporting the activities of delivering the Council’s Commissioning Intentions (A) above; C. The Council effectively undertakes its corporate and shareholder responsibilities in respect of delivering its Commissioning Intentions; and

D. The Council reflects and learns from its experience to date of arrangements to deliver these services, and ensures that suitably robust arrangements are developed for the future delivery of its Commissioning Intentions

Programme Structure:

Programme Governance:

Page 9 of 16

Appendix 4 PROTOCOL PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITY DUTY

2 If there is no adverse impact then that fact should be stated within the Report at section 4.4 and the initial assessment document appended to the Report duly signed and dated. A summary of the statutory duty is annexed to this Protocol and should be referred to in the standard section (4.4) of executive reports for decision and then attached in an appendix; the term ‘adverse impact’ refers to any decision-making by the Council which can be judged as likely to be contrary in whole or in part to the equality duty.

3 A full assessment should be prepared where necessary and consultation should then take place.

5 Responses to the consultation should be analysed in order to identify:

(a) whether there is adverse impact upon persons within the protected categories

(b) what is the nature of this adverse impact

(d) what mitigating actions can be taken and at what cost

6 The impact assessment carried out at the outset will need to be amended to have due regard to the matters in (4) above.

7 Where there is adverse impact the final Report should contain:

Page 10 of 16

Equality Act 2010

The Executive must have due regard to the public sector equality duty when considering Council reports for decision.

The public sector equality duty is as follows:

1 The Council must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to:

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by the Equality Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(a) remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

(b) take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

(c) encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

(a) tackle prejudice, and

(b) promote understanding.

5 The relevant protected characteristics are: (a) Marriage & civil partnership (b) Age (c) Disability (d) Gender reassignment (e) Pregnancy and maternity (f) Race (g) Religion or belief (h) Sex (i) Sexual orientation

Page 11 of 16

Birmingham City Council

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET

Report of: Corporate Director for Adult Social Care & Health

Date of Decision: 24 January 2018

SUBJECT: BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL'S VISION AND STRATEGY FOR ADULT DAY OPPORTUNITIES

Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 004376/2018

If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved

Relevant Cabinet Member(s) Councillor Paulette Hamilton – Health and Social Care

Relevant O&S Chair: Councillor John Cotton – Health and Social Care

Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report:

1.1 The report seeks approval from Cabinet for the Vision and Strategy Development Plan for Adult Social Day Opportunities in Birmingham.

2. Decision(s) recommended:

That the Cabinet:-

2.1 Approves the outline Vision and Strategy Development Plan to modernise Day Opportunities as contained in Appendix 1, which will be effective from the date of the decision.

2.2 Notes that the Adult Social Care and Health Directorate will coproduce the strategy with Service Users to shape “Having a Good Day in Birmingham” and will consult on specific proposals as they are developed and where consultation may be appropriate, with the proposals as part of the overarching strategy coming back to Cabinet for approval and final decision to implement.

2.3 Approve that a Prevention and Assistive Technology Strategy is developed in line with the Care Act 2014 for all user groups to ensure Service Users are equipped to access the Community and make best use of Day Opportunities.

Birmingham City Council

2.4 Approve that the Transport, Meals and Charging policy in relation to Day Services (internal and external) is reviewed in consultation with citizens. Following consultation a further report will be brought back to Cabinet outlining future recommendations.

2.5 Approve a 12 week period of consultation with customers, staff and stakeholders on the current performance, utilisation and options for Internal Day Services. Following consultation a further report will be brought back to Cabinet outlining future recommendations. The options being explored would include alternative delivery models, closure of centre(s), reduction in the number of centres delivering support, options for providing support in alternative venues and/or through other mechanisms, and the feasibility of reprovision.

2.6 Note that all current customers will be individually reviewed and/or re-assessed to ensure people receive the appropriate package of care in accordance with The Care Act 2014.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Graeme Betts Corporate Director for Adult Social Care & Health

Telephone No: 0121 303 2992

E-mail address: [email protected]

3. Consultation

3.1 Internal

3.1.1 Engagement has taken place on the draft vision and strategy with: the Chair of the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee; Executive Management Team (EMT); Corporate Leadership Team (CLT); Economy Directorate Management Team; Corporate Director of Place; and the Adult Social Care & Health Directorate Leadership Team.

3.1.2 Engagement sessions have been held with the Adult Social Care & Health Directorate staff group.

3.1.3 Response to the Vision and Strategy Development Plan by internal stakeholders has been positive.

3.2 External

3.2.1 Coproduction has started and it is essential that the Strategy and Service Model result from the Coproduction.

3.2.2 Engagement has started with: service users; carers; the Citizens Panel; single and multi- faith groups; community groups; Third sector and Supporting People providers; Birmingham Voluntary Service Council (BVSC); care providers and with Clinical Commissioning Groups and trusts in the Health sector.

3.2.3 The timeline for meetings with citizens is set out in Appendix 1.

Birmingham City Council

3.2.4 The response to the plans to coproduce the work by external stakeholders has been positive, but as noted work needs to take place to develop the strategy as set out in Appendix 1.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan is consistent with the Council’s ‘Vision and Priority 2017-2020’ and supports the priority of Health – A great city to grow old in. It also delivers the priorities set in the new strategy for Health and Social Care.

4.1.2 This priority includes: promoting independence of all our citizens; joining up health and social care services so that citizens have the best possible experience of care tailored to their needs; and preventing, reducing and delaying dependency and maximising the resilience and independence of citizens, their families and the community.

4.2 Financial Implications

4.2.1 Approval of the Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan does not commit the local authority to specific expenditure or investment plan at this stage. The importance of using resources effectively is highlighted and changes arising from the coproduction work will be aligned with the Council’s Long Term Financial Plan. This will set the direction for future consideration of savings proposals for Adult Social Care & Health Internal and External Day Service Provision.

4.2.2 Specific proposals will not be developed until after the period of public consultation. The future delivery of the service will be managed within the currently planned budget provision. We will be looking to transform the service to improve outcomes for residents and at the same time will be exploring opportunities to deliver the service more cost effectively, although as stated, there will be no specific proposals until after the period of public consultation

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan complies with the requirements of the Care Act 2014 which defines the primary responsibility of local authorities in the promotion of individual wellbeing.

4.3.2 It is consistent with responsibilities of a local authority under Part 1 of the Care Act 2014 to:

• Promote the individual’s physical, mental and emotional wellbeing (Section 1);

• Provide or organise services that prevent or delay the need for care and support (Section 2);

• Promote integration of care and support provision with health and health-related provision (Section 3) and co-operate with key partners to promote the wellbeing of adults and improve the quality of care and support (Section 6);

Birmingham City Council

• Establish and maintain a service for providing information and advice relating to care and support for adults and carers (Section 4);

• Promote diversity and quality in the provision of services for meeting care and support needs (Section 5);

• Assess an adult’s needs for care and support (Section 9) and assess a carer’s needs for support (Section 10);

• Adopt a person-centred approach to planning and supporting care (Sections 24- 25); • Make available Direct Payments (Sections 31-33);

• Safeguard adults at risk of abuse or neglect (Sections 42-47).

4.3.3 The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan provides a framework for Birmingham to respond to requirements of various legislation, policy and guidance documents where services need to be modernised to provide an enabling and individualised response. This includes:

• Transforming Care for people with Learning Disabilities, 2015 • Care Act 2014 • Mental Capacity Act 2005 • Making it Real 2012 • Think Local, Act Personal 2010

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 A stage 1 Equality Assessment (EA) was carried out in November 2016 and reviewed in November 2017 (Appendix 2); this will be updated as we continue to coproduce a new model for day opportunities that is fit for the future.

4.4.2 The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan is relevant to all protected characteristics. By enabling the outcomes to be delivered the Day Opportunities Strategy when implemented will have a positive impact on citizens, service users and carers and we will continue to meet our responsibilities under the Care Act 2014.

4.4.3 There may potentially be an adverse impact on employees of Adult Social Care Services, arising from re-organisation of Internal Day services with changes to work location or a reduction in Council run services. Mitigation of the impacts of specific proposals arising from this work will be in line with the Council’s agreed policies and procedures.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 There are a number of challenges facing the Council in supporting adults and older people including: more people living longer with more complex needs; significant numbers of young adults who have disabilities or who suffer from mental illness; people having higher expectations of the public sector; and significantly reduced level of resources. Consequently, changes are needed to the type of services that are arranged and provided, and to the way services are organised and delivered.

Birmingham City Council

5.2 The desired outcomes for adults and older people in Birmingham as set out in the Adult Social Care Vision and Strategy approved by Cabinet on 3 October 2017 are that they should be resilient, live independently whenever possible, and exercise choice and control so they can live good quality lives and enjoy good health and wellbeing. The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy will seek to address potential barriers and obstacles to delivering these outcomes. It will provide a framework for the actions required to modernise Adult Social Care Day Services in Birmingham. It will also seek to better utilise community assets at a local level to enable sustainable packages of care to be provide within service users own communities.

5.3 A key driver of the localised strategic approach to the provision of support for adults with learning disability is the national context which has a focus on transforming care and support based on personalised support, early intervention and enabling people to access a range of services and support at the point in which they need to do so. The key principles of this national context are reflected in the Care Act 2014 and Transforming Care (National document led by NHS England). In addition to the driver for transformational change, there is the financial context of reducing resources and increasing demand, which is both a national and local challenge.

5.4 The Care Act 2014 requires people to be assessed as individuals and for their needs to be determined in terms of their personal ‘wellbeing’. The Act focuses on looking at people’s strengths, what they can do and what outcomes they want to achieve, which is often described as strength based approach. It anticipates that most individuals can lead full lives focussing on prevention and timely advice and information. This will require a significant practice and cultural shift locally to which the Council has to respond

5.5 Historically adult social care in Birmingham has been based upon a traditional “assess for service” model which has resulted in a higher proportion of adults in receipt of services when compared to regional neighbours. Care and support has been provided by services rather than prevention and promotion of an individual’s strengths. Services also tend to be traditional due to lack of real alternatives available across the City.

5.6 Many Local Authorities have moved away from providing any in–house, building based offers and now offer a tailored, individualised and personalised service. Others have targeted a reduced resource to people with significant complex needs including behaviour that challenges.

5.7 A personalised approach will look at the individual’s outcomes as described in the Care Act 2014 and therefore individuals will use their personal budget with support to identify the best way to meet their own needs. This may be by accessing universal services at no or low cost, purchasing community services or commissioning a provider to provide domiciliary care or other types of support. This means that a range of different options will be developed and offered and this will incrementally increase through the transformation of adult care.

5.8 Access to Day Services and expectations of what “Having a Good Day” looks like varies across the age ranges. Younger aged Adults have greater access to Employment and Education and on transition from Children’s Services are faced with alternative provision to meet expectations not being available.

5.9 The Internal Day Services for Younger Adults are accessed in the main by 51-64 aged Adults (regardless of primary support reason/disability type) and access to Services is

Birmingham City Council

often driven by the need for carer respite. The numbers of people accessing a traditional service within this group are higher than other age groups.

5.10 Adults with a learning disability access a range of Council Adult Social Care services including residential care, transport and day care. These Service users are reflected in the proportion of 2016/17 budget spend with 40% of all Adult Social Care budget being spent on learning disability services/service users.

5.11 Consideration is therefore required on how to transform our services to meet the aspirations of individuals and their families, but also acknowledge the need for time to build confidence, trust and the wider market of services within local communities for wide ranging need and expectation.

5.12 Day Opportunity Design Principles

Consistent with the Birmingham Adult Social Care Vision and Strategy (October 2017), the following principles will guide the development of day opportunities:

5.12.1 Information, advice and guidance

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, it will be essential that information is freely available through a range of channels which includes quality web based services that provides people and their carers information on the range of options in the community where Day Opportunities can be accessed, the specific services that develop skills to enable personal development and the range of support options that can be supported through direct payment. Whilst the range of services that people can access directly will be increased and, Social Care staff will be expert in providing information and advice on day opportunities where a person or their carer requires additional support.

5.12.2 Personalised support

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, there will be a reorganisation of the current day service provision provided by the Council and the range of services provided on contract to the Council based on the coproduction work to set out “Having a Good Day in Birmingham”. Where a person is accessing community support, the Council will seek to enable them to purchase this through a direct payment as opposed to social workers brokering individual service contracts with providers.

The Council will consult with Services Users on the model of Day Care it provides directly. This may mean a change in the way people are supported in the day and a move from building based group models of care, to individual support to access day opportunities in the person’s own community and locality.

The day opportunities strategy will address some of the barriers people face to be included as full members of the community; change can only take place if all agencies work in partnership to break down any barriers. By engaging with new and existing voluntary, health, care and support, activity and housing providers the aim will be to deliver high quality services for people that will support people, including self-funders, Encouraging arrangements which allow more individuals to receive a personal budget as a direct payment or individual service fund will also give people greater choice and control.

Birmingham City Council

The Council recognises that services need to take a life course approach and recognise that the needs and aspirations change at different points in a person’s life, and that there are certain times when greater or different types of support is needed. However, an important principle in taking a personalised approach is that no assumptions are made about the opportunities that are relevant to people because of age. Within day opportunities, there will be particular focus on areas where there is common need. For example, for younger Adults there will be a focus on education and employment, for older Adults a reduction in social isolation and loneliness, and for those recovering from mental health or physical ill health, a focus on recovery and reablement.

This will require a change of culture from one that promotes dependency to one founded on enablement. The focus will be helping and encouraging people to live healthier lifestyles, therefore reducing or delaying the need for formal social care. At the heart of this approach will be greater community asset development and flexible models of support to meet individual need.

5.12.3 Community assets

There needs to be a shift in the investment in local services and resources need to be made available for local groups to provide the wide range of support that enables people to remain in the community. This will include support for volunteers to run activities and for micro-enterprises to run services such as personal assistants and day opportunities. There will need to be workers to undertake this work and they too will be based in the community. Essentially, they will be link workers or network workers and their role will be to make the links between formal services and the community assets.

Investment and development of the Personal Assistant market will be required to ensure that people are able to access personal care and support to be active participants in the range of activities that the community provides. Consideration of the views of people will inform this work and testing will take place to ensure that there are a range of options for people who want to employ their own Personal Assistant or those who want to access this support from organisations who can manage employment for them. As part of the work to improve Advice and Information, the value of a digital platform for Personal Assistants will be explored to ease the process of securing appropriate and safe support.

5.12.3 Prevention and early intervention

A thoroughgoing approach to prevention needs to be developed and implemented within day opportunities. This will involve the link to community assets to ensure that people with lower level needs aren’t left until they develop acute needs, but it will also involve a greater focus on employment and daily living skills that enable people to stay well, healthy and independent wherever possible.

5.12.4 Partnership working

People’s needs are often complex and require support and interventions from a range of organisations, as well as different services within the Council. Services need to be integrated and built on partnership working utilising existing community assets of all partners. This will require a drive to ensure all facilities and services in the City are accessible to people with support needs and/or disabilities, including provision for delivery of personal care, safe spaces for vulnerable adults, and for organisations to consider how activities are adapted to include people.

Birmingham City Council

A consistent message from people is that the activities they want to access should be meaningful in that they have value to the community, a value to the person, and improves their quality of life and daily living. In order to deliver this a greater range of employment opportunities will be developed and employment support will be reviewed to increase the access to those who receive adult social care. Through Community Assets, micro-enterprises led by community organisations will be supported and encouraged.

The Council and its partners need to be open to changes in processes to ensure they are also able to support employment for vulnerable adults and disabled people and to develop mentally healthy workplaces. Care and health partners need to embrace employment as a key option for people and consider through their service how they are supporting people to become ready for employment where this is their desired goal.

Our aspiration is to have an efficient and effective day activity market that meets the care and support needs of anyone wishing to access services while stimulating a vibrant and innovative variety of care and support options. This will enable us to meet the personalisation agenda so that people can plan and take control, bringing services which meet the outcomes important to them.

5.12.5 Making safeguarding personal

Information, advice and support planning (when accessed) will consider the strengths of individuals and focus on how they can access day opportunities, but will also ensure that systems and processes are in place that respond to any concerns of safeguarding.

5.12.6 Use of resources

Underpinning all of this is the imperative to use resources effectively. Every pound that the City council spends on care must represent a pound well spent. The pressures on the City council’s resources are enormous and it is essential that resources are maximised.

Investment in day opportunities will shift to increase investment in community assets, employment?? and personal assistant support. Going forward, the council will not put into place lifelong services in day care and will instead focus on how to enable individuals to access their community, employment and the raft of cultural and education opportunities that Birmingham offers. The Councils statutory responsibility in providing care will also be considered and this will include a review of policy in relation to charging, transport and meals to ensure any proposed change is subject to consultation and is fair.

There are a variety of current arrangements for purchasing day care for individuals through social work assessment. The Council will also ensure there is a consistent approach to the cost of day opportunities that are developed for people to choose from. As a part of this, the Council will ensure that appropriate methodology for procuring services is in place, but will seek to move to a positon where direct payments are strongly promoted and that effective mechanisms are in place to enable a person to pay for any service they wish to access.

The Council recognises that some people want to access building based services, but where these exist, there will be greater flexibility within those service models to increase choice of activity and access. Mechanisms and models of payment that reimburse for actual attendance at the service will be developed to facilitate these, as well as clear policy for client contribution and charging.

Birmingham City Council

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 Do nothing – This would not deliver the actions and outcomes required to modernise Adult Social Care Services.

6.2 Alternative options for the delivery elements of the strategy will be considered and evaluated through the development of specific programmes and projects.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 The Day Opportunity Strategy when coproduced will provide a framework for the actions required to modernise Adult Social Care Day Services in Birmingham in order to improve the health and wellbeing of adults and older people.

7.2 The future model enables the City council to procure outcome focused care services that empowers providers to offer a wider range of care and support that is centred on addressing individual service user care needs. A framework of quality standards will be developed with providers to enable individuals and the Council to understand quality of the market as well as enabling the Council to monitor performance and put in place minimum quality standards.

Signatures Date Cllr Paulette Hamilton Cabinet Member Health and Social Care .

Graeme Betts Corporate Director Adults Social Care & Health .

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

1. Council Vision and Forward Plan 2017 – Cabinet May 2017 2. Adult Social Care Vision and Strategy – Cabinet 3 October 2017 3. Care Act 2014

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

1. Birmingham City Council’s Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan for Adult Social Care services 2. Equality Analysis

Report Version v2 Dated 12/01/18

Birmingham City Council

Equality Act 2010

The Executive must have due regard to the public sector equality duty when considering Council reports for decision.

The public sector equality duty is as follows:

1 The Council must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to:

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by the Equality Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(a) remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

(b) take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

(c) encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

(a) tackle prejudice, and

(b) promote understanding.

ADULT SOCIAL CARE AND HEALTH

Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan

“Having a Good Day in Birmingham”

1.0 Introduction

The goals that Birmingham Council are seeking to achieve for adults and older people are that they should be resilient, living independently whenever possible and exercising choice and control so that they can live good quality lives and enjoy good health and wellbeing.

It is essential to recognise that in order to support people to achieve these goals, the Council has broad responsibility across a range of areas and it is a corporate responsibility to achieve them. For example, the Council has a key role in ensuring there is appropriate housing which offers choice to people with a wide diversity of needs. For people to engage in community activities there needs to be a wide range of community assets which the Council should ensure are in place including community centres, leisure centres, parks and gardens. People need to feel safe to come out of their homes to enjoy them. These are a few examples of the mainstream services the Council provides or arranges.

Most adults and older people can enjoy access to mainstream services independently or with help and support from their families, friends and social groups. However, for some citizens this is only possible with support from Adult Social Care services and from other public sector agencies such as health services. On the whole, people want to lead happy, fulfilled lives in touch with their families, friends and communities. They cherish their independence and prefer to live at home or in the community with support if necessary. The vast bulk of people do not want to be dependent on others but will accept one-off support or ongoing support if it helps them to maintain their independence.

Birmingham will continue to face considerable challenges as reductions in public spending have to be managed; whilst at the same time the forecast rising demand for care and support is likely to generate significant pressures.

The desired outcomes for adults and older people in Birmingham are that they should be resilient, live independently whenever possible, and exercise choice and control so they can live good quality lives and enjoy good health and wellbeing. The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy will seek to addresses potential barriers and obstacles to delivering these outcomes. It will provide a framework for the actions required to modernise Adult Social Care Day Services in Birmingham.

A key driver of the localised strategic approach to the provision of support for adults with learning disability is the national context which has a focus on transforming care and support based on personalised support, early intervention and enabling people to access a range of services and support at the point in which they need to do so. The key principles of this national context are reflected in the Care Act 2014 and Transforming Care (National document led by NHS England) and apply in principle as good practice to all service users of all ages and needs.

The Care Act 2014 requires people to be assessed as individuals and for their needs to be determined in terms of their personal ‘wellbeing’. The Act focuses on looking at people’s strengths, what they can do and what outcomes they want to achieve, which is often described as strength based approach. It anticipates that most individuals can lead full lives focussing on prevention and timely advice and information. This will require a significant practice and cultural shift locally to which the Council has to respond

Historically adult social care in Birmingham has been based upon a traditional “assess for service” model which has resulted in a higher proportion of adults in receipt of services when compared to regional neighbours. Care and support has been provided by services rather than prevention and promotion of an individual’s strengths. Services also tend to be traditional due to lack of real alternatives available across the City.

A more flexible and personal approach to adult social care services is our aim. By putting the individual at the heart of everything, people will be helped to develop their personal support network of trusted people, places and services, allowing more choice and control over their care and support. We will provide accessible information about the opportunities available and support people to identify what is best for them.

Day Opportunities are the activities that people take part in during the day. This will include activities that are focussed on or have elements of work, volunteering, contributing to the wellbeing of others, leisure, sport, heathy living, education, arts, training and developing skills for independent living. This paper describes the principles that Birmingham City Council will work to when developing day opportunities in the city and the expectations of the support negotiated with citizens in order for them to access those opportunities.

This paper defines people as those of all ages, but the focus is on those with eligible social care needs. This will include people with learning disability, Autism, older adults, people with mental health problems, physical disabilities.

An underlying principle for Adult Social Care is that services are co-produced with users and carers as they are directly impacted by services and have first hand experience of what works well and what doesn’t. The focus of the work will be to shape with people what “Having a Good Day in Birmingham” looks like and this will drive the future direction of services.

Therefore, with this in mind, this paper sets out the strategic framework for the development of day opportunities and further sets out the coproduction approach that will both create the service delivery model for day opportunities and lead the implementation of the resulting modernisation that will be required.

2.0 Vision for Day Opportunities

Consistent with the Birmingham Adult Social Care Vision and Strategy (October 2017), the following principles will guide the development of day opportunities:

2.1 Information, advice and guidance

People need easy access to high quality information, advice and guidance and whenever possible and appropriate, they need to be able to self-serve or their carers and families need to be able to do so on their behalf. This approach allows people to maintain control and to exercise choice at whatever point they are at in their lives. Further, it helps the Council to use its resources more effectively.

Building on this, it is essential that when people contact adult social care, they are given a positive response and support to help resolve the issues they face but by emphasising what people can do for themselves, what support is available from other organisations and what support is available in the community. The aim is to divert people to appropriate support other than formal care which fosters dependency. Adults with assessed eligible need for care and support and carers need to have access to good information and advice about the market and to be able to choose from suppliers in the knowledge that services are safe and of a stated quality and price

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, it will be essential that information is freely available through a range of channels which includes quality web based services that provides people and their carers information on the range of options in the community where Day Opportunities can be accessed, the specific services that develop skills to enable personal development and the range of support options that can be supported through direct payments. Whilst the range of services that people can access directly will be increased and, Social Care staff will be expert in providing information and advice on day opportunities where a person or their carer requires additional support.

2.2 Personalised support

People require and respond better to personalised services. The approach that works most effectively always puts users and carers at the centre and builds support round them rather than fitting people into rigid services. Essentially, there needs to be a strength-based approach to assessing people’s needs – building on the assets people, their families, friends and communities can offer to support them. Further, Direct Payments are the preferred option for delivering support because they maximise the opportunity for people to exercise choice and control.

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, there will be a reorganisation of the current day service provision provided by the Council and the range of services provided on contract to the Council. Where a person is accessing community support, the Council will seek to enable them to purchase this through a direct payment as opposed to social workers brokering individual service contracts with providers.

The Council will review and Consult on the current internal Day Care provision to look at how current needs are met. This may mean a change in the way people are supported in the day and a move from building based group models of care, to individual support to access day opportunities in the person’s own community and locality.

Day support will be expanded as part of Shared Lives developing options for long-term carer day support as well as Carer companions who can support a number of people who have an interest in spending time together.

2.3 Community assets

People need to be able to access a wide range of community assets which are local, flexible and responsive. Through being able to access these resources people can continue to enjoy good quality lives while maximising their independence.

While the use of community assets is part of a broader approach to prevention, these assets are important for the quality of people’s lives whatever period of life they are in. Some people may volunteer and be part of the provision of them while others may use them once in a while but still see them as a key part of being part of a wider community and others will make good use of them.

Community assets are the wide network of services which range from very small, very local services provided by volunteers through to faith groups and community groups, national charities and private companies and businesses. They are all part of the wide network of community assets which provide choice and enable people to engage with others in activities they enjoy and which add meaning to their lives.

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, there needs to be a shift in investment to a local range of support that enables people to remain in the community. This will include support for volunteers to run activities and for micro-enterprises to run services such as personal assistants and day opportunities. There will need to be workers to undertake this work and they too will be based in the community. Essentially, they will be link workers or network workers and their role will be to make the links between formal services and the community assets.

To achieve this requires the development of a market that offers a broad range of care and support options and works with its communities to develop innovative and sustainable support to members within their community who are in need of care and/or support.

2.4 Prevention and early intervention

People need to be able to access prevention and early intervention services quickly and at any time in their lives. Day Opportunities and personal support will help people to maximise their independence throughout their lives and as people’s needs change, services will adapt, change and develop. It is important too that organisations in the public sector and in the third sector are joined up in their approaches and maximise the available resources. Through making every contact count, timely access to day opportunities will take place and support will seek to maximise the skills and abilities of people to enhance the quality of their lives. By providing support and reassurance when this is needed and a constant focus on development of skills, the aim is that crisis will be prevented.

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, a thoroughgoing approach to prevention needs to be developed and implemented within day opportunities. This will involve the link to community assets to ensure that people with lower level needs aren’t left until they develop acute needs, but it will also involve a greater focus on employment and daily living skills that enable people to stay well, healthy and independent wherever possible.

2.5 Partnership working

A consistent message from people is that the activities they want to access should be meaningful in that they have value to the community, a value to the person, and improves their quality of life and daily living. In order to deliver this a greater range of employment opportunities will be developed and employment support will be reviewed to increase the access to those who receive adult social care. Through Community Assets, micro- enterprises led by community organisations will be supported and encouraged.

2.6 Making safeguarding personal

It is essential that we ensure we “make safeguarding personal” and understand what outcomes people want to ensure they are safe but are also supported to take appropriate risk. It is essential that safeguarding is seen as everybody’s business and that staff across the care and health sector are aware of the issues and know how to deal effectively with safeguarding concerns and this will apply to day opportunities. However, it is also essential that we have hope for people and recognise that in order for them to achieve their potential, we need to support them to realise their goals in community settings.

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, information, advice and support planning (when accessed) will consider the strengths of individuals and focus on how they can access day opportunities, but will also ensure that systems and processes are in place that respond to any concerns of safeguarding.

2.7 Use of resources

Underpinning all of this is the imperative to use resources effectively. Every pound that Birmingham spends on care must represent a pound well spent. The pressures on the City Council’s resources are enormous and it is essential that resources are maximised.

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, investment in day opportunities will change to reduce expenditure on buildings and transport, to increase investment in community assets, employment and personal assistant support. Going forward, the council will not put into place lifelong services in day care and will instead focus on how to enable individuals to access their community, employment and the raft of cultural and education opportunities that Birmingham offers.

Where possible services need to be delivered within communities; however this is not always possible. Therefore consideration needs to be on how people access services and whether this is sustainable. The local authority needs to consider a wide range of transport which takes into account the needs of older people, those with a disability to access main stream transport opportunities where appropriate. We recognise that for some people there will always be a need to access, with support, building based day activities outside of their local community

This is not a change the Council expects to deliver quickly or alone – this will be developed in partnership with people and their carers. A formal review of Policy such as charging, transport and meals will take place to ensure any proposed change has the required Consultation and is fair.

3.0 A client centred deliver model

3.1 “Having a good day in Birmingham”

The term to ‘have a good day’ is often used to broadly assess the quality of experience service users receive in the context of day activities and support.

The Social Care Institute for Excellence undertook research (in 2015) with people with Learning Disabilities on what ‘Having a Good Day’ looks like. In this research people are described as ‘Having a good day’ when they are:

• doing things that have a purpose and are meaningful for them • doing things in ordinary places, that most members of the community would be doing • doing things that are uniquely right for them, with support that meets their individual and specific requirements • Meeting local people, developing friendships and connections and building a sense of belonging.

It can also include activities such as:

• Work • Education / training • Volunteering • Participating in leisure activities , arts and hobbies • Socialising

It is acknowledged that the current Day opportunities provides services to a number of different service users including older people, people with mental health issues, people with learning disabilities as well as people with physical and sensory disabilities. Any future model needs to acknowledge the different needs of these groups but the principle of ‘Having a good day’ applies across all. There are also young people who are entering adulthood – sometimes known as those in ‘transition’. The life stage that these individuals are progressing through means that a greater focus on supporting training, education and employment is needed as well as enhancing opportunities for independence and choice.

3.2 National work guides us by setting out the important things to do which support to have a good day. The themes closely match the Adult Social Care Vision and Strategy 2017 and the design principles set out in section 2 of this paper. In summary, these are:

(a) Empowering people

Providing day opportunities’ involves service users being empowered and supported to take their place as citizens, participating as full and equal members of society. This is achieved by the increased take-up of direct payments, ensuring a supply of personal assistants and increasing the use of Assistive Technology and Communication Aids.

(b) Organising resources for change

Moving funding from congregate services and attaches it to individuals either through direct payments or flexible personal budget arrangements. This involves moving away from the traditional ‘day centre’ model and establishing a truly community based and community integrated approach.

Support being built around people, which is tailored to their needs supported by networks of services, brokers and advocates.

(d) Creating a barrier-free community

Ensure that citizens have full access to mainstream community services and develop a culture where people feel confident to support people in challenging prejudice and discrimination. Make sure people with learning disabilities and their families know their rights under equalities and disability discrimination legislation.

(e) Achieving inclusion in community life

It is an aspiration that individuals receiving day opportunities provision are part of mainstream community life and organisations support people into local jobs, whether through employment or self-employment (micro-enterprise) or people understand volunteering as an option. There is an understanding of how someone’s challenging behaviour can be managed in community settings.

(f) Supporting people into paid work

Engagement in paid work is one of the ways to most successfully engage individuals fully into their community.

(g) Helping people learn and develop

Helping people to continue to learn and develop by encouraging working in partnership with the local system so that young people with higher needs can attend local college courses rather than have to go away from their home area. Develop an ethos of supporting individuals progressively increase their independence skills; enabling people to have more control over their lives.

(h) Ensuring quality

By an outcome based approach and user led approaches ensure that each day service, employment or support provider has an effective system for monitoring and ensuring the quality of support taking place in community settings, and that they have contingency plans to ensure reliability and consistency of service

4.0 Current Day Care Provision

The Council currently arranges a range of day opportunities for younger and older adults including those with mental, physical, sensory and learning disabilities. These services are provided by both the internal and external social care market. External services are either procured individually for service users by Social Workers or commissioned through the Directorates grant funded community services.

4.1 Internal services

Younger adults day care services are currently delivered across eleven sites which are proposed to reduce to nine through 2017. The services support 862 people with physical and learning disabilities which include intensive support to people with complex needs.

4.2 External Services

There are currently approximately 97 providers across Birmingham delivering day opportunities to people procured directly by the Social Worker on an individual client basis. All services are building based and currently support 686 clients from low level to complex needs.

4.3 Third Sector Provider

There are also a number of third sector providers through grant funding or Supporting People arrangements that also offer day support and opportunities.

4.4 Expenditure

The current spend on day care is as follows:

Provider No of Clients Cost (p.a) £m) Locations

Internal 862 £8.5 Across Birmingham Provision (Younger Adults)

External 686 £7.2 Birmingham, Sandwell & Solihull Provision

Third Sector Not counted £1.1 Across Birmingham

Total 1548 £16.8

5.0 Co-production Methodology

People will be engaged in all aspects of the work and in a number of ways. Particular effort will be given to working in partnership with the Children’s Trust to coproduce services for the future.

Existing service users and their carers (social care, external provision and internal provision) will be interviewed, surveyed and engaged in working groups.

An employment challenge will be undertaken to test the Council’s Commissioned employment services for a group of current day service users who have expressed an interest in employment. This will inform how employment support is developed.

It is assumed that the prevention strategy work will inform the development of community assets that are available in Birmingham for all to access, and this includes family support, Information and Advice, community organisation. The coproduction will focus on the development of the model to meet the needs of people who require support in addition to general support – the green boxes in the diagram below

Respite and Short Breaks Shared Lives Personal Assistant Direct payment to purchase support

Employment Volunteering Leisure and culture Community assets

Prevention Advice & Support Community Assets Family & Friends

6.0 Day Opportunity Development Plan

Objective Tasks Date Deliver a clear coproduction Stakeholder map September approach 2017 Governance group October 2017 Peer Leadership October 2017 Series of events – transition, current From October service users, wider stakeholders 2017 to April 2018 Work readiness challenge of December 2017 employment services Vision and Strategy Development Plan January 2018 to Cabinet Day Opportunity model and Model proposed April 2018 development plan in place Life course approach clearly identified December 2017 including transition planning to April 2018 Day service review, coproduction and January to April Consultation 2018 Detailed provider map, cost and January 2018 service summary produced Information and Advice plan and web Tbc – based development prevention strategy Recommendation for Day Opportunity June 2018 Strategy to Cabinet Market Development ensures Market position statement May 2018 a vibrant and innovative

11 supply of day opportunities Commissioning intentions/plan May 2018 Provider engagement plan September onwards PA development strategy and plan By February 2018 Procurement and contract approach in March 2018 place (including pricing strategy) Day Opportunity strategy has Employment strategy developed with December 2017 a clear partnership approach Economy Directorate Accessibility and inclusion strategy in tbc place at Health and Wellbeing Board Day opportunities a clear feature of tbc mental health strategy, dementia strategy and Aging Well Policy and Process supports Review and reassessment as part of From October day opportunity strategy social work offer for uptake of direct 2017 payment Review of charging and provision December 2017 policy – transport, client contributions to May 2018

Equality Analysis Birmingham City Council Analysis Report

EA Name Early Help & Prevention Project: Day Opportunities Directorate People Service Area Adults - Joint Commissioning Type New/Proposed Policy EA Summary The Council currently arranges a range of day opportunities for younger and older adults including those with mental health needs, physical disability and sensory impairment and learning disabilities. These services are provided by both the internal and external social care market. External services are either procured individually for service users by Social Workers or commissioned through the Directorates grant funded community services. Much of the current service provision is dated and mainly building based with no clear outcomes that require providers to help citizens maintain or regain their independence or gain access to employment. For most clients these will become a lifelong service. The proposed future model will be underpinned by improved quality, better utilisation of community assets and the development of day opportunities providers of care and the third sector. This will be undertaken whilst ensuring the appropriate level of care or support is available that is centred on the citizen's needs. There is a timeline which cumulates in the seeking of approval to implement the new strategy at the November 2018 cabinet with the introduction of the new model in January 2019. Reference Number EA002560 Task Group Manager [email protected] Task Group Members [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Senior Officer [email protected] Quality Control Officer [email protected]

Introduction

The report records the information that has been submitted for this equality analysis in the following format.

Initial Assessment

This section identifies the purpose of the Policy and which types of individual it affects. It also identifies which equality strands are affected by either a positive or negative differential impact.

Relevant Protected Characteristics

For each of the identified relevant protected characteristics there are three sections which will have been completed. Impact Consultation Additional Work

If the assessment has raised any issues to be addressed there will also be an action planning section.

The following pages record the answers to the assessment questions with optional comments included by the assessor to clarify or explain any of the answers given or relevant issues.

1 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 1 Activity Type

The activity has been identified as a New/Proposed Policy.

2 Initial Assessment

2.1 Purpose and Link to Strategic Themes

What is the purpose of this Policy and expected outcomes? Consistent with the Birmingham Adult Social Care Vision and Strategy (June 2017), the following principles will guide the development of day opportunities: . Information, advice and guidance . Personalised support . Community assets . Prevention and early intervention . Partnership working . Making safeguarding personal . Best use of available resources

Engagement has taken place on the draft vision and strategy with: the Chair of the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee; Executive Management Team (EMT); Corporate Leadership Team (CLT); Economy Directorate Management Team; Corporate Director of Place and the Adult Social Care & Health Directorate Leadership Team.

Engagement sessions have been held with the Adult Social Care & Health Directorate staff group. Response to the Vision and Strategy Development Plan by internal stakeholders has been positive.

Co-production has started but it is essential that the Strategy and Service Model result from the Co-production.

Engagement has started with: service users; carers; the Citizens Panel; single and multi-faith groups; community groups; Third sector and Supporting People providers; Birmingham Voluntary Service Council (BVSC); Care Providers and with Clinical Commissioning Groups and Trusts in the Health Sector.

The response to the plans to co-produce the work by external stakeholders has been positive and further work needs to take place to develop the strategy.

The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan is consistent with the Council's 'Vision and Priority 2017-2020' and supports the priority of Health - A great city to grow old in. It also delivers the priorities set in the new strategy for Health and Social Care.

This priority includes: promoting independence of all our citizens; joining up health and social care services so that citizens have the best possible experience of care tailored to their needs; and preventing, reducing and delaying dependency and maximising the resilience and independence of citizens, their families and the community.

Approval of the Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan does not commit the local authority to specific expenditure. The importance of using resources effectively is highlighted and changes arising from the co-production work will be aligned with the development of the Council's long term Financial Plan. This will set the direction for future consideration of savings proposals for Adult Social Care & Health Internal and External Day Service Provision.

2 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan complies with the requirements of the Care Act 2014 which defines the primary responsibility of local authorities in the promotion of individual wellbeing.

It is consistent with responsibilities of a local authority under Part 1 of the Care Act 2014 to:

. Promote the individual's physical, mental and emotional wellbeing (Section 1); . Provide or organise services that prevent or delay the need for care and support (Section 2); . Promote integration of care and support provision with health and health-related provision (Section 3) and co-operate with key partners to promote the wellbeing of adults and improve the quality of care and support (Section 6); . Establish and maintain a service for providing information and advice relating to care and support for adults and carers (Section 4); . Promote diversity and quality in the provision of services for meeting care and support needs (Section 5); . Assess an adult's needs for care and support (Section 9) and assess a carer's needs for support (Section 10); . Adopt a person-centred approach to planning and supporting care (Sections 24-25); . Make available Direct Payments (Sections 31-33); . Safeguard adults at risk of abuse or neglect (Sections 42-47).

The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan provides a framework for Birmingham to respond to requirements of various legislation, policy and guidance documents where services need to be modernised to provide an enabling and individualised response. This includes:

. Transforming Care for people with Learning Disabilities 2015 . Care Act 2014 . Mental Capacity Act 2005 . Making it Real 2012 . Think Local, Act Personal 2010

A stage 1 Equality Assessment (EA) was carried out in November 2016 and reviewed in November 2017; this will be updated as we continue to co-produce a new model for day opportunities that is fit for the future.

The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy Development Plan is relevant to all protected characteristics. By enabling the outcomes to be delivered the Day Opportunities Strategy when implemented will have a positive impact on citizens, service users and carers and we will continue to meet our responsibilities under the Care Act 2014.

There may potentially be an adverse impact on employees of Adult Social Care Services, arising from re-organisation of Internal Day services with changes to work location or a reduction in Council run services. Mitigation of the impacts of specific proposals arising from this work will be in line with the Council's agreed policies and procedures.

There are a number of challenges facing the Council in supporting adults and older people including: more people living longer with more complex needs; significant numbers of young adults who have disabilities or who suffer from mental illness; people having higher expectations of the public sector; and significantly reduced level of resources. Consequently, changes are needed to the type of services that are arranged and provided, and to the way services are organised and delivered.

The desired outcomes for adults and older people in Birmingham are that they should be resilient, live independently whenever possible, and exercise choice and control so they can live good

3 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 quality lives and enjoy good health and wellbeing. The Day Opportunities Vision and Strategy will seek to addresses potential barriers and obstacles to delivering these outcomes. It will provide a framework for the actions required to modernise Adult Social Care Day Services in Birmingham. It will also seek to better utilise community assets at a local level to enable sustainable packages of care to be provide within service users own communities.

A key driver of the localised strategic approach to the provision of support for adults with a learning disability is the national context which has a focus on transforming care and support based on personalised support, early intervention and enabling people to access a range of services and support at the point in which they need to do so. The key principles of this national context are reflected in the Care Act 2014 and Transforming Care (National document led by NHS England). In addition to the driver for transformational change, there is the financial context of reducing resources and increasing demand, which is both a national and local challenge.

The Care Act 2014 requires people to be assessed as individuals and for their needs to be determined in terms of their personal 'wellbeing'. The Act focuses on looking at people's strengths, what they can do and what outcomes they want to achieve, which is often described as strength based approach. It anticipates that most individuals can lead full lives focusing on prevention and timely advice and information. This will require a significant practice and cultural shift locally to which the Council has to respond.

Historically adult social care in Birmingham has been based upon a traditional "assess for service" model which has resulted in a higher proportion of adults in receipt of services when compared to regional neighbours. Care and support has been provided by services rather than prevention and promotion of an individual's strengths. Services also tend to be traditional due to lack of real alternatives available across the City.

Many Local Authorities have moved away from providing any in-house, building based offers and now offer a tailored, individualised and personalised service. Others have targeted a reduced resource to people with significant complex needs including behaviour that challenges.

A personalised approach will look at the individual's outcomes as described in the Care Act 2014 and therefore individuals will use their personal budget with support to identify the best way to meet their own needs. This may be by accessing universal services at no or low cost, purchasing community services or commissioning a provider to provide domiciliary care or other types of support. This means that a range of different options will be developed and offered and this will incrementally increase through the transformation of adult care.

Access to Day Services and expectations of what "Having a Good Day" looks like varies across the age ranges. Younger aged Adults have greater access to Employment and Education and on transition from Children's Services are faced with alternative provision to meet expectations not being available.

The Internal Day Services for Younger Adults are accessed in the main by 51-64 aged Adults (regardless of primary support reason/disability type) and access to Services is often driven by the need for carer respite. The numbers of people accessing a traditional service within this group are higher than other age groups.

There is a further group of Adults with a learning disability service who access a number of types of traditional services - residential care, transport and day care. These Service users are reflected in the proportion of 2016/17 budget spend with 40% of all Adult Social Care budget being spent on learning disability services/service users.

Consideration is therefore required on how to transform our services to meet the aspirations of individuals and their families, but also acknowledge the need for time to build confidence, trust

4 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 and the wider market of services within local communities for wide ranging need and expectation.

Consistent with the Birmingham Adult Social Care Vision and Strategy (June 2017), the following principles will guide the development of day opportunities:

In order to deliver this element of the strategy, there will be a reorganisation of the current day service provision provided by the Council and the range of services provided on contract to the Council based on the co-production work to set out "Having a Good Day in Birmingham". Where a person is accessing community support, the Council will seek to enable them to purchase this through a direct payment as opposed to social workers brokering individual service contracts with providers.

The day opportunities strategy will address some of the barriers people face to be included as full members of the community; change can only take place if all agencies work in partnership to break down any barriers. By engaging with new and existing voluntary, health, care and support, activity and housing providers the aim will be to deliver high quality services for people that will support people, including self-funders, encouraging arrangements which allow more individuals to receive a personal budget as a direct payment or individual service fund will also give people greater choice and control.

The Council recognises that services need to take a life course approach and recognise that the needs and aspirations change at different points in a person's life, and that there are certain times when greater or different types of support is needed. However, an important principle in taking a personalised approach is that no assumptions are made about the opportunities that are relevant to people because of age. Within day opportunities, there will be particular focus on areas where there is common need. For example, for younger Adults there will be a focus on education and employment, for older Adults a reduction in social isolation and loneliness, and for those recovering from mental health or physical ill health, a focus on recovery and reablement.

5 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 Investment and development of the Personal Assistant market will be required to ensure that people are able to access personal care and support to be active participants in the range of activities that the community provides. Consideration of the views of people will inform this work and testing will take place to ensure that there are a range of options for people who want to employ their own Personal Assistant or those who want to access this support from organisations who can manage employment for them. As part of the work to improve Advice and Information, the value of a digital platform for Personal Assistants will be explored to ease the process of securing appropriate and safe support.

A thorough ongoing approach to prevention needs to be developed and implemented within day opportunities. This will involve the link to community assets to ensure that people with lower level needs aren't left until they develop acute needs, but it will also involve a greater focus on employment and daily living skills that enable people to stay well, healthy and independent wherever possible.

People's needs are often complex and require support and interventions from a range of organisations, as well as different services within the Council. Services need to be integrated and built on partnership working utilising existing community assets of all partners. This will require a drive to ensure all facilities and services in the City are accessible to people with support needs and/or disabilities, including provision for delivery of personal care, safe spaces for vulnerable adults, and for organisations to consider how activities are adapted to include people.

The Council and its partners need to need to be open to changes in processes to ensure they are also able to support employment for vulnerable adults and disabled people and to develop mentally healthy workplaces. Care and health partners need to embrace employment as a key option for people and consider through their service how they are supporting people to become ready for employment where this is their desired goal.

Underpinning all of this is the imperative to use resources effectively. Every pound that Birmingham spends on care must represent a pound well spent. The pressures on the City Council's resources are enormous and it is essential that resources are maximised.

Investment in day opportunities will shift to increase investment in community assets, employment and personal assistant support. Going forward, the council will not put into place lifelong services in day care and will instead focus on how to enable individuals to access their community, employment and the raft of cultural and education opportunities that Birmingham offers. It will also be considered what is the Councils statutory responsibility in providing care and this will include a review of Policy such as charging, transport and meals will take place to ensure any proposed

6 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 change has the required Consultation and is fair.

Evaluation of alternative option(s):

Do nothing - This is would not deliver the actions required to modernise Adult Social Care Services. Alternative options for the delivery elements of the strategy will be considered and evaluated through the development of specific programmes and projects.

Reasons for Decision(s):

The Day Opportunity Strategy when co-produced will provide a framework for the actions required to modernise Adult Social Care Day Services in Birmingham in order to improve the health and wellbeing of adults and older people.

The future model enables us to procure outcome focused care services that empowers providers to offer a wider range of care and support that is centred around addressing individual service user care needs. A framework of quality standards will be developed with providers to enables individuals and the Council to understand quality of the market as well as enabling the Council to monitor performance and put in place minimum quality standards.

The proposed commissioning approaches to Adult Social Care, focusing on prevention first and community assets to support the delivery of this. In particular, the strategy will be looking at the opportunity for internal and external Day Care Centre Services being provided in locality community assets, such as based in council leisure centres, parks, libraries and community centre sites.

There are currently approximately 1412 internal and external day centre clients; Internal Day Care data has been provided by Adult Social Care, for Adult clients who use a BCC managed day centre. Currently, there are approximately 722 internal day centre clients, across 11 BCC day centre sites. The proportions of clients by type of provision are: Learning Disabilities = 78%, Physical Disabilities = 19% and Older Adults = 3%. External day centre data has been obtained from Carefirst 6 and by liaison with external service providers. There are approximately 690 external day services clients accessing 57 day centres, The proportions of clients by type of provision are: Learning Disabilities = 278 clients (40.3%), Physical Disability & Sensory Impairment = 147 clients (21.3), Mental Health = 32 clients (4.6%) and Older Adults = 233 clients (33.8%).

Community assets location data has been provided by the responsible council services, which currently show 20 leisure sites (indoor centres, hubs, pools, and fitness centres), 60 Active Parks sites, 38 libraries and 10 directly managed community centres.

The largest age groups for day centre clients are 30-49 & 50-64 years. Together they account for

7 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 78% of all day centre clients. Younger clients (18-29) and older clients (65+) each represent 11% of total clients. There are more male clients, at 55%. 63% are of White ethnic background, nearly a quarter is of Asian ethnicity and 12% are of Black ethnic background.

Over a third (34%) of clients are from settled extended families (the majority from a South Asian background) and older people living in multi-cultural suburbs and have been settled in these neighbourhoods for many years, enjoying the sense of community they feel there. Therefore the strategy focuses upon locality based day opportunities that are accessible to citizens within their own neighbourhoods.

15% of clients are within families with children who have limited budgets and can struggle to make ends meet. Their homes are low cost and are often found in areas with fewer employment options. The strategy focus on development of employment options would improve these clients ability to become part of the workforce.

Clients using internal services are spread across all wards of the city, with higher numbers of clients in the east / south-east in particular. The top 5 wards for highest number of clients are Aston, Lozells & East Handsworth, Bordesley Green, Stockland Green and Springfield, accounting for 20% in total. 66% of the clients live in the highest level of deprivation quintile. Over four-fifths live in the top two most deprived quintile bands. This is a good fit with the strategy aim to help the wider council's aims to improve Wellbeing focused on the most deprived.

The internal service feels there is an opportunity through the management of internal services in co-production with service users and their carers to explore the possibility to consolidate, improve and co-produce its internal younger adult's day centres.

The function should not have any adverse impact on service users and they will be offered a choice of remaining within the internal services that is more refined and suited to their wish to have 'a good day', or supported to take up and alternative place at a third sector or independent day opportunity.

For each strategy, please decide whether it is going to be significantly aided by the Function.

Children: A Safe And Secure City In Which To Learn And Grow No Health: Helping People Become More Physically Active And Well Yes Housing : To Meet The Needs Of All Current And Future Citizens No Jobs And Skills: For An Enterprising, Innovative And Green City Yes

2.2 Individuals affected by the policy

Will the policy have an impact on service users/stakeholders? Yes Will the policy have an impact on employees? Yes Will the policy have an impact on wider community? Yes

2.3 Relevance Test

Protected Characteristics Relevant Full Assessment Required Age Relevant No Disability Relevant No Gender Relevant No Gender Reassignment Relevant No

8 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000

Marriage Civil Partnership Relevant No Pregnancy And Maternity Relevant No Race Relevant No Religion or Belief Relevant No Sexual Orientation Relevant No

2.4 Analysis on Initial Assessment

The strategy is likely to have a positive impact upon customer groups in terms of the proposed delivery models, which will promote and maximize the independence of adults to remain within their communities and to access community based resources over regulated services. Greater choice and control for Citizens will be encouraged through the encouragement to take up direct payments. The services will also remain available for self-funders.

A co-design plan is proposed for this piece of work which will include the Citizens accessing the services and their relevant support networks (relatives/carer/professional).

Supporting data relating to Citizen Profiles, usage of services and preferences will be collated as part of the project implementation.

At this stage, any negative impacts are unknown, however it is anticipated that for some Citizens that have accessed the same services for a period of time, any proposed change is likely to be unsettling. Therefore a risk and equality impacts log will be maintained alongside the development of this project.

We are confident that all internal service users can be accommodated. Clients and their families will be offered a social work review to support them to identify alternative day opportunities provision if they chose. The change is not anticipated to have any adverse impact on any of the service users and choice and control over their day care will be of the utmost importance.

Birmingham city council has comprehensive policies and procedures for supporting staff during the changes and these will be adhered to. This change is not anticipated to adversely impact on any protected characteristics.

A decision to complete a full EA and timing of the initiation of a full EA will form part of the Project Governance.

9 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 3 Full Assessment

The assessment questions below are completed for all characteristics identified for full assessment in the initial assessment phase.

3.1 Concluding Statement on Full Assessment

4 Review Date

31/01/19

5 Action Plan

There are no relevant issues, so no action plans are currently required.

10 of 10 Report Produced: 2018-01-04 14:13:47 +0000 Birmingham City Council

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET

Report of: Corporate Director for Children and Young People

Date of Decision: 24th January 2018

SUBJECT: SCHOOLS PRIVATE FINANCE INITIATIVE & BUILDING SCHOOLS FOR THE FUTURE SAVINGS REVIEW – CONTRACT TERMINATION

Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 004669/2018

If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved

Relevant Cabinet Member(s) Cllr Majid Mahmood, Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management

Cllr Carl Rice, Children, Families & Schools

Relevant O&S Chair: Cllr Mohammed Aikhlaq - Corporate Resources and Governance

Cllr Susan Barnett – Schools, Children and Families

Wards affected: ALL

1. Purpose of report: 1.1 Further to the agreed Cabinet report on 15th November 2016 – Schools Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Building Schools for the Future (BSF) Savings Review, this report is to advise of the proposal to progress one of the PFI and BSF related savings initiatives previously identified, namely the removal of Facilities Management (FM) provision for the 7 BSF Design and Build (D&B) Schools and Academies (as listed in Appendix 1). 1.2 The accompanying private report contains commercially confidential information related to this proposal.

Birmingham City Council

2. Decision(s) recommended: That Cabinet:-

2.1 Notes this report.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Jaswinder Didially, Head of Service Nadia Majid, Lead Contracts Manager, Education Infrastructure Telephone No: 0121 303 8847 E-mail address: [email protected] [email protected] 3. Consultation: 3.1 Internal

Officers from City Finance, Legal and Governance have been involved in the preparation of this report.

3.2 External

BSF Schools and Academies (as per Appendix 1), Birmingham Lend Lease Partnership, Amber Investments (on behalf of BSFi1 LLP), have been consulted on all relevant matters and are aware and support the Council’s interest in pursuing this initiative.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 The proposals contribute towards the City Council’s Financial Plan 2017+ which sets out the annual budget and long term financial strategy of the City Council and plans for assets, capital investment and other resource issues to deliver the City Council’s priorities.

4.2 Financial Implications (How will decisions be carried out within existing finances and Resources?)

4.2.1 Under the 7 D&B BSF contracts in question, the City Council has a Facilities Management (FM) Agreement in place at 7 Schools and Academies which provides for services such as cleaning, caretaking, grounds maintenance, etc. to be provided by a third party. The FM arrangements were a condition of the DfE capital works funding being allocated to these Schools and Academies under the Building Schools for the Future (“BSF”) Programme and mirror FM arrangements in our PFI Schools. The FM agreements are for up to 25 years and are subject to an annual indexation increase.

1 BSFi is the financial arm of the former Partnerships for Schools; the body set up to support the delivery of BSF on behalf of Central Government. Birmingham City Council

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 Sections 13, 14 & 16 of the Education Act 1996 provides the powers under which PFI and the BSF Programme were established. The proposals will assist the City Council to meet its statutory obligation to make arrangements and secure continuous improvement in the delivery of its functions (Best Value) under S.3 Local Government Act 1999.

4.3.2 Of the 150 staff subject to TUPE 144 will transfer straight to Academies and because they do not have any relationship to the Council the TUPE arrangements will be between the individual Academies as independent organisations and the outgoing FM contractor.

5 of the 7 Schools implicated are independent Academies and 1 is a Foundation School therefore all staff will transfer directly from the FM contractor to the Academy Trust / Governing Body. The only Community School implicated is George Dixon Primary a co- located Primary School which shares a site with George Dixon Academy. The number of staff to transfer to the Community School / the City Council will be between 4 and 6 depending on the part-time employment arrangements of the individuals and the “Relevant Proportion” funding currently held by the City Council to cover the costs of the staff. As part of the proposed contractual arrangements these staff will revert back to the School as part of the initiative, allowing the School to manage the staff directly.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 An Initial Equality Analysis was carried out on 02/10/2017 (EA002379) and the outcome indicated that a Full Equality Analysis was not required as this time due to the commercially sensitive nature of this initiative.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 The City Council has 4 PFI and BSF packages servicing 36 Schools and Academies at an annual revenue cost of circa £37.6m. The PFI and BSF arrangements have supported £456.8m of capital investment in Birmingham Schools and the long-term contracts in place, which extend up to 30 years, are envisaged to cost the City Council in the region of £755m revenue in total over the respective contract terms. For a protracted period of time the City Council has faced a considerable revenue pressure on its 4 PFI and BSF FM Contracts.

5.2 In light of the nationally recognised financial pressures associated with PFI arrangements, in January 2015 the City Council agreed to support a “pilot study” being undertaken by Local Partnerships. The study sought to explore the potential for savings from PFI contracts and had the buy-in of HM Treasury, Department for Education, Education Funding Agency and the Local Government Association.

5.3 Following the conclusion of the study a report was produced in April 2015. City Council officers have continued to work to implement the identified initiatives and further provide a far more robust challenge to PFI Providers. That challenge has extended to overseeing, critically reviewing and validating benchmarking exercises on all 4 City Council contracts as well as removing life-cycle obligations from the Broadway Academy FM contract. The outcome of implementing such exercises has delivered substantial reductions in the charges being applied to the associated contracts as detailed in previous reports to cabinet on 20th September and 15th November 2016.

Birmingham City Council

5.4 This initiative directly to a community primary School is made possible by utilising a clause within the contract but requires commercial negotiations with the Birmingham Lend Lease Partnership (BLLP), the FM provider (Engie) and the impacted individual Schools/Academies. The proposal when implemented will result in the TUPE transfer of circa 144 Soft FM and Hard FM staff currently engaged in the delivery of FM to the designated Academies and up to 6 staff

5.5 The Schools and Academies impacted have been directly consulted with over the last 18 months. All are supportive and would prefer to end current FM arrangement and take back direct responsibility of FM, and fully understand the implications and requirement to manage this activity within their respective delegated budgets. This approach is in line with the delegated budgetary arrangements that are in place at all other non- BSF schools. . Through the consultation period the Schools and Academies have confirmed that there is a more cost effective solution to this area of expenditure than that currently operated under the BSF programme and are keen to take back control.

5.6 Key to achieving this beneficial position for the City Council is the ability of officers from the Edi team, Legal and external technical support (funded from Edi budget) to challenge the contract assumptions, commercially negotiate the termination and negotiation with the Schools and Academies to pave the way for the initiative to be implemented

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 The removal of the FM provision for the D&B contract is a BSF specific opportunity not open to any other part of the PFI Schools contracts. The Edi team has considered carefully the rationale to activate this initiative and whilst it will result in complex negotiation, the current budget pressures faced by the City Council are a driving force behind the work done by the Edi team. There is no other initiative that could deliver this particular savings opportunity.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 To secure a reduction in the current contractual charges which will contribute to the achievement of significant savings targets across the PFI Schools contracts. Birmingham City Council

Signatures Date Cabinet Member for Children, Families & Schools Cllr Carl Rice .

Cabinet Member for Commercialism, Commissioning & Contract Management Cllr Majid Mahmood . ..

Corporate Director for Children & Young People Colin Diamond .

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

1. Report to Cabinet on 15th November 2016 – Schools Private Finance Initiative and Building Schools for the Future Savings Review

2. Report to Cabinet on 20th September 2016 – Broadway Academy Building Schools for the Future savings Review

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

1. List of BSF D&B Schools/Academies

Report Version 5 Dated: 15/01/2018

APPENDIX 1

BSF Schools

School / Academy Name Status Ward

Broadway Academy Academy Aston

George Dixon Academy Academy Harbo rne

George Dixon Primary School Community School Harborne

Tile Cross Academy (previously Academy Shard End International School)

Moseley School & Sixth Form Foundation School Springfield

Rockwood Academy (previously Academy Washwood Heath Park View)

Saltley Academy Academy Bordesley Green

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC REPORT Report to: CABINET Report of: INTERIM CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND CORPORATE DIRECTOR, CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE Date of Decision: 24 January 2018 SUBJECT: EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017- 18 Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: N/A If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "tick" box) O&S Chairman approved Relevant Cabinet Member: Cllr Carl Rice – Children, Families and Schools Relevant O&S Chairman: Cllr Susan Barnett – Schools, Children and Families Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report:

1.1 To present to Cabinet the Education Delivery and Improvement Plan (2017-18) for the Children and Young People Directorate.

1.2 This document will enable Cabinet to keep under review the priorities and improvements made in the City’s Educational system, in line with Birmingham City Council’s Vision and Priorities.

1.3 The Council continues to have direct responsibility for large parts of the education system, and has developed strong partnerships with key stakeholders, including local schools and education providers, to ensure there is effective leadership of education policy and delivery across the city.

1.4 The Department for Education and OfSTED hold the Council to account for the performance of its schools and its wider duties, which include: Early Years; Sufficiency of school places; Special educational needs and disabilities; Safeguarding and Transitions into education, employment and training.

1.5 This matter was not included in the Forward Plan but is being presented today in order that Birmingham City Council can begin to reflect the progress that has been made in line with the Council’s improvement framework.

2 Decision(s) recommended:

That Cabinet:

2.1 To agree the Education Delivery and Improvement Plan 2017–18 attached to this report, as the baseline for monitoring educational progression and achievement of outcomes, in line with the City Council’s overall suite of improvement plans.

2.2 To agree that the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools should continue to work with officers to drive forward improvements in Education outcomes.

2.3 To agree that the Cabinet should review progress in January 2019 in line with the publication of the City’s examination results.

Lead Contact Colin Diamond Officer(s): Corporate Director, Children & Young People

Telephone No: 0121 464 2808 E-mail address: [email protected]

3. Consultation 3.1 Internal

Discussions took place with the then Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools, staff colleagues, Schools Forum, Early Years, Primary, Secondary and Special Heads’ Fora and the Birmingham Education Partnership who are commissioned to deliver the Council’s school improvement duties under the statutory Schools Causing Concern Guidance.

3.2 External

Discussion took place with Department for Education officials and senior OfSTED inspectors about the improvement priorities during the regular Education Improvement Group meetings. Some discussion has taken place with the Birmingham Independent Improvement Panel about the principles of a range of Improvement Plans for key services.

4. Compliance Issues: 4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies? The Improvement Plan is in line with the Council’s vision and priorities, in particular ‘A great city to grow up in’ and ‘A great city to succeed in’ and the value of striving for excellence.

4.2 Good educational outcomes and life-long learning are intrinsically linked to employment, the city’s skill levels and quality of life outcomes. This can only be achieved in partnership with schools, colleges, universities, other education and training providers, employers and families and communities. A lack of skills and qualifications has the potential to restrict the economic growth of the city and limit the life-opportunities of residents. The quality of the Education system and offer in the city is imperative in ensuring that Birmingham continues to be an attractive location for employers, with a competitive labour market and a great place to live.

4.2 Financial Implications

4.2.1 The majority of education funding comes via the Direct Schools Grant (DSG), some through the General Fund and a small amount from Department for Education grants. Individual schools have the responsibility for managing their own budgets and decisions about what they spend. Schools Forum agrees the local funding formula for schools in consultation with Birmingham City Council.

4.2.2 The finance to deliver educational achievement in Birmingham has several different accountabilities and funding is generated through the following sources:

• The Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) - which accounts for the majority of funding and covers Early Years, Reception to Year 11 provision and Special Educational Needs. For 2017/18 the budgeted indicative DSG is £1,140,190m (including Academies and Free Schools for which grant is recouped back from Birmingham to enable the DfE to fund them directly). There is limited flexibility to retain funding centrally and what is available is subject to School Forum approval/consultation. However, within this year’s

allocation Birmingham secured ongoing approval from School Forum to fund the Birmingham Education Partnership at £1,080m.

• General Fund – although the budgeted controllable element is only £22m approximately; and in the current financial year £17.2m of this relates to the budget for SEND Transport.

• Grants – which include Pupil Premium and Universal Free School Meals which are required to be passed to schools.

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 The Education Delivery and Improvement Plan facilitates the discharge of the local authority’s duty under section 13A of the Education Act 1996 whereby the Council must ensure that its relevant education functions are exercised with a view to promoting high standards, ensuring fair access to opportunity for education and training, and promoting the fulfilment of learning potential by every child and young person.

4.3.2 The relevant education functions reflected in the Plan include legal duties contained within the:

• Education Act 1996, Part 1 – local authorities’ general responsibilities for education including securing the provision of sufficient primary and secondary schools so that all children have a school place;

• School Standards and Framework Act 1998, Part 3 – functions in respect of school admissions and admission arrangements to schools;

• Education and Inspections Act 2006, Part 4 – school improvement and intervention;

• Children and Families Act 2014, Part 3 – ensuring appropriate assessment and provision for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities;

• Children Act 2004, Part 2 – Safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children; cooperation to improve wellbeing.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty

The Plan will have a positive impact on protected groups and eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; (c) foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.

The Council has a duty to ensure that is actions do not have negative impacts on anyone with protected characteristics and has to proactively ensure that it is tackling disadvantage and giving children and young people the best possible opportunity. This Plan, working with partners, seeks to provide those opportunities and provides the framework for specific action plans that support young people with protected characteristics, and children, young people and adults with special educational needs.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

Background

5.1 In 2014 Birmingham City Council was the subject of the Kerslake report which outlined a range of weaknesses in the Council’s performance. In 2015 the Birmingham Independent Improvement Panel was appointed to support the Council and report back on its progress to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

5.2 Additionally, the Department for Education had appointed an Education Commissioner in September 2014 to oversee the necessary improvements to education in the city including government run academies, following the publication of the Trojan Horse letter in November 2013 and 21 inspections of Birmingham schools by OfSTED in Spring 2014.

5.3 The Secretary of State approved the first Education Improvement Plan in January 2015. The Government withdrew the Commissioner arrangements in Summer 2016 when it was satisfied that the Education Improvement Plan had been successfully delivered.

Key Issues

5.4 One of the things the Council has been seeking to do in the last two years has been to strengthen its governance arrangements. This is now visible in a clear Vision and Priorities and a framework of performance indicators which are now reported on and published on the Council’s website.

5.5 As part of the process the Council has been in discussion with the Independent Improvement Panel with the aim of having a series of Improvement Plans on key areas. With the addition of being led by the relevant Cabinet Member, these plans will have the corporate ownership of the Cabinet to enable progress to be visible and members to have direct input if there are areas which need further attention or new proposals in order to make progress.

5.6 This Plan, which has been in existence since April 2017 is the first to come to Cabinet for sign off and review. It builds on the first Education Improvement Plan, originally approved by Birmingham’s Education Quartet and subsequently by the Secretary of State. This is the third plan since 2015/16 and each year it has been updated to reflect progress and priorities.

5.7 The original priorities in 2015/16, in the wake of Trojan Horse, were to ensure that no school in Birmingham was operating in isolation, to establish strong practice in school improvement, school governance, safeguarding and re-establish communications with schools.

5.8 The 2017/18 Plan has broadened out to reflect Birmingham City Council’s core education duties, the creation of the Children’s Trust and the establishment of the Children and Young People's Directorate. Since 2015, significant progress has been made in relation to keeping children safe in education; strengthening the governance of Birmingham’s maintained schools; re-establishing communications with schools so that they do not operate in isolation; and building a strong platform for school improvement.

5.9 Stronger partnerships are now in place between Birmingham City Council, the Department for Education, OfSTED and the Birmingham Education Partnership (BEP). Birmingham’s Education Improvement Group, a monthly meeting between these partners, is seen as a model of best practice for all core cities by the National Schools Commissioner.

5.10 The relationship with the Education & Skills Funding Agency has also been strengthened, with regular meetings looking at Post 16 provision across the city, issues related to young people Not in Employment, Education and training and attainment and destinations figures.

5.11 Higher and more effective engagement with schools of all kinds (maintained, academies and free schools) has been achieved and the Schools Noticeboard, published weekly during term time, brings all communications with schools into one place. It is a flagship publication with high approval ratings from schools.

5.12 The areas of relative strength now lie in secondary school performance which ranks highly compared with other core cities and the development of unique safeguarding and resilience approaches with schools. Over 200 schools are now engaged in the UNICEF Rights Respecting Award which makes Birmingham’s pupils safer by ensuring they can make informed choices. Whilst work continues to address Not Known figures in the city, the number of young people registered as NEET has continued to fall, with Birmingham often ranking in the Top 2 best performing Core Cities.

5.13 The Inclusion Commission concluded its work in autumn 2017 and a new SEND and Inclusion Strategy has been approved. Its aims are to enable more children and young people with SEND to have their needs met locally in Birmingham’s own special and mainstream schools wherever possible. There is much work to be done here, including commissioning more local high quality specialist provision rather than rely on schools out of the City.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s): 6.1 It is important that the Children and Young People Directorate have a plan to work to for service development and design, and which allows outcomes and performance to be assessed. The only alternative to the current plan would be to focus on a different format for presentation.

7. Reasons for Decision(s): 7.1 The report sets out the recent history of the Education Service and the need for continued transparency of challenges and objectives, which allows for a meaningful assessment of process in Education as part of the Council’s work towards a culture focused on high performance.

Signatures Date Cabinet Member, Children, Families and Schools: Cllr Carl Rice .. .

Interim Chief Executive: Stella Manzie .. .

Corporate Director, Children & Young People: Colin Diamond .. .

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any): The Education Delivery and Improvement Plan 2017-18 (Children and Young People; Birmingham City Council) Report Version Final Date April 2017

Children and Young People Directorate

EducationDelivery and improvement plan 2017–18

A great city to grow up in 02 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 03

Contents

Introduction from Colin Diamond CBE, Corporate Director for Children and Young People 04 Birmingham a great place to grow up in, a council-wide commitment 05 Birmingham facts 07 Birmingham Education Service infographic (August 2017) 08 Education Delivery and Improvement Plan 2017–18 Directorate Outcomes 10 Recurring themes 11 Individual Service Plans 12 Outcome 1: Securing a good school place for children in the city 14 Outcome 2: Raising attainment and closing gaps for children across Birmingham 16 Outcome 3: Ensuring children and young people with SEND have their needs met in appropriate provision 18 Outcome 4: Ensuring children are safe and develop resilience 20 Outcome 5: Preparing young people with the skills they need for life 22 Outcome 6: Develop and broker strong support to schools 24 Monitoring Performance 26 Appendix Appendix 1: Individual Service Plans 27 Appendix 2: Shadow Children’s Trust Arrangements 28 Early Help and Children’s Social Care Improvement Priorities 28 Appendix 3: Progress on 2016–17 performance targets 29 Appendix 4: Developing a Child Friendly City 31 04 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

Introduction from Colin Diamond

The council started its education The challenge was then to maintain progress co-constructed and co-delivered with at the end of the intervention and incorporate education providers and stakeholders. improvement journey in plans to strengthen further the council’s Financial constraints mean different September 2014, with the leadership, management and capacity of approaches need to be adopted. education into ‘business as usual’. At the appointment of Sir Mike The 2017–18 Education Delivery and heart of the recovery journey has been the Tomlinson as the Education Improvement Plan captures six outcome establishment of effective partnerships. priorities for the coming year. This plan Commissioner. Rapid progress Birmingham Education Partnership now works provides a focus on the next phase of was achieved during the fi rst in strategic partnership with the council, to education improvement, in the drive to deliver its school improvement duties via a twelve months, marking a provide excellent education provision for three-year contract. period of major change and Birmingham’s children and young people. positive feedback from the DfE, In April 2017 the council re-organised Ofsted and local stakeholders. the overall leadership of Children and Young People’s Services as part of a wider The signifi cant capacity for re-organisation. I have recently been appointed improvement developed across as the interim Corporate Director for Children the city led to the Education and Young People, which carries the statutory Director of Children Service remit. This means I Commissioner’s tenure ending will continue to provide strategic leadership for in September 2016. Education, as well as overseeing the delivery of Children’s Social Care, through the Children’s Trust which goes live in April 2018.

The baseline for improvement has been Colin Diamond CBE established, enabling the next phase Corporate Director of improvement to be co-designed, Children and Young People BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 05

Birmingham, a great place to grow up in, a council-wide commitment

For Birmingham to deliver upon Collectively across the this commitment it means: council, services will work • An environment where our children have together to develop these the best start in life. opportunities and we will • Our children and young people are able monitor progress by: to realise their full potential through great • The number of children and young people education and training. with access to ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ • Our children and young people are confident educational provision – termly. about their own sense of identity. • The percentage of children making at least • Families are more resilient and better able to expected progress across each stage of their provide stability, support, love and nurture for education – annual. their children. • A reduction in the number of children in care • Our children and young people have access – monthly. to all the city has to offer. • A higher proportion of children in need supported to live in their own family – monthly. • The number of schools progressing a Mode “STARS” (Sustainable Travel Accreditation & Recognition for Schools) programme – annual*. • The perception of safety on public transport – annual.

*reported through the work of the Economy Directorate 06 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

Education Delivery and Improvement Plan 2017–18

The Birmingham Children and Young Participation The plan also recognises the role of the People Directorate: Education Delivery and Each child is heard in matters affecting them Directorate in supporting the development of Improvement Plan 2017–18 aims to outline the and participates in the lives of their family, the Children’s Trust. Shadow Trust arrangements current position across the city and put in place community and wider society. will be in place throughout 2017–18 and a plan to ensure this a great city for children Children’s Services will continue to progress Interdependence and indivisibility and young people to learn and grow up in. Each child enjoys all rights enshrined in the work outlined in the Early Help and Children’s The plan recognises Birmingham’s desire to convention1, whatever the circumstances. Social Care Improvement Plan 2017–18 work with UNICEF (see Appendix 4) to become (see Appendix 2). Transparency and accountability a city which is child friendly and promotes: Dependable, open and accountable Dignity relationships and dialogue between local Each child is a unique person with intrinsic government, communities, families and children worth and should be respected and valued in and young people is essential in the collective all circumstances. goal of securing children’s rights. Best interests of the child Birmingham has faced recent challenges Determining and doing what is best for a child, and continues to do so but the plan is about with that child, at that time and in that situation. building on the progress made to address these and moving forward. Key to this is the need Non-discrimination Each child is treated fairly and protected to work in partnership with schools, the NHS, from discrimination. police and third sector providers to meet the diverse needs of our city. Life, survival and development Each child is able to develop, thrive, achieve and flourish.

1 United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 07

Birmingham facts

Population and it is estimated that the city will need a Language further 80,000 houses by this time2. This will • In terms of population Birmingham is the • 43% of Birmingham’s school children have a have significant impact on our schools and largest UK city outside of London with an first language that is known or believed to be education services. estimated population of over 1.12 million as other than English. This equates to 38,089 of 2016.The city has also grown at a faster pupils, which is 1.3% more than in 2014. rate than the national average. It is estimated Diversity to have grown by 4.7% between 2011 and • Birmingham is proud of its “super-diversity”. 2016 alone. Deprivation Academic research suggests that there • Birmingham has significant pockets of • Birmingham is one of the youngest cities in are people from nearly 200 countries who deprivation across the city. According to Europe with around 46% of the population have made Birmingham their home3. The the 2015 Index of Multiple Deprivation aged under 30. 2011 Census revealed that 42.1% classified (IMD), Birmingham is ranked the sixth most • Based on 2014 levels, by 2022 the population themselves within an ethnic group other than deprived local authority district in relative aged between 0 to 4 is due to grow by 3.8% white British, compared to 30% in 2001, a rise rankings4. The income deprivation affecting to 88,1000 children; the 5 to 9 population is of 12%. children index (IDACI) ranks Birmingham 15th expected to grow by 4.5% to 84,000 but the • The demographic makeup of Birmingham’s nationally, with over 30% of children living in a largest growth rate in Birmingham’s children young people has also changed significantly deprived household. will be the 10 to 14 age group – increasing by over recent years and is becoming 14.6% to 82,600. increasingly diverse. For example, according

• This growth brings with it many challenges; to the 2011 census over 60% of the under 18 2 Based on the 2012 Strategic Housing Market Assessment, Birmingham already has a larger than average population is now from a non-white British as used for the Birmingham Development Plan 2031 – http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/plan2031 household size and a higher proportion of background, compared to around 44% 3 Institute for Research into Superdiversity (IRiS) University of overcrowded households than the country as in 2001. Birmingham 2013 a whole. Birmingham’s population is expected 4 IMD 2015 for Birmingham data: https://researchbcc.wordpress. com/2015/09/30/index-of- multiple-deprivation-2015-national-and- to grow by a further 150,000 people by 2031, birmingham/2013 08 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

Birmingham Education Service

PUPILS (SCHOOL CENSUS) BUDGET OFSTED RATINGS 1 August 2017 205,867pupils £19m 114,749 state-funded primary controllable budget 74,817state-funded secondary 445 8,645 independents schools

SCHOOLS PLUS 100% LA Nursery 1 August 2017 82% 81% Primary LA Academy Free Total 78% Nursery 27 27 40+ Secondary Primary 188 108 2 298 independents GOOD 81% OR OUTSTANDING Special Secondary 26 46 7 79 PLUS Special 24 3 27

All through 2 3 2 7

Pupil Referral Unit 1 Alternative 6 6 1,542 25 Total 267 160 17 445 Early Years PVIs IN SPECIAL MEASURES BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 09

As of 2016, 32,300 (93%) Since 2010, 10,454 additional SCHOOL POPULATION OVERALL 93% 3 and 4 year olds are 10,000+ primary places have been Aa benefiting from some created to meet increased Birmingham Nationally kind of free early pupil numbers. education. BME 66.6% 28.9% SENAR maintains 5,224 15,143 Primary and 14,908 7,600 Education, Health and 30,000 Secondary applications EAL 17.3% Care Plans and 2,388 received from parents of 35.8% statements for young home applicants on the people aged “National Offer Days” in 2017. 0 to 25. This total (30,051) is similar FSM 28.9% 15.2% to Manchester and Leeds combined (31,260).

SEN 17.8% 15.5% Travel Assist supports In 2015/16 the Exclusions 4,500 over 4,500 children to 280 team supported 280 travel to school. permanently excluded pupils back into education.

Virtual School provides On average, between 1,800 education support to 2.7% November 2016 and January 1,849 children in care 2017, 2.7% of 16 to 18 year aged 0 to 25. olds were classed as Not in Education Employment or Training (NEET). This was in line with the national average and better than the core city average. 10 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

Directorate outcomes

Education has the power to transform lives; The plan identifies five high level outcomes for Directorate outcomes that is why in Birmingham we are continuing children and young people along with some of to improve learning across the city to drive the key actions which will be done to support 1. Securing a good school place for children positive outcomes for all Birmingham children. the delivery of these outcome and measures in the city This Education Delivery and Improvement Plan which will be used to track progress. 2. Raising attainment and closing gaps for 2017/18 (the Plan) recognises Birmingham City children across Birmingham Council’s (BCC’s) role as a champion for all of 3. Ensuring children and young people with Birmingham’s children, young people and SEND have their needs met in appropriate their families within a regularly changing provision education environment. 4. Ensuring children are safe and develop

resilience

5. Pr eparing young people with the skills

they need for life

And as a Directorate we will

6. Develop and broker strong support services for schools In ensuring these outcomes for Birmingham’s children we are equipping them not just to flourish and succeed in later life but also to actively contribute now as citizens to life in Birmingham and their local communities.

BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 11

Recurring themes

Across all of these outcomes there are Drive improvement recurring cross-cutting themes which will All services will continue to have a focus on underpin delivery. improvement. This will work at all levels and Ensure strong and will form part of every staff member’s individual effective leadership yearly performance targets. It will also be a key area of accountability for Heads of Service and For areas where Birmingham City Council has Assistant Directors. statutory duties and responsibilities we will promote collaborative leadership with partners. Where required, service redesign will be utilised to improve performance and Increasingly it will be appropriate for agencies collaboration across the Directorate. other than the council to lead and we will act as supportive partners or help to broker We will continue to work closely appropriate collaboration. with our strategic partners including Services for Education and the Make best use of resources Birmingham Education Partnership With continuing pressure on the budgets of to deliver these themes. schools and the local authority, we will ensure that resources are deployed in a way to maximise their impact. We will review processes to ensure efficiency and make sure that commissioned activity delivers in terms of cost and benefit to the intended user. 12 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 13

Individual service plans

Supporting this Directorate plan is a range of Each service plan details: 20 individual service area plans captured in • The activities and deliverables to be Appendix 1. completed. The service plans are structured around each • The performance indicators that will service within Education, as described in measure progress. the Core Offer and Traded Offer to Schools • The outcome and impact to be achieved documents. through completing the activity. These documents can be found at: • The officers leading the activities and www.birmingham.gov.uk/education-coreoffer timeframes for completion. www.birmingham.gov.uk/tradingforeducation Although plans focus on individual service areas, they capture wider partnerships and recognise that Birmingham City Council is dependent upon continuing to build stronger links with early years settings, schools, post 16 provision and wider services supporting children and young people.

14 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

1. Securing a good school place for children in the city

As a growing city with rising demand for We will How we will do it child care and school places we will work • Maintain a capital investment programme in Leading conversations with central to ensure that there is both a sufficiency Leadership: schools to develop new places in appropriate government, academies and free schools and of supply and that provision is of a good locations across Birmingham. others to ensure that new places are delivered standard. Through Birmingham Education and resourced appropriately. Partnership we will help schools to access • Provide support to children without a school support for improvement where required place to receive appropriate education and Resources: Ensuring additional school places with the aim of increasing the number of promptly find a place. are sourced where needed and that this investment is efficient and makes best use of schools rated as Good or Outstanding by • Complete a review and redesign of the existing resources. Ofsted. We will continue to review our School Admissions function. use of alternative provision to ensure Working through Birmingham • Increase the proportion of all 3 and 4 year Improvement: appropriateness and value. Education Partnership to support schools in olds and targeted 2 year olds accessing their need of Improvement. Early Education Entitlement and continue to secure sufficiency of places. • Consult on and implement a revised Birmingham Fair Access Protocol.

We will • Consult on and finalise the strategy for SEND and Inclusion. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 15

What the results will be

Ref Peformance indicator Target Description 1 Overall proportion of schools which are Improving Based upon all current open judgements. Good or Outstanding Trend

1a Proportion of schools inspected within 80% The proportion of schools who are rated as Good or Outstanding in their Ofsted inspections. school year who are rated as Good or Outstanding

2 Excluded children without a school place 0 The number of children excluded from mainstream provision that do not have a full time place for more than 6 days within six days of exclusion.

3 SEND children out of school 0 Children with Special Education Needs and Disabilities who are currently not attending school

4 Number of children missing from 0 Children who we are notified by schools have gone missing from education. education

5 Early Years education take-up NAT AV The proportion of eligible 2 year olds in England benefitting from government-funded childcare. (for 2 year olds) A child is eligible if the family are: • in receipt of qualifying benefits • they’re looked after by a local council • they have a current statement of Special Education Needs (SEN) or an Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan • they get Disability Living Allowance • they’ve left care under a special guardianship order, child arrangements order or adoption order 16 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

2. Raising attainment and closing gaps for children across Birmingham

We know that across Birmingham the We will How we will do it attainment of children varies in relation to • Ensure appropriate school improvement Birmingham Education Partnership the area where they live and their various Leadership: support is provided through the ongoing will provide leadership and broker appropriate social characteristics. We are looking to commissioning of Birmingham Education peer support to schools to raise standards and see improvement across Birmingham in Partnership. improve attainment. the outcomes which children achieve at all levels. Our aim is to reduce the gap between • Continue to raise the educational outcomes Resources: The Virtual School will to continue Birmingham and the national average and of Children in Care through the work of the to improve co-ordination of education and reduce gaps between different groups of Virtual School. support to Children in Care and maximise the impact of Pupil Premium Plus. children across Birmingham. • Provide a full range of Early Years Consultant support to new settings or those where Improvement: We will further enhance our improvement is needed to maintain a focus data systems to make more effective use of on quality improvement within Birmingham’s intelligence, leading to improved delivery and managed day care provision. better monitoring of impact. • Make best use of data and intelligence on how children progress and use it to drive improvement. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 17

What the results will be

Ref Peformance indicator Target Description 6 Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) NAT AVE The proportion of children achieving a “Good Level of Development” (GLD) is a standard way Good level of development of measuring attainment at the end of the EYFS. A child achieves GLD if they achieve the ‘expected level’ in: • the early learning goals in the prime areas of learning (personal, social and emotional development; physical development; and communication and language) and; • the early learning goals in the specific areas of mathematics and literacy.

7 Key Stage 2 Attainment NAT AVE The proportion of children reaching the expected standard in Reading, Writing and Maths. Proportion reaching expected standard in • Reading, Maths, Grammar, punctuation & spelling is primarily informed by tests with a scaled score Reading, Writing and Maths of 100 indicating the pupil has reached the expected level. • Writing remains as a teacher assessment.

8 Key Stage 2 Progress – Reading 0 The new progress measures are ‘value added’; this means that pupils’ results are compared to the actual achievements of other pupils nationally with similar prior attainment. 9 Key Stage 2 Progress – Writing 0 There is no ‘target’ for the amount of progress an individual pupil is expected to make. Any amount of progress contributes to the overall average. 10 Key Stage 2 Progress – Maths 0 A score of 0 for a school means its pupils are making average progress.

11 GCSE Attainment 8 NAT AVE Attainment 8 measures the achievement of a pupil across 8 qualifications including Maths (double weighted) and English (double weighted), three further qualifications that count in the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) measure and three further qualifications that can be GCSE qualifications (including EBacc subjects) or any other non-GCSE qualifications on the DfE approved list.

12 GCSE Progress 8 0 Progress 8 is a value added measure and compares the Attainment 8 scores of similar pupils grouped using their prior attainment at key stage 2. A score of 0 shows that the school’s pupils on average make the same progress as similar pupils nationally. A score of +1 means pupils are achieving on average a grade higher in each subject that contributes to this score.

13 Children in Care GSCE – Progress 8 NAT AVE This is the same as above but specifically for Children in Care.

14 Children with SEN – Attainment 8 NAT AVE This is the same as above but specifically for children with SEN. 18 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

3. Childr en and young people with SEND have their needs met in appropriate provision

We recognise that children in Birmingham We will How we will do it often require additional support to assist • Consult on and finalise the strategy for Work with parents and partners them in their education. Our vision is that Leadership: SEND and Inclusion. through the Inclusion Commission to address every child and young person aged 0–25 areas of concern for their children. with a special educational need and/or • Reshape Access to Education to respond to disability (SEND) in Birmingham will have the new strategy and to best meet the needs Resources: Develop use of joint commissioning the opportunity to be happy, healthy and of children and schools. to ensure resources are used fairly and effectively to provide maximum impact on achieve their fullest potential, enabling • Complete the restructuring of the Travel outcomes. them to participate in, and contribute to Assist service and continue to improve the all aspects of life. We will provide services service provided to children and families. Improvement: Continue to develop the that ensure the needs of children and young timeliness and quality of Education Health and • Continue to improve the quality of Education people who have SEND and their families Care Plans working in partnership with families Health and Care Plans and to ensure are at the heart of all that we do. We aim and professionals. to offer this as locally as possible. completion within 20 weeks. • Support Early Years settings to appropriately meet the needs of pre-school children with SEND. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 19

What the results will be

Ref Peformance indicator Target Description 15 Special Education Needs 99% Local Authorities have a clear duty to assess a child or young person’s education, health and care Education Health and Care Plans needs where they may have SEN (special educational needs) and they may need special educational (EHCPs) Percentage of EHCPs completed provision to be made for them at a level or of a kind which requires an assessment of a child or young within 20 weeks person’s education, health and care needs. This is called an EHC needs assessment and has to be completed within 20 weeks.

16 Proportion of children with completed 95% Signed off Personal Education Plans which are required for Children in Care. Personal Education Plans (PEPs)

*Further performance indicators will be added here as a result of the Strategy for SEND and Inclusion. This Strategy is due to be finalised later in 2017 and this Plan will be updated at that time.

20 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

4. Childr en are safe and develop resilience

The council has regularly identified We will • Support schools with maintenance and safeguarding children as one of its top infrastructure issues to ensure safe • Provide tailored safeguarding briefings for priorities. We will continue to work in learning environments. schools and widen the use of Early Help partnership with schools, health services, Assessments. the police and other agencies to support and protect children ensuring that • Strengthen joint working between schools How we will do it safeguarding is a shared responsibility. and safeguarding colleagues and improve Leadership: Develop the capacity and We will ensure that children learn in safe communications between them. performance framework to manage the environments with appropriate facilities • Support the development of an independent council’s future relationship with the and good quality practice which positively Children’s Trust for Birmingham and develop Children’s Trust. promotes learning. the governance to manage this contract. Resources: Ensure that the Children’s Trust • Improve systems for identification of children is suitably resourced and the correct protocols who are missing or educated outside of the are put in place to enable it to flourish. school system. Improvement: Strengthen joint working • Model and develop a system of devolved between schools and safeguarding colleagues funding for alternative provision across and improve communications between them. secondary school networks. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 21

What the results will be

Ref Peformance indicator Target Description 17 Persistent absence NAT AVE The persistent absence measure is in line with national reporting. This is defined as 10% or (State-funded primary, secondary and special more of sessions missed (based on each pupil’s possible sessions). schools – six half terms)

18 Number of Permanent Exclusions – Reducing Primary Trend

19 Number of Permanent Exclusions – Reducing Information collated on a termly basis across Birmingham of the number of pupils Secondary Trend permanently excluded from schools.

20 Number of Permanent Exclusions – Reducing Special Trend 22 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

5. Pr eparing young people to leave school with the skills they need for life

Promoting jobs and skills is one of We will How we will do it Birmingham’s four priorities. We want to • Secure sufficient high quality, education and Champion the delivery of quality ensure that young people have the skills Leadership: training provision, which provide appropriate careers programmes from Year 8 –13 in all they need to help them succeed. We will and accessible learning pathways for all Birmingham secondary schools, colleges and work with partners to provide support young people aged 14 –19, including providers to equip young people. where there are barriers to learning, vulnerable groups. particularly for young people either Not in Resources: Ensure that systems to track Education, Employment or Training (NEET) • Develop a strategic approach to early children join up and there is greater alignment or at risk of becoming NEET. As Birmingham identification and support for young people at of work across teams. continues to grow economically we will work risk of disengagement from 14–19 education Improvement: Strengthen links between and training. with schools and colleges across the city to Birmingham City Council and further education develop learning opportunities for all young • Strengthen planning and contracting to colleges to enhance partnership working. people in line with the needs of employers. source appropriate SEND provision for post 16. • Work with Birmingham Education Partnership (BEP) to deliver the Birmingham Enterprise Adviser Network project to ensure good quality careers advice. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 23

What the results will be

Ref Peformance indicator Target Description 21 The proportion of young people aged 16 3% On a monthly basis the proportion of young people aged 16 to 18 Not in Education to 18 Not in Education Employment and Employment and Training is tracked across Birmingham. Analysis is also carried out of the NEET levels Training (NEET) for different sub-sets of young people (e.g. young people with SEND, Children in Care, Care Leavers).

22 Proportion of the population aged Increasing From the Annual Population Survey. Proportion of the population aged 16 to 24 qualified to 16 to 24 qualified to at least Level 1 Trend at least Level 1. Level 1 qualifications are: first certificate; GCSE grades D,E,F or G; Music grades 1,2 & 3; Level 1 award, certificate, diploma, English for Speakers of other Languages (ESOL); Level 1 essential skills and functional skills; Level 1 National Vocational Qualification (NVQ).

23 Proportion of the population aged 16 to Increasing From the Annual Population Survey. Proportion of the population aged 16 to 24 qualified 24 qualified to at least Level 3 Trend to at least Level 3. Level 3 qualifications are: A level grades A,B,C,D or E; Music grades 6,7 & 8; access to higher education diploma; advanced apprenticeship; applied general; AS level; International Baccalaureate diploma; tech level; Level 3 award, certificate, diploma, English for Speakers of other Languages (ESOL), national certificate, national diploma; Level 3 National Vocational Qualification (NVQ). 24 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

6. Develop and broker strong support services for schools

Birmingham’s education role continues We will • Review and improve our direct support and to change with increasing numbers engagement with governors. • Strengthen communications with schools of academies and free schools sitting through the expansion of the School • Develop our commissioning function to alongside maintained schools as part of Noticeboard, the refreshing of our websites ensure commissioned services deliver best the Birmingham family. Schools are now and appropriate and focused briefing events. value and with proportionate governance engaging a variety of providers to deliver services which might previously have been • Continue to improve the catering offer provided by the council. As the formal role to schools through Cityserve and look to How we will do it of the Local Authority reduces, we want to respond to new opportunities as appropriate. Leadership: Ensure high quality, accurate and ensure that the support and advice we offer • Strengthen the quality of our traded services appropriate guidance is shared with schools to to schools is timely and of a high quality. and how these are provided to schools. support their work. Some of this provision will be delivered on Resources: Develop and review trading options a formal trading basis. • Improve how support services share information to identify schools where there to ensure that services provide value for money may be governance, financial, staff or similar and are delivered efficiently. risks with aim of better co-ordinating the Improvement: Ensure that traded services response to them. delivered by the council are responsive to the needs of schools and are delivered in a way that meets their needs. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 25

What the results will be

Ref Peformance indicator Target Description A1 Maintaining levels of buy back from TBC Birmingham City Council provides a range of traded services to schools which schools are able schools for the traded services provided purchase or alternatively they may seek another provider or deliver themselves. This measure will by Birmingham City Council indicate whether schools are continuing to demand these services from BCC.

A2 New contracts won by traded services TBC This will be a measure of new contracts and work agreed with schools.

A3 Levels of customer satisfaction TBC This will measure the level of satisfaction from customers. Throughout the year an appropriate measurement of this will be developed.

A4 Evaluation of School Noticeboard TBC A weekly noticeboard is produced for schools and an evaluation of this will be carried out during the year with appropriate measures to be agreed. 26 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

Monitoring performance

Each outcome has a series of measures Performance Boards In line with the budget setting process and attached which will form the Directorate Approximately once a quarter, Heads of consultation during the autumn, this plan will scorecard. Support will be given to individual Service and Service Plan owners will meet with be reviewed and refreshed between January service areas to develop local scorecards for Assistant Directors to look at performance and March 2018 with the aim of publishing a each of their plans. issues and consider areas for service and new plan early in the 2018/19 financial year. process improvement. As part of this cycle, Senior Leadership Team It is planned to move towards a combined each meeting will consider an area for This meets on a fortnightly basis chaired by Children and Young People’s Plan reflecting the Directorate improvement, provide support to the Corporate Director with Assistant Directors Directorate’s new commissioning role with the Heads of Service in this area through workshops and will oversee performance. Each month Children’s Trust. and then look to review progress. the Directorate scorecard will be reviewed and Assistant Directors will follow up on areas Wider reporting of concern. The performance scorecard will be reported [email protected] centrally and discussed as part of bi-monthly twitter.com/BCCEducation Education Management Team meetings between the Cabinet Member and www.birmingham.gov.uk/education This meets fortnightly and draws together all Corporate Director. (Details of the previous Heads of Service with responsibility for plans. year’s performance can be found in Appendix 3) This meeting steers the Directorate’s business and promotes linkages across the Directorate to develop good practice

BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 27

Appendix 1 Individual Service Plans

Service area Lead contact 1. Virtual School for Children in Care Andrew Wright

2. Sustaining Inclusion Andrew Wright

3. Education Safeguarding Jon Needham

4. Resilience Razia Butt, Services for Education

5. Education and Skills Infrastructure Jaswinder Didially

6. School and Governor Support Karen Davies

7. Early Years Lindsey Trivett

8. Alternative Provision, Attendance and Independent Schools David Bishop

9. 14 –19 Participation and Skills Julie Stirrup and Parminder Garcha

10. Early Years Inclusion Support Gillian King

11. Special Educational Needs and Disability Information, Advice and Support Service (SENDIASS) Nasreen Hussain

12. Special Educational Needs Assessment and Review (SENAR) David Bridgman

13. Access to Education Heather Wood and Amanda Daniels

14. Travel Assist Jennifer Langan

15. School Admissions Alan Michell

16. Cityserve Dale Wild

17. Legal Services – Education Ian Burgess

18. Schools Financial Services Sue Beer

19. Schools HR and Employee Relations Paul Crossley

20. Communication and Stakeholder Engagement June Marshall and Laura Hendry 28 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

Appendix 2 Shadow Children’s Trust Arrangements

The plan also recognises the role of the Early Help and Children’s Social Care Directorate in supporting the development of improvement priorities the Children’s Trust. Shadow Trust arrangements 1. Early Help will be in place throughout 2017–18 and 2. Front Door, Children’s Advice and Support Children’s Services will continue to progress Service and Out of Hours work outlined in the Early Help and Children’s 3. Missing Children, Child Sexual Exploitation Social Care Improvement Plan 2017–18. 4. Child in Need and Child Protection This will pick up the following themes listed 5. Disabled Children’s Social Care opposite which were identified during the 6. Improve care planning, Children in Care Ofsted re-inspection which took place in and care leavers September 2016. 7. Care Leavers The performance against these actions will be 8. Private Fostering managed separately to this plan. 9. Quality Assurance and Performance Management Throughout the year the Children and Young 10. Partnership [overarching theme] People Directorate will lead on ensuring 11. More local foster placements the appropriate governance and resourcing 12. Workforce development arrangements are put in place to enable the 13. Workforce – Recruitment and Retention launch of the Children’s Trust in April 2018. 14. Placement Planning and Matching The Children and Young People Directorate 15. Innovations will also develop the capability to formally 16. Replace Child Record System commission and manage the council’s 17. Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children / partnership with the Children’s Trust and the No Recourse to Public Funds 2018 –19 Directorate plan will be widened to include this area of work. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 29

Appendix 3 Progress on 2016 –17 performance targets

The table below details the nine education measures included in the BCC Corporate Business plan 2016 –17 (referenced in the Education Services Delivery & Improvement Plan 2016 –17) and the performance achieved against the set targets. These measures ran in line with the council’s financial year reflecting performance between April 2016 and March 2017 rather than the standard academic year. The results given for GCSEs are for the summer of 2016 and so relate to the 2015 –16 academic year.

Peformance indicator Target Period Target Current Period Status Commentary Proportion of schools 90% 90% 80.6% As of March 2017, 80.6% of schools in Birmingham were rated as inspected as Good or Good or Outstanding. While this was an improvement on the position a Outstanding year before and there was a reduction in the number of schools classed as in Special Measures, the improvement was not enough to meet the 90% target.

Early Years Foundation Stage 70% 70% 64% The proportion of children reaching a good level of development at the end of the Early Years Foundation stage in 2016 was an improvement on 2015 up from 62% to 64%. However the gap between Birmingham and the national average of 69% increased slightly.

Key Stage 2 Attainment 52% 52% 47% The final Local Authority Key Stage 2 attainment results were released by the Department for Education in December 2016. It indicated that Birmingham’s performance of 47% was below our target – which was the national average of 54%. 30 BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18

Peformance indicator Target Period Target Current Period Status Commentary GCSE Attainment – 0 0 0 Birmingham’s 2016 GCSE results were very positive. 2016 saw the Progress 8 introduction of a new accountability system for schools with the new measure of Progress 8 – “the progress a pupil makes from the end of Key Stage 2 to Key Stage 4, compared with pupils nationally with similar attainment”. The national average performance is therefore zero. A positive score indicates out-performing the national average. Birmingham’s provisional result is zero, second best out of core cities.

Children in Care Outcomes National 22.8 25.3 The figure refers to the average Attainment 8 scores of children who have at GCSE average been looked after continuously for at least twelve months – comparing Birmingham to the national average. Birmingham’s Children in Care Progress 8 score was also above national levels.

Excluded children without a 0 0 106 As of the end of March 2017 there were 106 children without a school school place after 6 days place; 41 of primary school age and 65 of secondary school age.

Percentage of 16 to 18 year 4% 4% 2.7% The average NEET levels of those aged 16 to 18 are 2.7% - in line with the olds classed as NEET national average and better than the core city average.

Special Education Needs – 100% 100% 98.4% Between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017, 926 Education, Health and Care Percentage of EHCPs Plans have been issued (excluding Exceptions). Of these, 15 have not met completed within 20 weeks the 20 week timescale. The measure is still within tolerance.

Persistent absence in schools National 10.5% 12.2% Due to data lags, this measure refers to the previous school year - so in average effect we are reporting a year in arrears. Our result of 12.2% was slightly worse than the national average of 10.5%. BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE DIRECTORATE • EDUCATION DELIVERY AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2017–18 31

Appendix 4 Developing a Child Friendly City

Already over 170 schools have signed up Child Rights Partners Non-discrimination to UNICEF Rights Respecting School Award We are now pursuing an application to the Each child is treated fairly and protected from (RRSA) with a further 70 schools due to engage UNICEF Child Rights Partners programme discrimination. in 2017/18. We have worked with UNICEF to which extends the influence of the RRSA to establish a Birmingham cohort of schools who embed a children’s rights approach across the Life, survival and development work together to promote children’s rights as a council using the United Nations Convention of Each child is able to develop, thrive, achieve way of building resilience to extremism. the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). We are hoping and flourish. to be one of five local authorities chosen to We have the first nursery school and the first embed this initiative to become a child-friendly Participation secondary school to achieve the Level One city, weaving a child rights approach through Each child is heard in matters affecting them award in record time. education, environment, social care and and participates in the lives of their family, community initiatives. community and wider society. This initiative has had a significant impact on safeguarding, participation and community Over the next year we will look to develop Interdependence and indivisibility cohesion and we are hoping to work with the and embed the following seven principles Each child enjoys all rights enshrined in the Department for Education on a pilot research across our work and the work of other partner convention, whatever the circumstances. programme to demonstrate that this approach agencies in Birmingham: builds resilience to extremism and holds the Transparency and accountability goals of education at the centre of all our work. Dignity Dependable, open and accountable Each child is a unique person with intrinsic relationships and dialogue between local worth and should be respected and valued in government, communities, families and children all circumstances. and young people is essential in the collective goal of securing children’s rights. Best interests of the child Determining and doing what is best for a child, with that child, at that time and in that situation.

Making a positive difference every day to people’s lives

Email [email protected] Twitter @BCCEducation

birmingham.gov.uk/education Birmingham City Council

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC

Report to: CABINET

Report of: Corporate Director – Children & Young People

Date of Decision: 24th January 2018

SUBJECT: JOHN WILLMOTT SCHOOL CONVERSION FROM COMMUNITY SCHOOL TO ACADEMY STATUS

Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 004650 / 2017

If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved

Relevant Cabinet Member(s) or Cllr Carl Rice, Children, Families and Schools Relevant Executive Member: Relevant O&S Chair: Cllr Susan Barnett, Schools, Children and Families

Wards affected: Sutton Trinity

1. Purpose of report: 1.1 To provide an update to Cabinet to ensure Members are fully aware of the financial implications associated with the academisation of John Willmott School. Specifically that under current legislation the cumulative projected deficit of £1.1m falls on the Local Authority to fund. 1.2 This report also seeks approval for the execution and completion of the commercial and legal documentation associated with the conversion, substantially in the form required by the Department for Education (DfE).

2. Decision(s) recommended: That Cabinet:- 2.1 Notes that John Willmott School, Reddicap Heath Road, Sutton Coldfield B75 7DY is proposing to convert to Academy status on or after 1st February 2018. John Willmott School is to become a Sponsored Academy and will be sponsored by the Arthur Terry Learning Partnership (ATLP). 2.2 Notes that at the point of conversion John Willmott School will have a cumulative deficit balance of £1.1m and this will remain with the Local Authority at the point of conversion as outlined in the DfE Guidance entitled ‘Treatment of surplus and deficit balances when maintained schools become Academies.’ 2.3 Approves the grant and completion of the lease for John Willmott School to the ATLP for 125 years substantially in the form of the model lease produced by the DfE at a peppercorn rent. The school site is identifiable as shown on the accompanying redline plan (see Appendix 1). Birmingham City Council

2.4 Approves the completion of a Commercial Transfer Agreement to the ATLP relating to the transfer of staff under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 and assets to the Academy Trust. 2.5 Authorises the City Solicitor to negotiate, execute and complete all necessary documents to give effect to the above recommendations.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Jaswinder Didially – Head of Education Infrastructure Telephone No: 303 8847 E-mail address: [email protected]

3. Consultation:

Consultation should include those that have an interest in the decisions recommended

3.1 Internal

The Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools and Senior Officers in the Directorate for Children & Young People are aware of the conversion and have been involved in discussions relating to the transfer. Ward Councillors for Sutton Trinity, the Executive Member and the Service Integration Head for Sutton Coldfield and Senior Officers from Legal and Finance have also been consulted and any outcomes have been noted in the report.

3.2 External

The Secretary of State has issued the Academy Order attached as Appendix 2 requiring the conversion of John Willmott School.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 The Academies Conversion Programme is a Central Government Policy.

4.2 Financial Implications (How will decisions be carried out within existing finances and Resources?)

4.2.1 The recommendations in this report will enable John Willmott School to transfer as required by the DfE. Resourcing for corporate legal costs and potentially external legal costs arising from this conversion and the wider Academy conversion programme will be met from school contributions and earmarked resources within the Education Infrastructure Budget for the purposes of the Academy conversion process.

4.2.2 In accordance with the Academy Conversion Charging Policy schools pay a contribution towards the legal costs associated with the conversion of the school and owing to the nature and volume of work anticipated for this conversion the contribution for John Willmott School will be £5,000. Birmingham City Council

4.2.3 At the point of conversion (01.02.18) the cumulative deficit balance at John Willmott School will be £1.1m and this will remain with the Local Authority at the point of conversion as outlined in 2.2 above. Given the 2017 / 18 DSG contingency against which most of the projected deficit of £1.1m could have been charged is fully allocated an interim solution will involve funding the deficit from the Capital Maintenance Grant in 2017 / 18. The capital account will then be reimbursed in 2018 / 19 from the 2018 / 19 DSG contingency budget (£0.9m) plus capital receipts (£0.2m). The use of capital maintenance grant in 2017/18 is made possible by identifying capital expenditure funded from revenue contributions and resourcing that spend from the grant and using the revenue contributions to fund the deficit. 4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 The Secretary of State for Education has issued the Order under the Academies Act 2010 which requires all concerned parties to facilitate the creation of the Academy.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 The Academies Conversion Programme is a Central Government Policy.

4.4.2 An initial Equality Analysis was undertaken in February 2014 (EA000046) and the outcome indicated that a Full Equality Analysis was not required.

5. Relevant background / chronology of key events:

5.1 The Academies Act 2010 empowered the Secretary of State for Education to create Academies through Academy Orders. A Directive Academy Order for John Willmott School was issued in April 2016; and the school will be sponsored by a Multi Academy Trust.

5.2 The land and assets occupied and used by the school (including the caretaker’s house) on the school site are currently owned by the City Council. In order for the Academy to operate, a lease is to be granted to the Academy Trust substantially in the form prescribed by the DfE – this requires the lease to be for 125 years and at a peppercorn rent. Under the terms of the lease granted to an Academy, the Trust cannot transfer or assign the land or assets to anyone else. The Trust can only use the land for the provision of educational services and any community and recreational use ancillary to the schools educational use. The Trust can only share occupation (including subletting and other forms of tenancies up to a maximum of 10 years) with another entity providing ancillary services to the Trust. The lease can only be transferred to a successor organisation (if the Trust falls away for any reason) with the consent of the Secretary of State.

5.3 Where an Academy is failing or the Funding Agreement has been terminated there is now an option contained in the Funding Agreement in favour of the Secretary of State to acquire land at nil consideration without City Council (landlord) consent. The purpose of this option is to ensure the Secretary of State is able to arrange for the continuing education of the pupils in the period where the existing trust has failed and handover to another Academy Trust has not been affected. There is an expectation that another Academy Trust may take over the running of the Academy but if there is no alternative trust, then the Secretary of State may decide the land reverts back to the City Council.

Birmingham City Council

5.4 In addition, members of staff that are currently employed by the City Council are to transfer under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 to the Academy Trust as well as the assets of the school under Commercial Transfer Agreement (CTA).

5.5 The statutory TUPE consultation process which needs to take place prior to the proposed conversion date is being managed and coordinated by the HR Team. The consultations for John Willmott School took place with Staff on 17.11.17 and Unions on 23.11.17.

5.6 There are some planned works relating to Health & Safety, structural integrity and statutory compliance that are currently ongoing on the site and will continue post conversion. Full details of the works will be recorded in a schedule of the CTA and will be funded from the 17 / 18 Capital Maintenance Grant with it not to exceed budget of £500k. If any works are undertaken beyond the agreed scope and budget these costs for the additional works will be met by ATLP.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 A do nothing option is not available, as the Secretary of State has made an Academy Order which requires John Willmott School to become an Academy.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 To allow the completion of the transfer of John Willmott School in accordance with the Academy Order granted by the Secretary of State.

Signatures Date

Cabinet Member Children, Families & Schools:

Cllr Carl Rice: .

Corporate Director Children & Young People:

Colin Diamond: 5 January 2018

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

1. Relevant Officer(s) Files

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

1. Redline Plan - John Willmott School 2. Academy Order for John Willmott School

Report Version v9 Dated 05.01.17

FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY DRAWING NO. 14842

Tennis Courts 1 6 24

56 54 68 38 5 Tank 66 40 Key: 1

School Site

a 65 1 2 77 67 2 1 51 39 27

0 Caretakers House c 1 1 2

2 Fairfax School

91 205 1 219 School Bungalow 177

173 163

D H ROA 3 HEAT 15 ICAP REDD

90 8 8 102 REDDICAP HEATH 72 New Hall Lodge 114

W ard Bdy

P El ath Sub Sta 56 School Heathway Bungalow 46

John Willmott School

(Secondary)

15 124 11

ROAD STEPHENS

F 12 R E

2 A

I V

E 53

Playing Field

1 5 a 5 6

6 4

4 1

5 2 2 6 3

7 6

c 4 5 4 6 1

Tennis Court 0 5 1 25 2 4 5 5 1 1 11 15

D 7 OVEB 3 7 RIDG 3 E CL D OSE 51 A O 49 R S N E H D P 2 r E 2 a T 14 in S

5 8 9 5 6 8 45 47 1

3 26 11 15 2

T N 0 1 E C S E 3 7 R C

D BARFOR 4 L C D 6 IE 5 L 50 F

O 1 G 6 7

S 7 2 N 38 52 54 D I E O R V P E S B R 2 1 1 ID 7 G 4 E C 10 L 1 3 O 7 S 6 21 E LB

2 9

6 2 7 7 1 3 E 1

6 68 6 IV 31 4 7 R 9 D 1 8 9 6 5 Pond E G 19 32 A 4 22 Ward Bd 2 IT y 2 M 37 R E D H 8 rain 4

7 5

7 Pond 25 2 11 15

5 LI 0 T TLE WO RTH GR 0 25 50 100 150 OVE STO URTON CL OSE 17 1 3 5 2 11 3 6

14 9 3

1 24 Metres 32 40

AREA EDGED RED 6.66 HECTARES APPROX. 16.45 ACRES APPROX.

Peter Hay Director of People Council House Extension Margaret Street Birmingham, B3 3BU. SCALE DRAWN DATE John Willmott Secondary School Reddicap Heath Road 1:2,500 MI 07/06/2016 Sutton Coldfield O.S.Ref SP1395NE

Produced by the Survey & Mapping Team, BPS, Economy Directorate, 10 Woodcock Street, Birmingham, B7 4BL Tel 303 3867. © Crown Copyright and database right 2016. Ordnance Survey 100021326. You are not permitted to copy, sub-licence, distribute or sell any of this data to third parties in any form.

Birmingham City Council

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET Report of: Corporate Director, Children & Young People Date of Decision: 24th January 2018 SUBJECT: TILE CROSS ACADEMY AND BRAYS ACADEMY DEVELOPMENT 2019 – FULL BUSINESS CASE AND CONTRACT AWARD Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 004201/2017 If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved Relevant Cabinet Member(s) or Councillor Carl Rice – Children, Families and Schools Relevant Executive Member: Councillor Majid Mahmood – Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management Relevant O&S Chair: Cllr Susan Barnett – Schools, Children and Families Cllr Mohammed Aikhlaq – Corporate Resources and Governance Wards affected: Shard End

1. Purpose of report:

1.1 To set out the Full Business Case for works to develop Tile Cross Academy (formerly International School) and Brays Academy (formerly Brays Special School). These works include replacing teaching areas at Tile Cross Academy that have been be utilised to facilitate the necessary expansion of Brays Academy.

1.2 The accompanying private report contains further financial information and seeks approval to the Full Business Case and to place orders with a Constructing West Midlands Framework (CWM) contractor to progress the proposed works.

2. Decision(s) recommended:

That Cabinet:

2.1 Notes the content of this report.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Jaswinder Didially Paul Bowman

Telephone No. 0121 303 8847 E-mail address: [email protected] [email protected]

Birmingham City Council

3. Consultation

3.1 Internal

Consultation with The Leader, Ward Members for Shard End and the Executive Member for Yardley is in progress at the time of report publication. Officers from City Finance, Legal and Governance and Procurement have been involved in the preparation of this report.

3.2 External

All pupils, parents, governors, teaching and non-teaching staff have been consulted at a school meeting. Parents have been supportive of the proposal as pupils will benefit from improved facilities. In addition all Teaching Associations, Trade Unions and all neighbouring authorities have been advised of the consultation. A proposal and public notice was put on the Birmingham Planning web portal and all head teachers in Birmingham were made aware of it via Be Heard and the School’s website. No comments were received on the proposals.

4. Compliance Issues:

Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1 These works are required to enable the Local Authority to meet its statutory duty to not only provide pupil places but also to promote diversity and increase parental choice in planning and securing the provision of school places (Section 14 Education Act 1996 and Education & Inspections Act 2006). The spending priorities proposed are in accordance with the Schools’ Capital Programme 2017-18 and the Council’s Vision and Forward Plan priorities for Children, particularly ‘A great place to grow up in by providing an environment where children have the best start in life and are able to realise their full potential through great education’. The provision of these school places is also beneficial to the safeguarding of children.

4.1.2 Birmingham Business Charter for Social Responsibility The selected contractor is signed up to the principles of the Birmingham Business Charter for Social Responsibility and will work on an individual action plan, proportionate to the contract sum, demonstrating how the principles of the Charter will be implemented with the school and local community. This action plan will be agreed prior to the works order being placed.

4.2 Financial Implications (How will decisions be carried out within existing finances and Resources?)

4.2.1 The total cost of the works to Tile Cross Academy and Brays Academy will be funded from Department for Education (DfE) Basic Need Grant (SSAP Stage 5). Further cost details are included in Appendix A of the Private Report.

4.2.2 Consequential revenue costs including additional staffing will be funded by Tile Cross Academy and Brays Academy from their General Annual Grants. Any ongoing day to day repair and maintenance of the building will be the responsibility

Birmingham City Council

of ENGIE, the Facilities Management (FM) company appointed to operate and maintain the site as part of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) Design & Build (D&B) Contract as approved by Cabinet 29th March 2010 (ref 357194). Where future maintenance works are not captured through the existing FM Contracts (e.g. cyclical replacement), the Academies will pay any associated costs from their respective General Annual Grants.

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 This report facilitates the discharge of the local authority’s duty under section 14 of the Education Act 1996 to secure that sufficient school places are available.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 A Full Equality Analysis (EA0001202) was carried out in May 2016 for Education Infrastructure’s Education Development Plan and Schools’ Capital Programme 2017–2018. The outcomes from consultation demonstrate that proposed capital developments support positive outcomes for children, young people, their families and carers. No negative impact on people with Protected Characteristics was identified. It was concluded that sufficiency of educational places and opportunities for all children and young people contributes to providing positive life chances, and supports a positive approach to Safeguarding in Birmingham: actively reducing the number of children and young people out of school helps to mitigate risk to their safety and wellbeing.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 The Local Authority has a statutory duty to provide special pupil places, promote diversity and increase parental choice in planning and securing the provision of special school places (Section 14, Education Act 1996 and Education & Inspections Act 2006). This duty extends to our landlord responsibility to maintain the Education property portfolio to prevent school closure and asset failure, thus improving safeguarding for children.

5.2 Long-term projections of births provided by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) indicate that the increasing birth rate until the end of 2016 will remain steady therafter. However, the number of families moving into the City is on the increase. The pressure for in-year special school places is severe as schools struggle to keep up with the demand – annually more young people move into the City than leave. Reactive measures have been implemented over a number of years to accommodate the growth in demand for special school places and a planned programme of special school expansions is now being delivered as a priority.

5.3 Detailed reports on the impact of the birth rate and net-migration, including cohort growth, are regularly provided to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for Schools, Children and Families. In addition a Special Education Needs Sufficiency document, released in January 2016, details the impact of increased birth rates and cohort growth on the demand for special school places across Birmingham.

5.4 Tile Cross Academy was built for 1,200 students but, due to falling rolls, Birmingham City Council (BCC) sought an in year variation to the admission number from 180 to 120 for September 2016. The Office of the Schools Adjudicator approved this variation on 21st July 2016. This will result in the

Birmingham City Council

overall capacity of the school reducing to 600 places by September 2020, thus making the current occupation of the existing school buildings untenable.

5.5 In April 2016 a Statutory School Organisation proposal was agreed by Cabinet (CMIS ref 001543) to make prescribed changes at Brays Academy to increase the number of places by provision of an additional site and to change the SEN designation to include autistic spectrum condition. Brays Academy took over part ownership of the Leycroft building on the Tile Cross Academy site and over subsequent years increased the number of commissioned special school places from BCC which has resulted in investment to make the additional space suitable for use by primary age children with specific needs. Capital works for the earlier phases were approved by the relevant Cabinet Member and have been delivered during the summer holidays in July/August 2016 and July/August 2017 to provide additional special school places as Brays Academy have had a year on year increase in commissioned numbers. It is estimated that the final phase of works detailed in this report will be completed by September 2019.

5.6 Brays Special School converted to Academy status on 1st April 2017. International School converted to Academy status on 1st May 2017 and became Tile Cross Academy. The redline property boundaries as defined in the CTA for both schools enables them to operate as separate entities with Brays Academy taking full occupancy of the Leycroft building.

5.7 Some provision will have to be re-provided within Tile Cross Academy to meet the DfE Building Bulletin guidelines for secondary school provision. This includes provision of four specialist Design Technology classrooms, a Sports Hall, Multi Use Games Area and refurbishment and internal remodelling of existing buildings as envisaged since the inception of the scheme for Brays Special School to take over the Leycroft building.

5.8 The design brief for the project was driven by the need to provide additional special school places as part of the Special School Additional Places programme and to provide a warm, safe and dry learning environment. The Executive Head Teachers, Head Teachers and School Business Managers of both Tile Cross Academy and Brays Academy participated in the design process as strategic partners of the Council and as representatives of the end users.

5.9 The Education Development Plan and Schools’ Capital Programme 2017-2018, approved by Cabinet on 18th April 2017, identified funding to increase the capacity of Birmingham City Council schools to help address the current shortfall of special school places.

5.10 Procurement Strategy The procurement route for this project will be through the Constructing West Midlands (CWM) Framework with a construction partner selected via a mini- competition using approved criteria to achieve best value for money based on current DfE education space guidelines and industry benchmark rates. Acivico will develop the scheme and provide Project Management throughout delivery.

5.11 The Full Business Case (FBC) for this scheme is included in Appendix A. The FBC details the works which will be undertaken at Tile Cross Academy and Brays Academy on the Tile Cross Academy site through the full occupation of Tile Cross Academy’s Leycroft building by Brays Academy. This will enable Brays Academy

Birmingham City Council

to develop in its own dedicated buildings. This final phase of works will ensure that the accommodation at Brays Academy will meet the needs of the currently commissioned special school places.

5.12 A Planning Application is due to be submitted in February 2018 with a decision expected by April 2018.

5.13 Subject to FBC approval and Planning Permission, work is due to commence in August 2018 with completion in September 2019.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 The option of doing nothing would mean the City Council would fail to meet its statutory obligation in providing sufficient special school places and maintaining the Education property portfolio.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 To approve the proposed capital works at Tile Cross Academy and Brays Academy in order to provide suitable provision for young people in both mainstream and special provision.

Signatures Date Cabinet Member, Children, Families and Schools: Cllr Carl Rice

Cabinet Member, Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management: Cllr Majid Mahmood

Corporate Director for Children & Young People: Colin Diamond

Birmingham City Council

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

1. BSF Hard and Soft FM contracts completed and signed January 2011 (approved by Cabinet March 2010). 2. Birmingham Special Education Development Plan (SEDP) – Cabinet 16th February 2015 3. Birmingham Special Education Needs Sufficiency Requirements January 2016. 4. Proposal to Make Prescribed Changes at Brays Special School by increasing the number of places by provision of an additional site and change of SEN designation to include Autistic Spectrum Condition (ASC) – Cabinet 19th April 2016 5. Schools’ Capital Programme 2017-18 - Cabinet 18th April 2017. 6. Brays Special School conversion to Academy status – Cabinet 18th April 2017. 7. International School conversion from Community School to Academy status - Cabinet 1st May 2017. 8. Creation of Brays Academy on the International School site – Cabinet Member/Chief Officer, 17th July 2017. 9. Provision of Additional Special School Places for Brays School at the annexe on the Tile Cross Academy site to meet demographic growth from September 2016 onwards – Cabinet Member/Chief Officer, 19th October 2017.

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

A. Full Business Case B. Risk Assessment C. Stakeholder Analysis D. Milestone Dates and Resources E. Ward Councillors Consultation

Report Version 4 Dated 12/01/2018

Appendix A FBC Public

Full Business Case (FBC) 1. General Information Directorate Children, Young People & Portfolio/ Children, Families Families Committee and Schools Tile Cross Academy and CA-01903-02-1-189 Tile Project Title Brays Academy Development Project Code Cross CA-01903-02-1-156 2019 – FBC Brays Project Description To provide Tile Cross Academy (previously known as International School) with replacement teaching spaces for those that have been utilised to facilitate the necessary expansion at Brays Academy (previously known as Brays Special School).

Tile Cross Academy was built for a number on roll of 1200 students but following a judgement by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator in 2016 which approved the variation of admission arrangements at Tile Cross Academy this number on roll is to reduce to 600 students by September 2019, thus making the current occupation of the existing school buildings untenable.

In April 2016 there was a Statutory School Organisation proposal agreed by Cabinet (CMIS ref 001543) to make prescribed changes at Brays Academy by increasing the number of places by provision of an additional site and to change the SEN designation to include autistic spectrum condition. Brays Academy took over part ownership of part of Tile Cross Academy in their Leycroft Building in January 2015.

Over subsequent years Brays Academy has increased the number of commissioned special school places from Birmingham City Council which has resulted in investment to make the additional space suitable for use by primary age children with specific needs.

When the schools became academies, the redline was drawn up to enable both schools to operate as separate entities with Brays Academy taking full occupancy of the Leycroft building. Some of this provision will have to be re-provided within the Tile Cross Academy redline to meet the DfE Building bulletin guidelines for secondary school provision. This includes provision of four specialist Design Technology classrooms, a Sports Hall, Multi Use Games Area and refurbishment and internal remodelling of existing buildings.

A Constructing West Midlands construction partner for the scheme was selected via a mini-competition using approved criteria to achieve best value for money based on current DfE education space guidelines and industry benchmark rates. The selected contractor is signed up to the principles of the Birmingham Business Charter for Social Responsibility and will work on individual action plan, proportionate to the contract sum, demonstrating how the principles of the Charter will be implemented with the school and local community. This action plan will be agreed prior to the works order being placed. Acivico will develop the scheme to Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) Stage 4 and provide Project Management throughout delivery.

Which Corporate and Service outcomes does this project Links to Corporate address : and Service Outcomes ° Vision and Forward Plan; ° A great City to grow up in ° Making the best of our diversity ° Creating a safe and secure city for our children and young people to learn and grow ° Providing an environment where our children have the best start in life ° The Birmingham Special Education Development Plan; ° Education Development Plan and Schools Capital Programme 2017-18. ° Schools’ Capital Date of Cabinet 18 th April 2017 Programme 2017-18 Approval Benefits Measure Impact Quantification The project will enable Brays Providing additional Impact on Outcomes Academy to provide educational accommodation at Brays Special facilities for children with complex Academy addresses identified needs who will be taught in fit for demand and fulfils the Council’s purpose re-modelled statutory obligations to provide accommodation allowing for the sufficient pupil places for special delivery of high quality special needs. This building provides education in a building which was much needed general teaching previously part of the Tile Cross areas and associated Academy site. Consequently the accommodation. provision within that building is being re-provided within the Tile Cross redline to include specialist PE, Sport and DT spaces. The project delivers additional Raised standards, improved teaching spaces to create the behaviour, staff well-being and delivery of personalised learning.at reduced turnover/mobility, Brays Academy and fit for purpose facilitation of the sharing of good secondary provision at Tile Cross practice. Academy. Support and enrich community Children and young people have and family learning e.g. basic skills a safe, warm and dry and opportunities to address environment before, during and worklessness. after school hours. The project prolongs the life of Tile Improved efficiency and Cross Academy buildings and management of the school mitigates the risk of school closure buildings. due to asset failure. Promoting designs which support Creating teaching and learning Birmingham’s Education Vision. environments that are suitable for delivering modern day school curriculum. Project Deliverables The creation of two separate schools in line with the Commercial Transfer Agreement (drawn up when both schools became academies) which specified the scope of works which would separate the two schools. Scope • The provision of a four-court sports hall with associated changing facilities for Tile Cross Academy. • Four additional classrooms provided within the Sports Hall development for Tile Cross Academy.

• Two Multi Use Games Areas for Tile Cross Academy. • Relocation of Design Technology and Music classrooms and associated works for Tile Cross Academy. • Works to upgrade the Martineau building to accommodate specialist teaching space for Tile Cross Academy. • Accessible Student entrance for Brays Academy to include Brays visitor parking. • Provision of a medical room for Brays Academy. • Platform lift for 2 rooms to facilitate access for Brays Academy. • New access road including fencing, kerbs and lighting to ensure child safeguarding particularly when students arrive and depart school in minibus transport for Brays Academy • All associated programme costs e.g. The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 (CDM 2015), Building Regulations, Planning etc. Scope exclusions No works will be undertaken outside the scope of works. Dependencies on Secure Planning Approval other projects or Placing Orders with Contractors. activities Achievability Scope of work identified • Site investigation reports have shown no abnormal site conditions • Programme in place and costs agreed • Funding is in place • Availability of resources • Consultants appointed have experience of delivering similar projects Project Manager Paul Bowman Lead Capital Projects Manager, 0121 464 8997 Education Infrastructure [email protected] Budget Holder Jaswinder Didially Head of Education Infrastructure 07825 117334 , [email protected] Sponsor David England Lead Officer, Education Infrastructure 0121 675 7963 [email protected]

Project Accountant Jaswinder Didially Head of Education Infrastructure 07825 117334 [email protected] Paul Bowman Lead Capital Projects Manager, 0121 464 8997 Education Infrastructure [email protected] David England Lead Officer, Education Infrastructure 0121 675 7963 [email protected]

Anil Nayyar Head of City Finance CYPF 0121 675 3570 [email protected] Project Board Paul Bowman Lead Capital Projects Manager, Members 0121 464 8997 Education Infrastructure [email protected] Head of City Finance Date of H. o. CF Anil Nayyar (H. o. CF) Approval:

Planned Date of Planned Project Start date April 2018 September 2019 Technical completion

2. Capital Costs & Funding

The costs are funded from Department for Education (DfE) Basic Need Grant (SSAP Stage 5). Further details are included in Appendix A of the Private Report.

Consequential revenue costs including additional staffing will be funded by Tile Cross Academy and Brays Academy from their General Annual Grant. Any ongoing day to day repair and maintenance of the building will be the responsibility of ENGIE, the Facilities Management (FM) company appointed to operate and maintain the site as part of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) Design & Build (D&B) Contract as approved by Cabinet 29 th March 2010 (ref 357194). Where future maintenance works are not captured through the existing FM Contracts (e.g. cyclical replacement), the schools will pay any associated costs from their General Annual Grant.

3. Checklist of Documents Supporting the FBC Item Mandatory Number attached attachment

Financial Case and Plan • Detailed workings in support of the above Budget Mandatory See Private report Summary (as necessary) • Statement of required resource (people, equipment, Mandatory Appendix D accommodation) – append a spreadsheet or other document • Milestone Dates/ Project Critical Path (set up in Mandatory Appendix D Voyager or attached in a spreadsheet)

Project Development products • Populated Issues and Risks register Mandatory Appendix B • Stakeholder Analysis Mandatory Appendix C

Appendix B - RISK ASSESSMENT

Risk Likelihood Severity Effect Solution of risk of risk Building costs Low Medium The cost of the EdSI will work closely with the escalate buildings would be Contractor to monitor the more than the schedule of works and build funding available costs. Value engineering of scheme to reduce costs if needed. Building works fall Medium Medium Deadlines not met EdSI will work closely with the behind School & Contractor to monitor the scheme on site. BCC faced with Low Low Increased pressure The FM provider will meet all day increasing revenue on the revenue to day repair and maintenance of costs budget the infrastructure.

Appendix C

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Schools Cabinet Member for Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management Head Teacher School Leadership Team Pupils Parents School Governors Education Infrastructure FM Provider Executive Member and Ward Councillors Residents

DEGREE OF INFLUENCE

High influence Low influence

• Cabinet Members • Parents for CF&S and CC & • Pupils CM • Education Infrastructure • FM provider • School Leadership Team (including Head Teacher and Governors) • Executive Member and Ward Councillors • Residents

Low importance

Stakeholder Stake in Potential What does Perceived Stakeholder Responsibility project impact on the project attitudes management project expect from and/or strategy stakeholder risks Cabinet Strategic High Ra tification of Strategy not Early BCC / EDI Members for Overview of BCC approved Consultation C,YP&Fand Basic Need approach to and Regular VfM & E and Capital Basic Needs Briefing on all Maintenance aspects of expenditure Special Provision Client (E DI) Budget holder / High Commit Financial High Acivico Project Landlord funding / constraints & involvement in Manager / EDI resources timescales all aspects of Project Officer affect project delivery delivery School’s FM Design and High Design of Unable to Close working School provider Delivery refurbishment design to with other Leadership Team Project budget stakeholders / Governors management Unable to Regular Project Manager deliver to feedback timescales School End Users High Ongoing End users Re gular project School Leadership delivering high involvement feel that the meetings to Leadership Team Teams / quality in the design building is ensure that end / Governing Body Governors education meetings and not suitable users views are EDI Project revenue costs for incorporated in Officer for R&M once educational design process build use complete Pupils /Parents / End user Low Consultation Objection to Through School Residents scheme school’s Leadership Team communication and statutory processes Executive Knowledge of High Consultation Objections Involve in EDI Project Members and other with from local consultation Officer Ward developments community residents and planning Councillors affecting local and support permission Governors/ communities for project process School that may link Leadership Team into project

Appendix D MILESTONE DATES and RESOURCES

Schools’ Capital Programme 2017-18 18th April 2017 FBC – Cabinet 24 th January 2018 Final target costs agreed with contractor January 2018 Planning application submitted February 2018 Planning Permission expected April 2018 Orders placed with contractor April 2018 Commencement of works August 2018 Completion of works September 2019 Post Implementation Review December 2019

STATEMENT OF RESOURCES REQUIRED

People School’s Project Team Design /Architect Quantity Surveyor Technical Officers Project Officer Contractors/Sub contractors Administrators Clerk of Works Equipment (to enable Specialist equipment provided by contractor relevant to the works) requirements for the construction works.

Equipment (installed as IT infrastructure in new accommodation part of project)

PROGRAMME TEAM

Name Designation Telephone Jaswinder Didially Head of Education Infrastructure 07825 117334 Lead Capital Projects Manager, Education Paul Bowman 0121 464 8997 Infrastructure David England Lead Officer, Education Infrastructure 0121 675 7963

Report Version 2 Dated 12/01/18

Appendix E –Public Report

TILE CROSS ACADEMY AND BRAYS ACADEMY DEVELOPMENT 2019 – FULL BUSINESS CASE AND CONTRACT AWARD

Consultation with Ward Councillors/Executive Member for Shard End

Method of Councillor Name Date Comments Consultation Councillor Uzma Ahmed

Councillor Ian Ward

12/01/18 E-mail TBC Councillor Marje Bridle

Councillor John Cotton

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET Report of: CORPORATE DIRECTOR, ECONOMY Date of Decision: 24th January 2018 SUBJECT: SPRINT BUS RAPID TRANSIT NETWORK DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 004305/2017 If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chairman approved Relevant Cabinet Member(s) or COUNCILLOR STEWART STACEY, CABINET MEMBER Relevant Executive Member : FOR TRANSPORT AND ROADS Relevant O&S Chair: COUNCILLOR ZAFAR IQBAL, ECONOMY, SKILLS AND TRANSPORT Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report:

1.1 This report seeks approval for the network development and implementation strategy for Sprint bus rapid transit within Birmingham as per the recommendations in paragraphs 2.1 to 2.9. This forms part of the strategy for the wider West Midlands Sprint network, including that delivery would be undertaken jointly between the City Council and Transport for West Midlands, subject to confirmation of funding, further approvals as required, and separate agreements with the other West Midlands Local Authorities and Sprint operator/s.

2. Decision(s) recommended:

That Cabinet:- 2.1 Notes the benefits of Sprint to the travelling public, residents of and visitors to Birmingham, including Sprint’s role in supporting the 2022 Commonwealth Games, the adopted Birmingham Development Plan, and any mandated Clean Air Zone. 2.2 Notes the Sprint Standards (Appendix 1) and endorses the Sprint Definition (Appendix 1) which will inform scheme design and highway priority measures, in line with policies included in Birmingham Connected, and the developing Birmingham Design Guide, along with parking and loading modifications, and Park and Ride site development. 2.3 Approves the Sprint network development priorities (Appendix 2) reflecting priority routes to support the 2022 Commonwealth Games and delivery of key elements of the Birmingham Development Plan, to be subject to further scheme and business case development. 2.4 Approves the key design principles for the Sprint network (Section 5.3), and notes that key infrastructure interventions would be subject to further preliminary and detailed design together with local and wider stakeholder consultation, and notes that subject to confirmation of funding, Project Definition Documents and Full Business Cases will be prepared for each scheme in accordance with the City Council’s Gateway process in line with the timescales outlined in paragraph 5.6.4, and West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) governance requirements. 2.5 Notes the total estimated cost of the Sprint programme (Section 4.2), and that funding arrangements would be subject to further approvals through WMCA and City Council governance processes. 2.6 Notes that delivery would be undertaken jointly between the City Council and Transport for West Midlands, subject to confirmation of funding, further approvals as required, and separate agreements with the other West Midlands Local Authorities and Sprint operator/s; 2.7 Approves the City Council progressing to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding (draft at Appendix 3) between the City Council and Transport for West Midlands, and authority being delegated to the Assistant Director Transportation and Connectivity, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads and the City Solicitor, to finalise the specific content of the Memorandum of Understanding, and to negotiate, execute and complete any other necessary legal documentation to give effect to the recommendations included in this report. 2.8 Notes that initial utility diversion works will commence in the vicinity of the Metro Edgbaston Terminus on Hagley Road between Five Ways and Wyndham Road in the early part of 2018 executed under statutory undertakers’ powers, supporting delivery of the early highway interventions noted in paragraph 5.4.2, and 2.9 Delegates to the Assistant Director Transportation and Connectivity, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads and the City Solicitor, authority to negotiate and finalise the specific content of a Section 278 agreement, to enable Transport for West Midlands to deliver the early highway interventions noted in paragraph 5.4.2.

Lead Contact Officer(s): David Harris, Transportation Policy Manager Telephone No: 0121 464 5313 Email Address: [email protected]

3. Consultation:

3.1 Internal

3.1.1 Officers from City Finance, Legal and Governance, and Planning and Development have been involved in the preparation of this report.

3.2 External

3.2.1 The former West Midlands Integrated Transport Authority (WMITA) held a public consultation event regarding the draft version of Movement for Growth, (the West Midlands Strategic Transport Plan which is the statutory Local Transport Plan for TfWM as a Local Transport Authority), at the Council House on 17th September 2015 which was attended by members of the public, stakeholders and City Council officers. Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) undertook a public consultation on the draft Movement for Growth Delivery Plan during May-June 2017. Comments expressed in response to both these consultations have been used in developing the final versions of the Movement for Growth Strategy and Delivery Plan, both as approved by WMCA in June 2016 and September 2017 respectively, which include the proposed future Sprint network. 3.2.2 It is anticipated that consultation with local residents and businesses together with wider stakeholders will be undertaken as part of the preparation of the Project Definition Document (PDD) and Full Business Case (FBC) for each route.

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 This decision is consistent with the City Council’s Vision and Forward Plan:  A healthy city and a great place for people to grow old in;  A great city for children to grow up in;  A great city to live in with decent homes for all; and  A city where citizens succeed because they have skills required for the jobs on offer. 4.1.2 This decision supports the delivery of policies included in the City’s Birmingham Connected Transport White Paper (as agreed by Cabinet on 17th November 2014 and as noted by Full Council on 7th February 2017), including the delivery of a rapid transit network, which in turn support delivery of the adopted Birmingham Development Plan and Movement for Growth. This decision supports the delivery of the mandated Clean Air Zone.

4.2 Financial Implications (Will decisions be carried out within existing finances and Resources?)

4.2.1 Development and delivery of the Sprint network is being funded through the West Midlands Devolution Deal as agreed with Government, and the WMCA acts as budget holder for this funding. This Devolution Deal Investment Programme includes the HS2 Connectivity Package. The total provisional capital funding envelope for the Sprint network across the West Midlands is £279.9m as approved by WMCA in February 2017; this includes funding through the Devolution Deal, anticipated funding from future operator/s (for vehicles), and other anticipated local contributions. This envelope also includes committed Local Growth Fund contributions (as agreed by the Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership) for Hagley Road Phase 1 (£8.1m) and Birmingham to Airport A45 (£35m). 4.2.2 This report has no capital financial implications for the City Council. Specific schemes and elements to be delivered by the City Council would be dealt with through the City Council’s and WMCA’s governance arrangements through the process outlined in paragraph 4.3.4, including PDDs and FBCs. 4.2.3 The City Council would be responsible for maintaining additional highway infrastructure within the Birmingham boundary. Paragraphs 5.3.1-5.3.5 show an overview of the types of infrastructure including carriageway widening, alterations to junctions, and new bridges. Specific revenue funding implications for the City Council would be determined as part of future business cases, in line with the process outlined in paragraph 4.3.4, including PDDs and FBCs.

4.3 Legal Implications

4.3.1 The West Midlands Strategic Transport Plan (referred to as Movement for Growth) is the statutory Local Transport Plan for TfWM as a Local Transport Authority. Preparation of the Local Transport Plan is a statutory requirement under Section 108(3) of the Transport Act 2000 (as amended by the Local Transport Act 2008). The responsibility for the preparation of the Strategic Transport Plan is with TfWM. Full Council approval was given on 7th February 2017 to recognise Movement for Growth as the Statutory Transport Plan for the West Midlands. 4.3.2 As per the recommendation in paragraph 2.7, it is proposed to progress to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU, draft at Appendix 3) between the City Council and TfWM. 4.3.3 As per the recommendation in paragraph 2.9, it is proposed to negotiate and finalise the specific content of a Section 278 agreement, to enable TfWM to deliver the early highway interventions noted in paragraph 5.4.2. 4.3.4 This report has no procurement implications for the City Council as design development is currently being procured by TfWM. Detailed design of highway infrastructure measures including Full Business Case development (WMCA), and delivery of those measures, would be procured by TfWM with the Highway Authorities, including the City Council, and would be subject to further reporting including through the Highway Authorities’ and WMCA’s respective governance processes. 4.3.5 The Sprint programme will adhere to the City Council, other Highway Authorities, WMCA, and HS2 investment approval/governance processes, in line with the requirements of the HS2 connectivity investment funding regimes.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty (see separate guidance note)

4.4.1 An initial Equalities Analysis has been carried out (ref EA002569) and is attached as Appendix 4. No adverse effects have been identified from the actions recommended in this report. Any scheme-specific equalities issues would be identified as part of the process of further scheme development as outlined in paragraph 4.3.4.

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 Background 5.1.1 In 2014 the Birmingham Connected White Paper, as the City’s transport strategy (as agreed by Cabinet on 17th November 2014 and as noted by Full Council on 7th February 2017), stated the intention to complete a £1.2bn integrated public transport network within 20 years. This will allow people to travel across the City in high-quality vehicles, feeling safe and secure and enabling fast movement through some of the most congested sections of the network. This will include a minimum of three more Metro lines and up to nine cross-city bus rapid transit lines, known as Sprint. Sprint is a road- based rapid transit public transport mode designed to provide a level of service, comfort and presence close to a tram but at a lower cost, providing dependable, shorter journey times. A network of Sprint routes was subsequently included in the following:  The HS2 Connectivity Package, as published by the former West Midlands Integrated Transport Authority (WMITA) in July 2015 to effectively 'plug-in' the two new HS2 stations to local transport networks. The West Midlands Devolution Deal has a £4.4bn HS2 Growth Strategy to make the most of HS2 arriving in the West Midlands, including funding to deliver the HS2 Connectivity Package;  In 2016 the proposed future Sprint network was included in the final West Midlands Transport Strategy ‘Movement for Growth’ as agreed by the former WMITA.  During 2016 the City Council supported TfWM in progressing initial feasibility studies regarding the Sprint routes, and following discussion with the Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads regarding prioritisation, the proposed future Sprint network was included in TfWM’s consultation on the Movement for Growth 2026 Delivery Plan during April-May 2017.  In February 2017 the WMCA approved the revised HS2 connectivity package which included funding commitments outlined in paragraph 4.2.1.  On 23rd March 2017 the Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership (GBSLEP) agreed to provide Local Growth Fund funding to TfWM for delivery of the initial Sprint route, Hagley Road Phase 1 (between Quinton and the City Centre).  The A45 Birmingham to Birmingham Airport Sprint scheme was included in the second round of Local Growth Fund funded schemes and was granted programme entry status on the 29th January 2015.  In September 2017 TfWM published the final Delivery Plan which included the future Sprint network to be delivered by 2026. 5.1.2 This report seeks approval for the network development and implementation strategy for Sprint bus rapid transit within Birmingham as per the recommendations in paragraphs 2.1 to 2.9, as part of the strategy for the wider West Midlands Sprint network, including that delivery would be undertaken jointly between the City Council and Transport for West Midlands, subject to confirmation of funding, further approvals as required, and separate agreements with the other West Midlands Local Authorities and Sprint operator/s.

5.2 Sprint Standards, Definition and Benefits 5.2.1 The West Midlands is building an integrated rail and rapid transit network and much of this new network will be Sprint which was considered within Movement for Growth and Birmingham Connected as the right form of rapid transit for the passenger flows on our major, high volume routes. Cabinet is asked to note the Sprint Standards (Appendix 1) which set out the criteria that Sprint is expected to fulfil, as approved by the former WMITA in March 2016. Sprint will offer customers a safe, clean, convenient, reliable and integrated passenger experience. As well as using low emission technologies, vehicles should offer high specification amenities, as well as multi door boarding/alighting for shorter dwell times. 5.2.2 More specifically, building on the Sprint Standards, Cabinet is asked to endorse the Sprint Definition (see Appendix 1) which states that the target Sprint standard is to have journey times comparable to private car, and an improvement of over 20% on existing bus journey times; infrastructure will be designed to achieve average vehicle speeds of 20km/hr reliably throughout the day. 5.2.3 Headline benefits of Sprint include:  A new mode of transport – bus rapid transit with the comfort and speed of light rail. 75 miles (122km) of Sprint network is predicted to attract over 23 million passengers per year;  Over 80 new vehicles, with low noise, low vibration, and low emissions (vehicle specifications and delivery to be discussed with the future Sprint operator);  High quality customer service with a distinctive brand and identity.  Great passenger comfort, with airy interiors, plenty of legroom, and air conditioning  Wi-Fi, audio visual announcements, and on-board next stop information, with over 300 upgraded stops;  Reliable and dependable journey times that will be at least 20% quicker than conventional buses, saving commuters over 2 million hours in journey time per year.

5.3 Key Design Principles 5.3.1 Cabinet is asked to approve the Sprint Routes Key Design Principles as follows. In order to deliver the Sprint Standards, in particular the requirements relating to journey times and average speed, Sprint will require significant highway prioritisation which will have significant implications for infrastructure changes and other road users. Highway interventions for Sprint are being designed for the benefit of both Sprint and the conventional bus network, to include significant public transport priority, delivered through a combination of segregated, where possible, and/or enforced dedicated road space and traffic signal prioritisation. 5.3.2 Specifically, from the initial feasibility the following measures have been identified:  Carriageway widening to provide additional lanes/lane width – in some locations this would require Compulsory Purchase Orders with land take from private property, with some limited instances of building demolition, and removal of parking laybys;  Restrictions on parking (on-street and off-street) and loading;  Improvements to junctions including at-grade (existing street level) infrastructure changes, priority for Sprint at traffic signals, and improved facilities for cyclists and pedestrians;  New or extended sections of bus lane (usable by Sprint and conventional buses);  New laybys to allow Sprint vehicles to easily overtake conventional buses;  The need to mitigate impacts on trees and listed properties;  Closure of some side-road junctions and/or restriction of turning movements. 5.3.3 Consideration is being given as to how Birmingham Connected policies could be designed into Sprint schemes. For example, the City Council is working with TfWM to manage the needs of all road users. 5.3.4 Work is being undertaken by TfWM which is anticipated to conclude during 2018, to support the business case and development for Strategic Park and Ride, which has the potential to enhance Sprint’s contribution to modal shift, congestion reduction and economic benefits by attracting even more patronage from car users. 5.3.5 Depot facilities and sites are required as part of the solution and further clarification is anticipated following discussion with the potential Sprint operator/s.

5.4 Network Development Priorities 5.4.1 Cabinet is asked to approve the Sprint Network Development Priorities as shown in Appendix 2. The following routes have been identified as priorities for delivery by 2022, to support delivery of the Commonwealth Games and delivery of key elements of the Birmingham Development Plan:  Sutton Coldfield to Birmingham via Langley;  Walsall to Birmingham serving the Commonwealth Games site at Alexander Stadium and Perry Barr; and  Birmingham – Airport (A45), which would also serve Solihull Town Centre via Lode Lane, and Commonwealth Games sites at the UKCentral Hub. This is a Local Growth Fund Department for Transport retained Portfolio scheme. 5.4.2 Hagley Road Phase 1 (Birmingham-Quinton) is a Local Growth Fund scheme, and is already prioritised for delivery. Subject to a Section 278 agreement with TfWM to enable delivery, (see paragraph 2.9), initial utility diversion works will commence on Hagley Road in the vicinity of the Metro Edgbaston Terminus between Five Ways and Wyndham Road in the early part of 2018 executed under statutory undertakers’ powers; supporting delivery of specific early highway interventions benefitting both Sprint Hagley Road Phase 1 and conventional bus operation. 5.4.3 Following the Phase 1 early works outlined in paragraph 5.4.2, it is anticipated that a PDD setting out proposals for the remaining elements of Hagley Road Sprint (including the remainder of Phase 1 comprising stops and vehicles, Phase 2 and Halesowen extension as outlined in paragraph 5.4.4) would be submitted for Cabinet approval in summer 2018, along with reports submitted in accordance with WMCA governance requirements. 5.4.4 Other routes are proposed to be delivered in time for the opening of HS2 Phase 1 (London-Birmingham) in 2026, including:  Hagley Road Phase 2, including further journey time improvements on the Birmingham section of the route;  Hagley Road extension from Quinton to Halesowen Town Centre;  Longbridge to Birmingham; and  Hall Green-Solihull-Airport via Damson Parkway. 5.4.5 Cabinet is asked to note that key infrastructure interventions for each route within Birmingham would be subject to further design and consultation to be reported through future PDDs and FBCs in line with the timescales outlined in section 5.6.4., and WMCA governance requirements. 5.4.6 The City Council is working with TfWM and the other West Midland Local Authorities to investigate the potential to run Sprint routes across the City Centre providing direct connections between key locations, which have the potential to further enhance the benefits of Sprint.

5.5 Proposed Delivery Model and Draft Memorandum of Understanding 5.5.1 Cabinet is asked to approve the City Council to progress to negotiate a MoU (draft at Appendix 3) between the City Council and TfWM. The proposed key principles of the MoU are as follows:  Funding for delivery of the Sprint Future Network to be provided through the funding package as summarised in paragraph 4.2.1;  All parties to work together to implement the Sprint Future Network, in line with the Sprint Definition and Network Development Priorities. For route sections within Birmingham, the Future Network will be developed in line with policies included in Birmingham Connected, and in line with the emerging Birmingham Design Guide and Design and Conservation Review Panel;  The City Council will deliver highway interventions within Birmingham, including public consultation, and subject to agreement with other Highway Authorities, beyond (through Section 8 agreements), or will enter into Section 278 agreements with WMCA to deliver specific highway interventions;  TfWM will act as Scheme Promoter and will deliver the public transport integration elements including fares, ticketing, information, stop infrastructure. TfWM will appoint a Scheme Project Manager to oversee delivery of all elements of Sprint schemes including highway infrastructure;  All parties to participate in risk and reporting activities. All parties to participate in joint governance arrangements through WMCA, to oversee delivery.

5.6 Next Steps 5.6.1 City Council officers will work with TfWM and the other West Midlands Local Authorities to take forward further development, seeking to ensure that the three high priority routes defined in paragraph 5.4.1 above are delivered in time for the 2022 Commonwealth Games and key developments at Langley and Peddimore and, following this, that the routes due for implementation by 2026 in time for HS2 Phase 1 are delivered in time. 5.6.2 An operator procurement model will be developed by TfWM over the next 6 months. 5.6.3 Development and delivery of the Sprint programme will be undertaken in accordance with scheme governance requirements including WMCA assurance. This will run in parallel with PDDs and FBCs to be produced to take forward approvals and detailed design for each route, to be subject to the City Council’s governance processes. 5.6.4 The PDDs for the three high priority routes as defined in paragraph 5.4.1 will be produced in October 2018 and it is anticipated that these will be submitted to Cabinet for approval by December 2018. The FBCs for the three high priority routes will be produced in Summer 2019 and it is anticipated that these will be submitted to Cabinet for approval by December 2019. Timescales for PDDs and FBCs regarding other Sprint routes, as defined in paragraph 5.4.4, are to be advised by TfWM in due course. City Council officers will work with TfWM to ensure these timescales are met.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 If the Sprint network is not delivered this will result in continued worsening of problems of congestion and pollution, presenting a significant risk to the delivery of the Birmingham Development Plan, Birmingham Connected, Movement for Growth, and the HS2 Connectivity Package. 6.2 In terms of alternative routes, the Birmingham Connected White Paper determined that a number of corridors are best suited for a Sprint system for a number of reasons; including the space available. Sprint is envisaged to be the primary, ‘transformative’ public transport mode for Birmingham over the next 20 years, striking the optimum balance between quality improvements, deliverability and cost and is therefore the most able to be rolled out as a mass network within the shortest period. Whilst Metro is being progressed for other routes, it is regarded as suited to particular characteristics including where the more significant local impacts (property demolition and road space allocation) and costs can be justified where there is the greatest travel demand and opportunity to link with regeneration and land use developments. Improvements to heavy rail will be progressed on existing lines with some new stations. For those corridors not covered by Metro or Sprint, improvements for conventional buses (Citylink) will be progressed. 6.3 An alternative option was considered including highway infrastructure improvements but utilising conventional buses at a lower cost than Sprint, similar to the previous Bus Showcase schemes implemented during the 2000s. However this would not meet the requirements set out in the Sprint Standards and Sprint Definition, nor the policies set out in Birmingham Connected. Bus Showcase is not comparable to Sprint, would undermine the supporting business cases, and would not deliver the step change desired and reflected in the investment and commitment made to deliver Sprint by the WMCA.

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 To progress the implementation of a Sprint Rapid Bus Transit network.

Signatures Date

Councillor Stewart Stacey, Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads …………………………………. ………………………….

Waheed Nazir, Corporate Director, Economy ………………………………….. ………………………….

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report: “Birmingham Connected White Paper”: Birmingham City Council, November 2014 “West Midlands Integrated Transport Authority Strategic Transport Plan: ‘Movement for Growth’”: report to Cabinet Member for Development, Transport and the Economy jointly with Deputy Chief Executive, 15th October 2015 “West Midlands Integrated Transport Authority Strategic Transport Plan: ‘Movement for Growth’”: West Midlands Integrated Transport Authority, December 2015 “Movement for Growth Delivery Plan”: Transport for West Midlands, September 2017

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any): 1. Sprint Standards and Sprint Definition 2. Sprint Network Development Priorities 3. Draft Memorandum of Understanding 4. Equalities Analysis

PROTOCOL PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITY DUTY

3 A full assessment should be prepared where necessary and consultation should then take place.

5 Responses to the consultation should be analysed in order to identify:

(a) whether there is adverse impact upon persons within the protected categories

(b) what is the nature of this adverse impact

(d) what mitigating actions can be taken and at what cost

6 The impact assessment carried out at the outset will need to be amended to have due regard to the matters in (4) above.

7 Where there is adverse impact the final Report should contain:

 a summary of the adverse impact and any possible mitigating actions (in section 4.4 or an appendix if necessary)  the full equality impact assessment (as an appendix)  the equality duty – see page 9 (as an appendix).

Equality Act 2010

The Executive must have due regard to the public sector equality duty when considering Council reports for decision.

The public sector equality duty is as follows:

1 The Council must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to:

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by the Equality Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(a) remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

(b) take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

(c) encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

(a) tackle prejudice, and

(b) promote understanding.

5 The relevant protected characteristics are: (a) Marriage & civil partnership (b) Age (c) Disability (d) Gender reassignment (e) Pregnancy and maternity (f) Race (g) Religion or belief (h) Sex

(i) Sexual orientation

APPENDIX 2

Sprint Network Development Priorities

APPENDIX 3

Draft Memorandum of Understanding and Joint Governance Arrangements between Birmingham City Council and Transport for West Midlands regarding the Delivery of the Future Sprint Network

Key Principles

1_TfWM is accountable for delivery of the HS2 Connectivity Package on behalf of the WMCA.

2_ TfWM will work in partnership with Birmingham City Council and other relevant Local Highway Authorities to jointly develop and deliver the schemes. Birmingham City Council will ensure local approvals, such as Project Definition Documents and Full Business Cases, are expedited and will work with TfWM to ensure these are produced in a timely manner.

3_ The expected funding requirement for each scheme will be agreed, by all parties to the agreement, in advance of the Outline Business Case being submitted to WMCA.

4_ All parties will seek to implement the agreed Sprint Definition and Sprint Standards on the corridors.

5_ A dedicated Project Manager accountable to the Sprint Programme Board will manage overall scheme development and delivery.

6_ Birmingham City Council will deliver highway interventions for the scheme within their boundary including management of public consultation unless otherwise agreed.

7_ All signatory organisations to the agreement will participate on the scheme Project Board.

8_ The scheme Project Board will be accountable to the Sprint Programme Board.

9_ Project funding will provide a contribution towards programme level deliverables including: Off board ticketing solution development, revenue protection policy specification (e.g. ticket inspectors), etc.

10_ All signatory organisations will contribute to risk and schedule workshops run by WMCA and agree funding requirements. These funding requirements will include an agreed amount of risk and contingency funding based on a quantified risk assessment.

11_When all tender prices are received, a full business case shall be submitted jointly by the signatories (Birmingham City Council and Transport for West Midlands) to WMCA and other funders as appropriate with a revised expected funding requirement.

12_ If, following agreement of the full business case, any shortfall in funding for the scheme is identified then the parties shall work jointly to agree how the scope can be adjusted to deliver the maximum possible benefit from the scheme maintaining the credibility of the scheme with the funding available, or to jointly submit a revised case for additional funding.

13_ Notwithstanding the requirement of point 12 above, if the scheme has to be terminated before the expected benefits are delivered and funding has to be repaid, this shall be repaid by TfWM as scheme promoter noting TfWM is funded from each of the seven WMCA constituent members.

Sprint – Bus Rapid FAST AND RELIABLE SERVICE INTEGRATED CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE Dedicated lanes and signal priority Access for all Transit (BRT) to ensure dependable average speeds DEFINITION Multiple doors for quick boarding Turn up and go service Off-board fare collection to limit dwell times Stops every 500-800 metres Like all the world’s great cities and regions, (less frequently than local bus) Enhanced waiting environment with CCTV and way finding the West Midlands is building an integrated rail, bus and rapid transit network. Alongside new rail Cycle storage as part of an integrated customer experience, stations and metro extensions, much of this new where Sprint interfaces with the cycle network network will be Sprint Bus Rapid Transit, the right form of rapid transit for the passenger flows on Information for onward connectivity our major, high volume routes. Sprint will provide Integration with other modes e.g. local buses and taxis a level of service, comfort and presence close to a tram, providing dependable, shorter journey times for customers.

Sprint will offer an attractive viable alternative for car drivers. Fully integrated Sprint routes combined with convenient park and ride will help to significantly reduce the number of cars coming into our cities and help to improve air quality in our region.

In order to achieve this, the West Midlands must be willing to allow Sprint priority. This would be delivered through a combination of segregated, where possible, and/or enforced dedicated road MODERN space and traffic signal prioritisation. Higher capacity vehicles

A Sprint BRT route can be provided for less than Vehicles are often longer articulated 25% the capital cost of Metro, and using existing and specially designed highway powers can be delivered in less time.

Sprint BRT offers flexibility, enabling vehicles and Latest energy efficient technologies services to be moved, if neccessary, and to cater BRT for new developments as they are built.

The vehicles used on Sprint will deliver a similar level of customer experience to Metro, will serve limited stops, and offer an integrated customer COMFORTABLE experience. Spacious and comfortable interiors Sprint – Bus Rapid Transit is an opportunity to Enhanced facilities at stopping locations expand the region’s rapid transit offer of a higher quality and more reliable travel experience Wifi, CCTV, on-board Real Time Information and next stop information

Dedicated lanes with high quality surface to provide smooth running

Introduction Document Title Sprint Standards

Purpose of Document To set standards of Sprint in West Midlands

Author ITA Policy and Strategy Team Endorsed By ITA Version Control Version Number V1

Date Effective From 16th March 2016

Review Frequency (If Annually applicable) Next Review Date (If March 2017 applicable) Revision History Version Date Author Action Reviewed By V0.05 29/12/15 T Skidmore Draft L Shoaf V0.06 06/01/16 T Skidmore L Shoaf feedback incorporated STOG V0.07 13/01/16 T Skidmore STOG feedback incorporated TDC V0.08 26/01/16 T Skidmore TDC, Bus Alliance, and Sprint L Shoaf Board feedback incorporated V1 07/03/16 T Skidmore Presentation amendments L Shoaf

Distribution Name/Title Date of Issue Version STOG 06/01/16 V0.06 TDC 14/01/16 V0.07 Bus Alliance 18/01/16 V0.07 ITA 09/03/16 V1

- 1 -

Sprint Standards

Document for adoption by the ITA

March 2016

- 2 -

Contents

Page Title 4 What is Sprint? 5 Why Sprint? 5 Headline benefits of Sprint Sprint performance and service standards 1. Sprint operation – timetables, frequencies and service integration 2. Vehicles 3. Sprint shelters and interchanges 6 4. Fares and fare collection 5. Highways and priority 6. Intelligent transport systems – including real time information 7. Branding, marketing and customer service 8. Environmental credentials 7 The Sprint Standards – Summary Table Sprint operation  Key features of the timetable 8  Key features of the route  Punctuality and reliability targets Sprint vehicles  A great customer ambience 9  The latest technologies  World class maintenance and upkeep 10 Sprint shelters and interchanges 11 Fares and ticketing Highways and priority  Highways arrangements 12  Sprint stops  Junction arrangements  Construction and maintenance 14 Intelligent transport systems 15 Branding, marketing and customer service 16 Environmental credentials

- 3 -

What is Sprint?

Successful and exciting cities require cutting-edge forms of mass transit, elevating urban transport to a new level of excellence while making communities more liveable, competitive, and sustainable.

Sprint is a bus based rapid transit mode which is part of the vision for the future network of world class public transport in the West Midlands. Sprint is an innovative mode of transport with journey times and comfort levels that are based on those of a light rail system while maximising the flexibility and lower costs associated with bus technology. Sprint means faster journeys, improved reliability, higher quality public transport environment, greener environment, and easier access to transport and our communities.

It will play a key role in improving the journey experience for people living, working and visiting the West Midlands and with its stylish looks will become the image of a modern and successful region.

The Sprint programme will deliver significant benefits to the West Midlands including:  Providing a significant transformational effect on the image of public transport in the Metropolitan area;  Meeting the mobility needs of the West Midlands conurbation as outlined in the Transport Prospectus, Birmingham’s Mobility Action Plan (BMap), HS2 Growth packages, and emerging West Midlands Strategic Transport Plan;  Generating a significant uplift in public transport patronage;  Providing a high capacity and low emission vehicle resulting in less environmental pollution; and  Delivering a tram-like vehicle while maximising the flexibility and lower costs associated with bus technology compared to that of a tram.

Included in the 'Towards a World Class Integrated Transport Network' Prospectus, Birmingham City Council's Birmingham Connected Report, the HS2 growth strategy, and the West Midlands Strategic Transport Plan, Sprint is part of the vision for the future of a network of world class public transport in the West Midlands. The 2014 Strategic Economic Plan for the Birmingham & Solihull LEP identified Sprint as a very worthwhile intervention providing high value for money. Funding has already been allocated to deliver the programme across the A456 (Birmingham to Quinton) and A45 (Birmingham to Birmingham Airport) corridors between 2015 and 2020.

The Sprint Standards are required, in order to ensure a basic service specification which can be applied to a new network of bus rapid transit corridors, as part of a world class public transport system that supports growth, jobs and inclusion.

- 4 -

Why Sprint?

Branded the same throughout the West Midlands, Sprint will be recognised as a benchmark for high quality rapid transit. Along with heavy rail and Metro, Sprint will form part of the high capacity rapid transport network. The network links the metropolitan area’s key centres to their travel-to-work areas and underpins the regeneration of key corridors.

The West Midlands vision of world class public transport is to have an integrated system of four tiers:  Rail and rapid transit network  Principal bus corridors  Local bus networks  Complementary travel services

With a generational shift in the quality of public transport, Sprint supports Centro and local authorities’ visions for improved urban centres served by very low-emission vehicles with characteristics similar to trams. The passenger experience of the Sprint network will be very different to that of a bus in service today. Off-vehicle ticketing, conductors and multi-door boarding, coupled with highway priority, will help to reduce journey times to be more competitive with the private car.

Sprint will offer a 'turn-up-and-go' timetable with journey times and comfort levels that are based on those of light rail systems (trams) while maximising the flexibility and lower costs associated with bus technology. Similar systems already operate in the continent in cities such as Metz, Bergen, Geneva, Barcelona, Luxemburg and Malmo among other cities.

The required investment in highways and passenger infrastructure for Sprint will be matched by the service operators’ investment in vehicles and staff. Presentation will be to agreed exceptional standards – vehicles will always be clean and damage-free, passenger-facing staff will be informative and project a positive image of public transport. A rigorous customer charter will clearly set out the expectations of all parties involved and be focused on delivering a world-class public transport service.

Headline benefits of Sprint  A new mode of transport – bus rapid transit with the comfort and speed of light rail  State-of-the art vehicles, with low noise, low vibration, and low emission vehicles (Euro VI or better emissions, with an aspiration to operate with zero emission vehicles when practicable)  Great passenger comfort, with airy interiors, plenty of legroom, and air conditioning  Wi-Fi, audio-visual announcements, and on-board next stop information  Faster journeys including dedicated priority at key junctions – competitive with the car, and quicker journey times compared to conventional bus (journey times will be at least 20% quicker on average than conventional bus)  Extensive smartcard and limited driver interaction to speed up journeys  Dedicated stops and interchanges, with easy boarding and simple onward connections  High quality customer service  A distinctive brand and identity

- 5 -

Sprint performance and service standards

The standards have been structured according to the key components of Sprint. The following key components are considered: 1. Sprint operation – timetables, frequencies and service integration 2. Vehicles 3. Sprint shelters and interchanges 4. Fares and fare collection 5. Highways and priority 6. Intelligent transport systems – including real time information 7. Branding, marketing and customer service 8. Environmental credentials

The proposed standards for each of these components are detailed further in later sections below and a summary chart can be found on page 7.

As part of the communication of the Sprint vision to a wide range of stakeholders and interested parties, these standards will:  Present the features and concept of Sprint  Guide the design of the physical and operational characteristics of Sprint  Provide a benchmark against which scheme alternatives can be assessed The development of these standards has been guided by local transport policy and in reference to worldwide established good practice. Further incremental improvements on Sprint routes are expected following delivery, this will ensure the standards can be built upon as additional best practice is recognised.

There are a number of important themes underlying the development of the standards:  A strong focused brand image that delivers a clear identity for Sprint across the West Midlands  High quality in all aspects of Sprint including fixed infrastructure, vehicles, operations and customer services  High standards of reliability with punctual departures and predictable journey times  Integration at all levels where possible, including policy areas such as social inclusion and economic regeneration, and with other modes of transport including public transport services, private car users, cyclists and pedestrians  Strong support to improving environmental emission standards through the use of greener vehicles

- 6 -

The Sprint Standards – Summary Table For the best Sprint solution, the Target standard must be achieved. The Minimum standard should only be applied to individual factors when the Target level is not practical or economically feasible. It is expected that a Sprint route should achieve the Target standard in a majority of factors to provide the step change required.

Target standard – required for high standard Sprint. Minimum standard – required for a good standard Provides a high level of attractiveness and efficiency. of Sprint. This is an acceptable solution that provides a good level attractiveness.

FACTOR TARGET STANDARD MINIMUM STANDARD Sprint Operation Frequency A “turn-up and go” service with 95% A “turn-up and go” service with 95%

and reliability reliability reliability Stop distance Stops every 500-800m Stops 300-500m or more than 800m apart Vehicles Easily distinguishable with an appearance Easily distinguishable with an appearance Identity closer to tram and multi-door boarding closer to tram and multi-door boarding Free Wi-Fi, on board CCTV, on board real- Free Wi-Fi, on board CCTV, on board real- Features time information, and next stop time information, and next stop announcements announcements Accessibility Access for all Access for all Sprint shelters and interchanges High quality shelters with real time High quality shelters that clearly signify Shelters information, CCTV, wayfinding and walking they are served by Sprint, include passage-ways wayfinding, and promote accessibility Stops in key locations to interface with Interchanges Park and ride provided on Sprint route other forms of transport Cycle Storage provided at shelters where Sprint Wayfinding to cycle facilities provided at

facilities routes interface with cycle routes stop Fares and fare collection Payment systems to encourage cashless Payment systems to encourage cashless Fares payment and fares aligned with local bus payment and fares aligned with local bus services services Ticketing Ticketing facilitated through conductors Off board ticketing and on board validation Highways and priority Carriageway Dedicated bus lanes in priority locations Dedicated bus lanes separation with mixed traffic roads elsewhere Full signal priority with no interfering Active measures for Sprint vehicles, such Signalling vehicles at junctions as priority at traffic signals Clean approach to allow close docking, Clean approach to allow close docking, Stop easy boarding and marked boarding easy boarding and marked boarding approaches positions positions Local bus Lay-bys provided for local bus services Sprint priority over local bus services Interaction Journey Approximately 20% quicker than Comparable to car journey times times conventional bus Priority measures actively enforced with Enforcement Priority measures will be self-enforcing fixed CCTV cameras Intelligent transport systems Vehicles with automatic vehicle location for Real time passenger information will be Systems signal controlled junctions, fleet operation provided at all Sprint shelters, and through and headway management internet and smartphone services Branding, marketing and customer service Distinct Sprint brand to be used on Distinct Sprint brand to be used on Brand vehicles, stops, signage, information and vehicles, stops, signage, information and marketing material marketing material Regular customer satisfaction surveys, Regular customer satisfaction surveys, Customer continuous specialised training continuous specialised training service programmes and an on-board presence programmes and an on-board presence Environmental credentials Emissions Better than Euro VI technology Better than Euro VI technology

- 7 -

1. Sprint operation

Sprint will provide fast and reliable services along its corridors, linking key centres and residential areas. It is our aspiration that Sprint will integrate with other planning processes including land use development, environmental enhancement, education and health care. Longer-term we envisage that the network of Sprint services will provide through services across major centres, with high quality interchange facilities between services in the city and town centres.

Key features of the timetable

 Operating with a core timetable 0700-1900 Monday to Friday, and 0900-1800 on Saturdays  Night time and Sunday services to operate after these hours according to demand  Daytime services at least every 10 minutes  Early morning and late evening services at least every 20 minutes, with regular ‘clock face’ spacing  Services will be increased at times of peak demand, such as major sporting or entertainment events

Key features of the route

 Stops approximately every 800m (to ensure fast journeys) except where there is high demand for closer locations  Complementary to feeder services, ensuring a coordinated network, with appropriate interchange stops provided and service schedules aligned  Enforced priority lanes where possible to ensure Sprint lanes are kept free of obstructions

Punctuality and reliability targets

 99% of journeys to operate  95% of services to depart no more than 5 minutes late  No services will operate early

- 8 -

2. Sprint vehicles

The Sprint vehicles are a key part of the system image as they will portray a modern network that is a new mode of transport for the region. The vehicles will:  Have a strong identity and high quality appearance  Be easily distinguishable from non-Sprint buses  Possess an appearance closer to tram than regular bus, internally and externally  Provide a high quality environment for passengers, with comfort and space  Provide access for all  Feature comprehensive on-board information As well as these quality attributes, Sprint vehicles must combine high capacity with fast boarding and alighting. The recommended requirements for the vehicles are as follows.

A great customer ambience

 High quality vehicles with high capacity that allow for growth in patronage, such as articulated or bi-articulated vehicles  A mix of seating and standing areas, with standing made easier and more comfortable  Easy access boarding and on board areas for wheelchairs and pushchairs  Multiple double-width doors with boarding and alighting at all doors  Spacious interior design to provide adequate circulating room to enable rapid access and egress, to minimise stop dwell times  Low density seating and good legroom  Interiors to use high quality materials

The latest technologies

 Air-conditioning and double-glazed windows  Low noise, low vibration and low emission engine  Multiple information screens visible throughout the vehicle, with real time information, visual and audible next stop and destination announcements  Wi-Fi  On board CCTV, and with road facing CCTV for bus lane enforcement (when powers for the use of such equipment is devolved to local authorities)

World class maintenance and upkeep

 Fleet to be less than 8 years old or subject to complete refurbishment at intervals of no more than 8 years, unless otherwise agreed between Centro and service operators  Vehicles to be subject to high standards of maintenance and cleanliness  Interior panelling to be maintained to be free of rattles, with all quality standards will be monitored through a KPI regime  Internal graffiti, window scratching and damage to seat backs and side panels will be repaired overnight  No vehicle will enter service each day with internal damage, subject to agreement with Centro

- 9 -

3. Sprint shelters and interchanges

Sprint shelters will also be a key part of the system image. Just like the vehicles, the stop environment will have a distinct and high quality appearance that separates them from standard bus shelters. The shelters will provide a high quality waiting environment, providing shelter, safety, security and information. Dependent on the ticketing system specified, ticket purchase facilities may be provided, or facilities to collect/validate pre-purchased tickets by smartcards. The shelters will enable quick and easy access to the vehicles. The recommended requirements for the Sprint stop environment are:  High quality branded stops with illuminated shelters, seating, real time passenger information, CCTV facilities, help points and information including an orientation map  Off-board ticketing machines, and/or smartcard top-up/validation points where possible  Revenue generation opportunities of shelters will maximised (for example advertising or vending)  Safe, secure and signed pedestrian routes will be provided, linked to signals and vehicle priorities as appropriate  Secure cycle parking facilities may be provided at stops, where demand exists and suitable land is available  Marked door locations for speedy boarding and adequate circulating room to minimise vehicle waiting times  Easy access for wheelchairs and pushchairs, and a stop environment that promotes accessibility

Interchanges are important to ensure that the Sprint network is fully integrated with other modes of transport.

The recommended requirements for Sprint interchanges are:  Interchange stops in city centres and key locations, to allow easy access to other public transport services  Park & Ride facilities, if provided, will be sited at key locations with high quality and secure parking facilities for vehicles and cycles. Preferably Park & Ride sites will achieve Secure Car Park status  Where Sprint stops interface with cycle routes and networks, opportunities to improve cycle infrastructure and storage to facilitate interchange will be included in the stop design, subject to availability of space and appropriate funding to support additional cycle infrastructure measures

- 10 -

4. Fares and ticketing

Sprint fares will be fully integrated with existing public transport services to maximise accessibility and the opportunities for interchange. Tickets for Sprint services will be purchased prior to boarding in order to minimise waiting times at the Sprint stops, or may be purchased from the on-board conductor, dependent on the final specification for the ticketing system. The key features of the Sprint fares and fare collection systems will be:  Fares aligned with those charged on local bus services  The driver will have no direct contact with passengers and will not check tickets  Ticketing will be facilitated through conductors and/or off board ticketing machines, enabling quicker interchange and stop times  Ticketing integrated with other public transport services to enable seamless interchange  Concessionary fares in operation in line with current Centro policy with reimbursement consistent with that offered to bus operators  Off-board ticketing facilities where possible to minimise stop waiting times supported by on- vehicle ticket inspection (and potentially sale)  Payment systems and tariffs to encourage cashless payment  Existing Swift smartcard system to be extended to Sprint and payment by debit card, contactless (EMV), mobile phone app and other emerging technologies to be pursued

- 11 -

5. Highways and priority

In order to achieve journey times that are at least 20% quicker on average than conventional bus, Sprint corridors will include mixed traffic roads, dedicated bus lanes and priority measures at junctions. The philosophy for establishing a running way for Sprint routes acknowledges that the priority measures may reduce road capacity for general traffic and may impose increased delays on non- public transport modes. Increased delays for general traffic are, in effect, accepted as part of the trade-off of providing an enhanced public transport system that will be designed to achieve sustainable modal shift targets. Effective priority for Sprint services will be essential to ensure rapid and reliable journeys. The reallocation of road space is likely to be undertaken in conjunction with the implementation of Park & Ride facilities, in order to encourage modal shift to public transport. The possibility of its introduction will be reviewed by Centro and the partner highway authority, considering such implications as land acquisition or highway operational impacts.

Highways arrangements

Priority measures will generally be based on a whole-corridor approach, and the key features will be:  Any on-street bus lanes will be for use by Sprint and other designated vehicles only  Hours of bus lane operation will generally be 0700-1900 Monday to Friday, 0800-1800 Saturday, and appropriate Sunday operation  The bus lanes may be arranged as either with-flow lanes (where Sprint vehicles travel in the same direction as the traffic in the adjacent lane) or contra-flow lanes (where Sprint vehicles travel against the main direction of general traffic flow)  The bus lanes will generally be discontinuous across junctions to allow for turning of traffic that is entering onto and coming from side roads  Bus lanes should be maintained to a good standard which will allow for the optimal journey experience  General traffic will normally be permitted to enter a bus lane for the purpose of legally accessing a driveway or access way  Priority measures will be designed to be self-enforcing as far as possible, but provision will be made for the active enforcement of the bus lane with fixed CCTV cameras where possible  Where the Sprint route runs on roads with mixed traffic it will be essential to provide active measures for Sprint vehicles, such as priority at traffic signals, to maintain reliable journey times through these sections  Existing parking provision will be maintained or relocated to alternative locations where practicable, whilst ensuring that access to parking will not obstruct operation of Sprint services

Sprint stops

 Approaches to Sprint stops will operate 24 hours per day, in order to maximise the perception of the Sprint route as a fixed link, to avoid road user confusion and to maximise compliance.  Sprint bus lanes and stops will be interdependent, with the placement of the bus lane dictating the options for stop arrangements and vice versa

- 12 -

 Stop designs will be assessed on a location-by-location basis, but where possible within the standard templates, addressing pedestrian accessibility, impact on signal junctions, journey time and passenger demand  Approaches to stops will be designed to ensure that Sprint vehicles are afforded a clean approach to close docking and ease of boarding  Lay-bys will not be used for Sprint vehicles at stops, but where possible lay-bys should be provided for local bus services to allow Sprint vehicles to overtake stationary local buses, as long as the local services are not delayed in resuming their journey due to passing traffic

Junction arrangements

 At signal-controlled junctions, the bus lane to run to the signal stop line where practicable  To maximise priority, it may be necessary at some junctions to ban either right or left turns to side streets; at such locations traffic management arrangements to be put in place to provide alternative routes for turning traffic  Pedestrian phases at signals to be provided where junctions are close to Sprint stops

Construction and maintenance

 Working with the highway authorities and their maintenance contractors, the carriageway will be maintained to a suitable condition and any defects notified will be assessed and repaired within the appropriate timescale depending on the assessed risk of the defect

- 13 -

6. Intelligent transport systems

Effective use of intelligent transport systems will help encourage maximum take-up of Sprint. The key to this will be the supply of effective pre-trip and real time information. Intelligent transport systems will also assist the effective operation of priority measures at signalised junctions and the operational management of the Sprint fleet. Recommended features for the Sprint intelligent transport systems include:  All vehicles will be fitted with an automatic vehicle location system used for real time passenger information, operation of priority at signal controlled junctions and fleet operation and management and headway management  Real time passenger information will be provided at all Sprint shelters, and through internet and smartphone services  ‘Next stop’ on board announcement will be provided  At-stop display signs will have voice activation announcements, via personal key tags issued to visually impaired users  Priority will be provided at signalised junctions though linkage of the automatic vehicle location system and central or localised signal control systems as appropriate  All intelligent transport systems will conform with current and planned standards and specifications  Two-way driver communication to allow emergency calls  Training on all Sprint intelligent transport systems to be provided for operators, drivers and traffic control room staff as appropriate  Documented maintenance regime to be maintained by monitored KPIs

- 14 -

7. Branding, marketing and customer service

A key part of the successful delivery of high quality transit systems is the development of a strong brand image. This image must provide a clear message as to the quality service that is being provided together with differentiation from existing services. The brand image should be established during system development and used consistently for all aspects of the system, including promotional material, information, Sprint stops, vehicles, running ways and signage. Recommended features of the Sprint branding include:  Distinct Sprint brand to be used on vehicles, stops, signage, information and marketing material  Vehicles to share similar liveries that identify them as part of the Sprint brand Recommended features of the Sprint marketing include:  Pre and post-opening marketing campaigns to launch and maintain product image  Distribution of appropriately-branded service and timetable information throughout each corridor  A regular update newsletter during construction and the initial period of operation  Bespoke marketing campaigns directed at current car users Recommended features of the Sprint customer services include:  High quality website with real time information and opportunities for customer feedback  Dedicated training and continuous improvement programme for drivers and customer-facing staff  Regular customer surveys and monitoring of performance and satisfaction levels to drive a continuous improvement process  Potential for participation in loyalty schemes for smartcard users  An on-board customer-facing presence to provide passenger information, a deterrent for anti- social behaviour and support accessibility

- 15 -

8. Environmental Credentials

A key objective of the Sprint vision is the reduction of CO2 emissions and improvement of air quality. Sprint provides a viable alternative to the use of the car and will drive modal shift to a more sustainable method of travel. The vehicles will also incorporate greener technologies.

The key features of Sprint’s environmental credentials are:  Vehicles not only meet the latest emissions standards, but subsequent vehicles are future proofed for more demanding air quality management measures  Sprint vehicle engine technology will be specified initially for Euro VI technology and progress towards zero emission engine technology as and when this technology is suitable for the scheme  Sprint vehicle depot will also have the appropriate infrastructure to support zero emission technology as and when this technology is suitable for the scheme  Further provision of Sprint fuelling stations and any health and safety implications arising will be addressed as and when this technology is required for the scheme  Sprint will maintain to support any Park and Ride agenda where present, to ensure that emissions from regular vehicular traffic is contained to a minimum, and reduced within our urban centres

- 16 - Equality Analysis

Birmingham City Council Analysis Report

EA Name SPRINT Bus Rapid Transit Network Development And Implementation Strategy Directorate Economy Service Area Economy - Transportation Services Growth & Transportation Type New/Proposed Policy EA Summary The EA reviews the request to approve the network development and implementation strategy for Sprint bus rapid transit within Birmingham as part of the strategy for the wider West Midlands Sprint network; including that delivery would be undertaken jointly between the City Council and Transport for West Midlands, subject to confirmation of funding, further approvals as required, and separate agreements with the other West Midlands Local Authorities and Sprint operator/s. Reference Number EA002569 Task Group Manager [email protected] Task Group Members [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Date Approved 2018-01-08 00:00:00 +0000 Senior Officer [email protected] Quality Control Officer [email protected]

Introduction

The report records the information that has been submitted for this equality analysis in the following format.

Initial Assessment

Relevant Protected Characteristics

For each of the identified relevant protected characteristics there are three sections which will have been completed. Impact Consultation Additional Work

If the assessment has raised any issues to be addressed there will also be an action planning section.

The following pages record the answers to the assessment questions with optional comments included by the assessor to clarify or explain any of the answers given or relevant issues.

1 of 6 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:40:56 +0000 1 Activity Type

The activity has been identified as a New/Proposed Policy.

2 Initial Assessment

2.1 Purpose and Link to Strategic Themes

What is the purpose of this Policy and expected outcomes? The purpose of this policy is to approve the city council's recommendations to .note the benefits of Sprint to the travelling public, residents and visitors of Birmingham; .approve the definition for Sprint which will inform scheme design and highway priority; .agree the Sprint network development priorities; .approve the key design principles; .note the total estimated cost of the Sprint programme, and that funding arrangements would be subject to further approvals through WMCA and City Council governance processes; .note that delivery would be undertaken jointly between the City Council and Transport for West Midlands, subject to confirmation of funding, further approvals as required; and separate agreements with the other West Midlands Local Authorities and Sprint operator/s; .approve the City Council progressing to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding between the City Council and Transport for West Midlands (TfWM); .note that initial utility diversion works will commence in the vicinity of the Metro Edgbaston Terminus on Hagley Road between Five Ways and Wyndham Road in the early part of 2018, executed under statutory undertakers' powers, supporting delivery of the early highway interventions; and .delegate to the Assistant Director Transportation and Connectivity, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads and the City Solicitor, to negotiate and finalise the specific content of a Section 278 agreement, to enable Transport for West Midlands to deliver the early highway interventions. The expected outcome is that the recommendations will be approved. The Birmingham Connected White Paper in 2014 stated the intention to complete a £1.2bn integrated public transport network within twenty years which will allow people to travel across the City in high-quality vehicles, feeling safe and secure and enable fast movement through some of the most congested sections of the network. This will include a minimum of three more Metro lines and up to nine cross-city bus rapid transit lines, known as SPRINT.

The West Midlands is building an integrated rail and rapid transit network and much of this new network will be SPRINT, which was considered by Movement for Growth and Birmingham Connected as the right form of rapid transit for the passenger flows on our major, high volume routes. SPRINT will provide a similar level of service, comfort and presence as Metro, providing dependable, shorter journey times for customers.

Headline benefits of Sprint include: .A new mode of transport - bus rapid transit with the comfort and speed of light rail. 75 miles (122km) of Sprint network is predicted to attract over 23 million passengers per year; .Over 80 new vehicles, with low noise, low vibration, and low emissions (vehicle specifications and delivery to be discussed with the future Sprint operator); .High quality customer service with a distinctive brand and identity. .Great passenger comfort, with airy interiors, plenty of legroom, and air conditioning .Wi-Fi, audio visual announcements, and on-board next stop information, with over 300 upgraded stops; .Reliable and dependable journey times that will be at least 20% quicker than conventional buses, saving commuters over 2 million hours in journey time per year.

In order to deliver the SPRINT Standards, in particular the requirements relating to journey times 2 of 6 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:40:56 +0000 and average speed, SPRINT will require significant highway prioritisation which will have significant implications for infrastructure changes and other road users. Highway interventions for Sprint will be designed for the benefit of both Sprint and conventional bus network, to include significant public transport priority, delivered through a combination of segregated, where possible, and/or enforced dedicated road space and traffic signal prioritisation. Specifically, from the initial feasibility studies the following types of measure have been identified: .Carriageway widening to provide additional lanes/lane width - in some locations this would require Compulsory Purchase Orders with land take from private property, with some limited instances of building demolition, and removal of parking laybys; .Restrictions on parking (on-street and off-street) and loading; .Improvements to junctions including at-grade (existing street level) infrastructure changes, priority for Sprint at traffic signals, and improved facilities for cyclists and pedestrians; .New or extended sections of bus lane (usable by Sprint and conventional buses); .New laybys to allow Sprint vehicles to easily overtake conventional buses; .The need to mitigate impacts on trees and listed properties; .Closure of some side-road junctions and/or restriction of turning movements.

The Sprint Network Development Priorities include the following routes which have been identified as priorities for delivery by 2022, to support delivery of the proposed Commonwealth Games and delivery of key elements of the Birmingham Development Plan: .Sutton Coldfield to Birmingham via Langley; .Walsall to Birmingham serving the proposed Commonwealth Games site at Alexander Stadium and Perry Barr; and .Birmingham - Airport (A45), which would also serve Solihull Town Centre via Lode Lane, and proposed Commonwealth Games sites at the UKCentral Hub. This is a Local Growth Fund Department for Transport retained Portfolio scheme.

Other routes are proposed to be delivered in time for the opening of HS2 Phase 1 (London- Birmingham) in 2026, including: .Hagley Road Phase 2, including further journey time improvements on the Birmingham section of the route; .Hagley Road extension from Quinton to Halesowen Town Centre; .Longbridge to Birmingham; and .Hall Green-Solihull-Airport via Damson Parkway.

The proposed key principles of the Memorandum of Understanding are as follows: .Funding for delivery of the Sprint Future Network to be provided through the West Midlands Devolution Deal as agreed with Government, and the WMCA acts as budget holder for this funding; .All parties to work together to implement the Sprint Future Network, in line with the Sprint Definition and Network Development Priorities. For route sections within Birmingham, the Future Network will be developed in line with policies included in Birmingham Connected, and in line with the emerging Birmingham Design Guide and Design and Conservation Review Panel; .The City Council will deliver highway interventions within Birmingham, including public consultation, and subject to agreement with other Highway Authorities, beyond (through Section 8 agreements), or will enter into Section 278 agreements with WMCA to deliver specific highway interventions; .TfWM will act as Scheme Promoter and will deliver the public transport integration elements including fares, ticketing, information, stop infrastructure. TfWM will appoint a Scheme Project Manager to oversee delivery of all elements of Sprint schemes including highway infrastructure; .All parties to participate in risk and reporting activities. All parties to participate in joint governance arrangements through WMCA, to oversee delivery.

The recommendations are consistent with the City Council's Financial Plan 2017+, including the

3 of 6 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:40:56 +0000 City Council's vision for the future, specifically: .A healthy city and a great place for people to grow old in; .A great city for children to grow up in; .A great city to live in with decent homes for all; and .A city where citizens succeed because they have skills required for the jobs on offer.

This decision supports the delivery of policies included in the City's Birmingham Connected Transport White Paper, including the delivery of a rapid transit network, which in turn support delivery of the adopted Birmingham Development Plan and Movement for Growth. This decision supports the delivery of the mandated Clean Air Zone.

Internal consultation: officers from City Finance and Legal & Democratic Services have been involved in the preparation of this report.

External consultation: the former WMITA held a public consultation event regarding the draft version of Movement for Growth at the Council House on 17th September 2015 which was attended by members of the public, stakeholders and City Council officers. TfWM undertook a public consultation on the draft Movement for Growth Delivery Plan during May-June 2017. Comments expressed in response to both these consultations have been used in developing the final versions of the Movement for Growth Strategy and Delivery Plan including to inform the proposed SPRINT network priorities.

No external consultation has been undertaken on these proposals, as external consultation was undertaken by WMITA and TfWM on the Movement for Growth strategy and delivery plan. It is anticipated that consultation with frontaging properties and other local stakeholders will be undertaken as part of the detailed design stage of each SPRINT route. There would be local consultation (which TfWM is proposing that BCC undertake) on the local designs as each route is taken forward, including regarding local accessibility implications.

For each strategy, please decide whether it is going to be significantly aided by the Function.

Children: A Safe And Secure City In Which To Learn And Grow Yes Health: Helping People Become More Physically Active And Well Yes Housing : To Meet The Needs Of All Current And Future Citizens No Jobs And Skills: For An Enterprising, Innovative And Green City Yes

2.2 Individuals affected by the policy

Will the policy have an impact on service users/stakeholders? Yes Will the policy have an impact on employees? Yes Will the policy have an impact on wider community? Yes

2.3 Relevance Test

4 of 6 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:40:56 +0000 Pregnancy And Maternity Not Relevant No Race Not Relevant No Religion or Belief Not Relevant No Sexual Orientation Not Relevant No

2.4 Analysis on Initial Assessment

This EA is only concerned with approving the network development and implementation strategy for Sprint bus rapid transit within Birmingham.

As such, no measures are considered to discriminate against the protected characteristics in terms of age, disability, gender, gender reassignment, marriage / civil partnership, pregnancy or maternity, race, religion / belief or sexual orientation. It has therefore been determined that a Full Assessment is not required.

Further Equalities Assessments will be carried out when the future Project Definition Documents and Full Business Case documents for each Sprint route are compiled; subject to the City Council's gateway processes reporting to Cabinet, during which any specific equalities issues for each route would be identified and addressed as appropriate.

5 of 6 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:40:56 +0000 3 Full Assessment

The assessment questions below are completed for all characteristics identified for full assessment in the initial assessment phase.

3.1 Concluding Statement on Full Assessment

This EA is only concerned with approving the network development and implementation strategy for Sprint bus rapid transit within Birmingham.

4 Review Date

17/12/18

5 Action Plan

There are no relevant issues, so no action plans are currently required.

6 of 6 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:40:56 +0000 BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET Report of: CORPORATE DIRECTOR, ECONOMY Date of Decision: 24th January 2018 SUBJECT: ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGE POINT NETWORK DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME– FULL BUSINESS CASE Key Decision: Yes Relevant Forward Plan Ref: 003724/2017 If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "X" box) O&S Chair approved Relevant Cabinet Councillor Stewart Stacey –Transport and Roads, Members: Councillor Lisa Trickett –Clean Streets, Recycling and the Environment, Councillor Majid Mahmood- Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management. Relevant O&S Chair: Councillor Zafar Iqbal – Economy, Skills and Transport Councillor Mohammed Aikhlaq – Corporate Resources and Governance, Councillor John Cotton - Health and Social Care Wards affected: ALL

1. Purpose of report: 1.1 To seek approval to the Full Business Case (FBC) for the proposal to procure an Electric Vehicle (EV) Network Development Partner to install and operationally manage a Taxi EV charge point network and develop a publicly accessible EV charge point network. This proposal supports the ‘Addressing Air Quality in Birmingham - Draft Air Quality Strategy for Clean Air Zone (CAZ) Issues and Options Consultation’ report which is subject to approval and also timetabled under this Cabinet agenda.

1.2 To seek approval to accept funding from the Office of Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV) of £2.929m, awarded to the City Council for the deployment of a 197 EV taxi charge point network within Birmingham city centre and wider Birmingham local areas.

1.3 To seek approval to the procurement strategy for the appointment of an EV Network Development Partner who will be responsible for production and implementation of a city wide EV charge point development plan to deliver 197 OLEV funded taxi charge points and the commercial opportunity to develop a public EV charge point network.

2. Decision(s) recommended: That Cabinet:

2.1 Approves the Full Business Case (Appendix A) for the proposed development, implementation and management of an EV charge point network, through a procured EV Development Partner.

2.2 Accepts the grant funding of £2.929m from OLEV that enables the installation and operational management of 197 Taxi EV charge points within Birmingham city centre and the wider Birmingham local areas and levers in additional external investment through the opportunity for the commercial development of a publicly accessible EV charge point network.

2.3 Approves the procurement process for an EV Network Development Partner for the provision of an EV charge point network, in accordance with the strategy and approach set out in the FBC (Appendix A).

2.4 Delegates authority to approve the award of the contract for an EV Network Development Partner for the provision of an EV charge point network to the Cabinet Members for Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management, and Transport and Roads jointly with the Corporate Director, Economy.

2.5 Notes that the outcome of each stage of the procurement process; namely the Standard Selection Questionnaire (SQ) and the Invitation to Negotiate (ITN); Invitation to Submit Revised Tenders (ITSRT), and Invitation to Submit Final Tender (ISFT)) will be reported to the Interim Assistant Director Transportation and Connectivity and the Director of Commissioning and Procurement before proceeding to the next stage.

2.6 Authorise the City Solicitor to negotiate, execute, seal and complete all necessary documentation to give effect to the above recommendations.

Lead Contact Officer(s): Sylvia Broadley – Air Quality Manager, Transportation and Connectivity

Telephone No: 07730 282091 E-mail address: [email protected]

3. Consultation Internal 3.1 Consultation has been undertaken with the Air Quality Members Steering Group (AQMSG) which includes the Cabinet Member for Clean Streets, Recycling and the Environment, Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads, Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care, Chair of Licensing and Public Protection Committee and Chair of Planning Committee, who support the proposals contained within this report.

3.2 Officers from City Finance, Procurement, Legal and Governance have been involved in the preparation of this report.

3.3 As part of the City Council’s obligations under the Highway Maintenance and Management Private Finance Initiative (HMMPFI) contract, Highways and the Street Services Division have been consulted on proposed changes to the highway inventory arising from this scheme and support the proposal.

3.4 The Assistant Director Transportation and Connectivity, Director for Public Health, the Head of Licensing and the Operational Manager for Air Quality and Environmental Services have been consulted and support the proposal.

External 3.5 City Council officers undertook consultation with stakeholders within the taxi trade including taxi owners, drivers, associations, operators and the RMT union. All were supportive of the proposed taxi charge point network to assist take up of electric taxis by providing rapid and fast charging at convenient points to support both hackney carriage vehicles (HCV) and private hire vehicles (PHV) daily operational needs within the city centre radius and longer journeys to Birmingham Airport and the NEC.

3.6 Tyseley Energy Park (TEP) and Network Rail (regarding New Street Station/Ellis Street) have been consulted and support the proposed EV charge point development. Both locations are identified as key hubs for electric charging.

4. Compliance Issues: 4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council’s policies, plans and strategies?

4.1.1 This report is consistent with the City Council’s Vision and Forward Plan 2017 and supports the following priorities: • Job & Skills - Build upon our assets, talents and capacity for enterprise and innovation to shape the market and harness opportunity. • Health - Help people become healthier and more independent with measurable improvement in physical activity and mental wellbeing.

4.1.2 This project also links into the Birmingham Development Plan, Birmingham Connected, West Midlands Combined Authority Strategic Economic Plan and Movement for Growth by supporting improvements to air quality and reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and improving the local environment.

Birmingham Business Charter for Social Responsibility (BBC4SR)

4.1.3 Compliance with the BBC4SR is a mandatory requirement that will form part of the conditions of this contract. Tenderers will submit an action plan with their tender that will be evaluated in accordance with the Evaluation and Selection criteria in the FBC, and the action plan of the successful tenderer will be implemented and monitored by the Council through the EV Project Manager, during the contract period.

4.2 Financial Implications

4.2.1 Capital

The capital cost of the taxi EV charge point equipment is £2.929m. This will be funded from capital grant approved by OLEV on 22nd March 2017, subject to acceptance being approved. These resources are allocated specifically to fund the 197 charge points for the taxi EV charging network within Birmingham city centre and wider Birmingham local areas.

The EV Network Development Partner will be required to install the 197 taxi charge points in total, which will incorporate two key taxi charge point hub locations (with a minimum of six rapid charge points each), one at Tyseley Energy Park and the other at Birmingham New Street, along with other key city centre taxi charging locations which will provide a minimum of two charge points per location. This will be supported by an out-of-city taxi EV charging network. The capital costs that are covered through the OLEV grant, are outlined below.

Charge Point No. of Charge Points Cost per Charge Point Total Infrastructure Required Infrastructure Cost Fast charge 97 £7,000 £679,000 points

Rapid charge 100 £22,500 £2,250,000 points TOTAL 197 £2,929,000

The number and type of taxi charge points funded through the OLEV scheme was identified as a result of an Energy Saving Trust feasibility study (see paragraph 5.4). The cost of charge point equipment, outlined above, is as per the public OLEV fund guidance which sets out the price per charge point. The EV Network Development Partner will cover the additional cost of installation and connection to the electric grid.

In addition the grant funding will be used to lever in external investment from the appointed EV Network Development Partner through the commercial opportunity to develop, install and operate a publically accessible EV charge point network across the city alongside the EV taxi charge point network. Levels of investment and deliverables will be explored and negotiated as part of the procurement process for the EV Network Development Partner with the minimum investment value set at £1m.

This anticipated investment is expected to include the innovative use of smart technology such as: grid balancing to draw cheaper off-peak electric from the grid and store for daytime local community EV charging use; development of innovative ways of delivering local community EV charge point facilities, particularly in locations that present challenges such as terraced housing, blocks of flats; new ways to widen take-up of electric vehicles by deploying multiple charge points at key locations to enable potential future EV Car Club provision and commercial vehicle EV charging requirements, (e.g. for electric vans), to support last mile deliveries into the city.

4.2.2 Revenue

As substantial investment will be required from the EV Network Development Partner, it is not thought viable for Birmingham City Council to generate income from this contract in the early years. However, the contract will allow for arrangements to be reviewed through an open book policy with the EV Network Development Partner. The tenders will be evaluated on both the level of investment proposed by the EV Network Development Partner (set at a minimum of £1m) and the percentage and timing of gross income to be shared. The EV Network Development Plan will set out the detail of the publicly accessible EV Network, the associated investment and potential income. No decisions relating to the use of any potential income generated for the Council will be made until the likely values and timing are more certain however, possible uses could include reinvestment into development of the EV Network or other projects supporting improvements to air quality, reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and improving the local environment.

The current limited network of charging points operated by the Council will also transfer to the selected provider for decommissioning/replacement in line with the EV Development Plan. The Council currently covers the costs associated with this ‘legacy’ provision, circa £19,400 per annum. These costs will cease to be incurred by the Council once the assets transfer to the new provider and so represent a saving. Please refer to paragraph 5.8 for further information.

The costs associated with the development, legal, procurement, implementation and management of the programme will be contained within current resources, as outlined in section 3 of the FBC at Appendix A.

There are expected to be no other revenue cost implications for the Council arising from this proposal, although the detail of how the Council will recover its parking income from charging point bays will be determined during contract negotiations. As part of the contractual arrangement the EV Development Partner will incur all revenue costs as they will own, operate and maintain the taxi and publicly accessible charge point network. They will cover their costs through EV charge point customers’ use of the EV network, where the customers will pay for their electric charge use in re-charging their vehicles.

4.3 Legal Implications 4.3.1 Where public land is used to locate the EV charge point network, the relevant primary legislation required to enable this project to install a charge point network in regard to where it is located and to support specification requirements for civil works on the public highway, includes the Highways Act 1980; Road Traffic Act 1974; Traffic Management Act 2004 and the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 including the use of Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs).

4.3.2 Under the general power of competence per Section 1 of the Localism Act 2011, the Council has the power to enter into the arrangements set out in this report and are within the boundaries and limits of the general power of competence Section 2 and 4 of the Localism Act 2011.

4.3.3 The Government is set to mandate Birmingham to introduce a Clean Air Zone (CAZ) under the Environment Act 1995 (Birmingham City Council) Air Quality Direction 2017 by December 2019 to enable compliance with EU Air Quality targets by 2020. The minimum vehicle standards will be Euro 6 level for diesel vehicles and Euro 4 for petrol vehicles. Increased use of electric vehicles will support the City in achieving compliance and this project in turn supports this transition.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty 4.4.1 An Equality Analysis has been carried out (ref EA002592) and is attached to this report (Appendix B). No adverse effects have been identified from the actions recommended in this report.

5. Relevant background/chronology of EV Taxi charge point network development

5.1 In 2015 the Council commissioned Element Energy to produce the Birmingham Blueprint study that assessed the level of environmental and air quality improvements that could be achieved through the reduction of carbon and other harmful emissions from public and private sector transport vehicles. The key recommendation outlined in the study, which was published in February 2015, was the need for a Birmingham low/zero emission re-fuelling infrastructure to include electric charging, hydrogen, compressed natural gas and bio-fuels to enable the take up of low and zero emission vehicles to include fleet re-fuelling requirements particularly of taxis (but also buses), as older fleet vehicles are concentrated within the city centre contributing towards harmful emissions.

5.2 Birmingham’s licensed taxi fleet, comprises of 1,262 Hackney Carriage Vehicles (HCVs) and 4,098 Private Hire Vehicles (PHVs). They undertake approximately 27.87 million journeys per annum. However, none of the current HCV fleet meet the latest Euro 6 emission standards and there are no zero emission electric vehicles across the fleet of HCVs or PHVs. The Council has worked with the Taxi industry to explore a number of options. These include a pilot scheme for LPG retrofit of 65 taxi engines resulting in CAZ compliance under Petrol Euro 4+, and exploring the transition requirements to ultra-low/zero emission electric vehicles through leasing or purchasing, supported by a robust taxi-only EV charge point network.

5.3 As a result of the above and the need to plan for the forthcoming CAZ implementation there is urgent need to ensure that an EV charge point network is ‘fit for purpose’ with the required level of investment made. This needs to be appropriately managed to provide an integrated city level EV Taxi network and public accessible EV charge point network, that should also meet the challenges of different residential locations and provide fast and rapid ‘charge and go’ facilities. As pre-existing arrangements have come to an end, the future of a city level EV charging network has to be considered in the context of the following constraints:

A requirement for taxi and publicly accessible EV network to be cost neutral to the Council; The Council does not have the resources, expertise or capacity to deploy or manage a taxi-only or publicly accessible EV network.

5.4 The Council has worked with Energy Savings Trust (EST) to undertake a feasibility study with the Birmingham taxi industry to assess the potential taxi EV charge point network and location requirements for both HCVs and PHVs. Analysis of Licensing Authority data also showed that a large proportion of drivers live on the east side of the city around Tyseley, Nechells, Bordesley, Small Heath and South Yardley areas. Two main charge point hub locations were identified to enable multiple charge point use. These would be Birmingham New Street Station/Ellis Street Car Park as the main rank, pick up and drop off point in the city centre, and Tyseley Energy Park off the A45, as the main route to Birmingham Airport and the NEC. This site is just 2 miles from the city centre, is on the east side of the city and is in close proximity to where a large proportion of taxi drivers live. Both of these hubs will provide renewable electricity to ensure the maximum environmental impact of ultra-low emission taxis. Tyseley Energy Park benefits from renewable energy produced from the wood bio-mass plant, and Birmingham New St/Ellis Street car park benefits from renewable energy produced from solar as well as renewable energy from their connection to a combined power and heat network. As part of the project bidders will be expected to liaise with these energy suppliers (already engaged through the development of this project) in formulating the EV Network Development Plan.

5.5 The proposed two main charge point hubs will provide a minimum of six charge points each, with the city centre being further supported through seven other charge point sites (Map in Annex A of the FBC). Out-of-city locations, where arterial roads join the A4040 ring road were also recognised as key EV charging opportunities to specifically address PHV drivers’ requirements that operate outside of the city centre. In total, 197 fast/rapid charge point facilities for taxis were recommended in the Energy Savings Trust feasibility study to meet an initial transition of at least 526 electric taxis by 2020.

5.6 In March 2017, the Council successfully bid for £2.929m OLEV Taxi Electric Vehicle (EV) charge point funding from the Department for Transport (DfT) to implement the proposed 197 Taxi EV charge point network across the city. With the Council’s Licensing Committee approval ( 23rd October 2017) for a revised Taxi licensing policy that now prioritises emission standards and the transition of the taxi fleet towards clean air compliant vehicles by 2020, zero emission electric HCVs and PHVs will provide a real impact in contributing towards the Council achieving air quality compliance by 2020.

5.7 Whilst the conditions of the OLEV funding require the grant to be spent on a 197 Taxi EV charge point network for the sole use of taxi drivers, the capital grant resource will be used as a lever to attract further investment, (set at a minimum of £1m), and potential income from the procured EV Network Development Partner to develop a publically accessible EV charge point network. Using the Competitive Process with Negotiation Procedure, details including the level of investment, the range and extent of EV charge point coverage, type of infrastructure and potential income will be negotiated and agreed.

5.8 The proposed development will replace the current ‘legacy’ public EV charge point network located at 18 EV charging points locations operated by the Council. This current network of 36 standard 7 -10 hour charge points (map at Appendix 1 of FBC) installed in 2012 as part of the ‘Plugged in Midlands’ project, consists of a mix of on-street charging facilities (free parking and EV charging for a maximum of 3 hours) and off-street charging facilities in council owned car- parks (free EV charging but parking must be paid as per car park conditions). This charge point network sits outside of the Amey/PFI contract arrangements, where the Council covers the costs associated with this provision at £19,400 per annum. These costs will not be incurred by the Council when the assets have transferred to the new provider.

5.9 The project will be managed by the Air Quality Manager, Transportation and Connectivity with support from the Category Manager, Procurement Services following contract commencement in July 2018. Project management will also align with the Council’s obligations under the Highway Maintenance and Management Private Finance Initiative (HMMPFI) contract. Highways and the Street Services Division have been formally notified of proposed changes to the highway inventory arising from the proposed EV Taxi charge point scheme. Additionally, an EV Network Project Board will be set up with representation from the EV Development Partner, Highways Maintenance and Management Private Finance Initiative (HMMPFI) contract personnel, Street Services Division, the Transportation and Connectivity EV Network Project Manager and Procurement Services, to oversee proposed works as an ‘inclusive package’ outside of the PFI. The EV Development Partner will own, operate, maintain and manage the EV Network, but overall programme co-ordination will be through an EV Network Development Project Board in line with other programmed activities on the highway network and public car parks.

Procurement

5.10 The procurement strategy will set out the selection criteria to include the innovative use of smart technology in developing the taxi and publicly accessible EV charge point network, particularly in locations that present challenges such as terraced housing and blocks of flats, as well as innovative ways to widen take up of electric vehicles by deploying multiple charge points at key locations to enable potential future EV Car Club provision and commercial vehicle EV charging requirements.

5.11 To enable the successful delivery of the project, it is proposed that a procurement exercise will be undertaken, using the Competitive Process with Negotiation Procedure, the details of which are contained within the FBC accompanying this report.

5.12 The proposed duration of the contract will be for a period of 7 years with the option to extend for a further 3 years subject to satisfactory performance, EV take-up by citizens and Council priorities. This period has been chosen in consultation with the market as it represents a reasonable period for a return on investment taking into account the high level of investment required by operators.

5.13 Following approval of this report it is proposed that the required OJEU notice will be issued on the 1st February 2018. Dependent upon the length of negotiations it is anticipated that the contract will commence in July 2018. A more detailed timetable is included in the FBC.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s) 6.1 The options that have been considered in the full business case are as follows:

Do Nothing - This option was discounted as it would not demonstrate value for money and would result in the City Council having to maintain the existing network, at a current annual cost of £19,400, which is limited by the number of available working charge points and the low charging level up to 7 kw which is only suitable for a 7-10 hour charge, significantly reducing the amount of users who can benefit from the charge point network. This conflicts with the priorities set within the Birmingham Connected Transport Strategy to encourage Green Travel Districts and the emissions reduction targets set through the Government’s air quality compliance targets. The £2.929m grant for the taxi-only EV charging network would be returned to OLEV.

Decommission the existing PiM EV charging network (at both on-street and car park locations), and not seek to develop a publicly accessible EV charging network, only taking up the OLEV funded taxi EV charge point network – This option would limit the level of investment made in the city, where EV network demand has already been demonstrated by the level of information requests and complaints by members of the public who want to either purchase an electric vehicle or have experienced problems in using the current ‘legacy’ EV charge points. Additionally, the City Council is under pressure to meet compliance with air quality targets (the Air Quality Direction 2017), where any transition to electric car use would provide an immediate impact of reducing emissions. This requires a city wide publicly accessible EV charging network to be available.

6.2 The following procurement options were considered:

Use of the Amey PFI Contract - This option was considered and discounted as the scope of this project falls outside the existing contractual agreement with Amey under the PFI.

Use a collaborative framework agreement - There is a collaborative framework agreement in place that cover EV charging points awarded by Crown Commercial Services - Traffic Management Technology 2 (TMT2). The framework call-off process restricts bidders to submitting a single tender and does not allow for dialogue meetings or revisions to be made to the Council’s requirements. The complexity of this project, (e.g. the charging technology, the taxi/public infrastructure implementation and operation, hubs, pricing, level of private investment and potential income), is likely to result in a variety of possible solutions. Without the ability to enter into competitive dialogue it was not felt possible to deliver the best outcome for the Council. For this reason the TMT2 framework was discounted.

Tendering a Birmingham Only Contract - This route will provide the most flexibility in specifying the Council’s requirements. Working with suppliers through a competitive dialogue process will enable the Council to consider a variety of options in working towards a tailored solution, whilst also allowing for negotiation on the level of investment and pricing for the network, resulting in best value for the Council. This is the recommended option.

7. Reasons for Decision(s): 7.1 Enabling the development of an EV infrastructure to support the early transition of EV take-up through the proposed Taxi EV charge point network and development of a publicly accessible charge point network.

7.2 Supporting the Council in achieving clean air compliance in the shortest possible time before 2020.

Signatures Date

Councillor Stewart Stacey, Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads . .

Councillor Lisa Trickett, Cabinet Member for Clean Streets, Recycling and the Environment . .

Councillor Majid Mahmood, Cabinet Member for Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management . .

Waheed Nazir, Corporate Director, Economy . .

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report: Energy Saving Trust ULEV Taxi Scheme Feasibility Report- Energy Savings Trust March 2016 Birmingham Blue Print for Low and Zero Emission re-fuelling infrastructure-Element Energy February 2015 Birmingham Development Plan- Birmingham City Council 2017 Birmingham Connected- Birmingham City Council 2014

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any):

Appendix A - Full Business Case-January 2018 Appendix B - Equality Analysis- January 2018

PROTOCOL PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITY DUTY

3 A full assessment should be prepared where necessary and consultation should then take place.

5 Responses to the consultation should be analysed in order to identify:

(a) whether there is adverse impact upon persons within the protected categories

(b) what is the nature of this adverse impact

(d) what mitigating actions can be taken and at what cost

6 The impact assessment carried out at the outset will need to be amended to have due regard to the matters in (4) above.

7 Where there is adverse impact the final Report should contain:

a summary of the adverse impact and any possible mitigating actions (in section 4.4 or an appendix if necessary) the full equality impact assessment (as an appendix) the equality duty (as an appendix).

Equality Act 2010

The Executive must have due regard to the public sector equality duty when considering Council reports for decision.

The public sector equality duty is as follows:

1 The Council must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to:

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by the Equality Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(a) remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

(b) take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

(c) encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

(a) tackle prejudice, and

(b) promote understanding.

Appendix A

Full Business Case (FBC)

1. General Information Directorate Portfolio/ Clean Streets, Transport Economy Committee Recycling and and Roads Environment

Project Title ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) Project Code CHARGE POINT NETWORK TA-01849-01 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME Project The project sets out to deploy an Office for Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV) Description funded 197 EV taxi charge point network within Birmingham city centre and wider Birmingham local areas, providing the opportunity for a public accessible charge point network to be developed at the same time as a commercial opportunity by a procured EV Network Development Partner.

With road traffic, and particularly diesel vehicles, as a primary source of harmful emissions and poor air quality, the project focusses on diesel taxis as a key contributor to NO2 emissions in the city particularly on specific city centre roads where the main taxi ranks are located.

Background In 2015 the Council commissioned Element Energy to produce the Birmingham Blueprint study that assessed the level of environmental and air quality improvements that could be achieved through the reduction of carbon and other harmful emissions from public and private sector transport vehicles. The key recommendation outlined in the study which was published in February 2015, was the need for a Birmingham low/zero emission re-fuelling infrastructure to include electric charging, hydrogen, compressed natural gas and bio-fuels to enable the take up of low and zero emission vehicles, and to address fleet refuelling requirements particularly of taxis (and buses) as older fleets are more concentrated within the city centre contributing towards harmful emissions.

Birmingham’s licensed taxi fleet comprises of 1,262 Hackney Carriage Vehicles (HCVs) and 4,098 Private Hire Vehicles (PHVs). They undertake approximately 27.87 million journeys per annum. However, none of the current HCV fleet meet the latest Euro 6 emission standards and there are no zero emission electric vehicles across the fleet of HCVs or PHVs. The Council has worked with the Taxi industry to explore a number of options. These include a pilot scheme for LPG retrofit of 65 taxi engines resulting in CAZ compliance under Petrol Euro 4+, and exploring the transition requirements to ultra-low/zero emission electric vehicles through leasing or purchasing, supported by a robust taxi-only EV charge point network.

The Council has worked with Energy Savings Trust (EST) to undertake a feasibility study with the Birmingham taxi industry to assess the potential taxi EV charge point network and location requirements for both HCVs and PHVs. The assessment followed an extensive consultation carried out with taxi owners/drivers, taxi operators, representative taxi associations and RMT Union. Surveys were carried out at the taxi ranks with drivers, on-line questionnaire, workshops, taxi forum meetings and newsletters.

Analysis of Licensing Authority data also showed that a large proportion of drivers live on the east side of the city around Tyseley, Nechells, Bordesley, Small Heath and South Yardley wards. Two main charge point hub locations were identified to enable multiple charge point use. These would be at Birmingham New Street Station/Ellis Street Car Park as the main rank, pick up and drop off point in the

city centre, and Tyseley Energy Park off the A45, as the main route to Birmingham Airport and the NEC and just 2 miles from the city centre, and also being on the east side of the city is in close proximity to where a large proportion of drivers live.

Both of these hubs will provide renewable electricity to ensure the maximum environmental impact of ultra-low emission taxis. Tyseley Energy Park benefits from renewable energy produced from the wood bio-mass plant, and Birmingham New St/Ellis St car park benefits from renewable energy produced from solar as well as renewable energy from their connection to a combined power and heat network. As part of the project, bidders will be expected to liaise with these energy suppliers (already engaged through the development of this project) in formulating the EV Network Development Plan.

The proposed two main charge point hubs will provide a minimum of six charge points each, with the city centre being further supported through seven other charge point sites (Map in Annex A of the FBC). Out-of-city locations, where arterial roads join the A4040 ring road were also recognised as key EV charging opportunities to specifically address PHV drivers’ requirements that operate outside of the city centre. In total, 197 fast/rapid charge point facilities for taxis were recommended in the study to meet an initial transition of at least 526 electric taxis by 2020.

In March 2017, the Council successfully bid for £2.929m OLEV Taxi Electric Vehicle (EV) charge point funding from the Department for Transport (DfT) to implement the proposed 197 Taxi EV charge point network across the city. With the Council’s Licensing Committee approval ( 23rd October 2017) for a revised Taxi licensing policy that now prioritises emission standards and the transition of the taxi fleet towards clean air compliant vehicles by 2020, zero emission electric HCVs and PHVs will provide a real impact in contributing towards the Council achieving air quality compliance by 2020.

Whilst the conditions of the OLEV funding require the grant to only be spent on a 197 taxi charge point network for the sole use of taxi drivers, the capital grant resource will be used as a lever to attract further investment (set at a minimum of £1m) and potential income from the procured EV Network Development Partner to facilitate the opportunity of developing a publically accessible EV charge point network. Using the Competitive Process with Negotiation procedure, details of the level of investment in terms of the range and extent of EV charge point coverage will be negotiated and agreed.

The proposed development will replace the current ‘legacy’ public EV charge point network located at 18 EV locations operated by the City Council. This current network of 36 standard 7 -10 hour charge points (map at Appendix 1 of FBC) installed in 2012 as part of the ‘Plugged in Midlands’ project, consists of a mix of on-street charging facilities (free parking and EV charging for a maximum of 3 hours) and off-street charging facilities in Council owned car-parks (free EV charging but parking must be paid as per car park conditions). This charge point network sits outside of the Amey/PFI contract arrangements, where the Council covers the costs associated with this provision at £19,400 per annum. These costs will not be incurred by the Council when the assets have transferred to the new provider.

The current ‘legacy’ publicly accessible charge point network The proposed EV Network development will replace the current ‘legacy’ public EV charge point network located at 18 EV charging points locations operated by the Council. This current network of 36 standard 7 -10 hour charge points (map at Appendix 1 of FBC) was installed in 2012 as part of the ‘Plugged in Midlands’ project, consists of a mix of on-street charging facilities (free parking and EV charging for a maximum of 3 hours) and off-street charging facilities in Council

Page 2 of 23 January 2018

owned car-parks (free EV charging but parking must be paid as per car park conditions). This charge point network sits outside of the Amey/PFI contract arrangements, where the Council covers the costs associated with this provision at £19,400 per annum. These costs will not be incurred by the Council when the assets have transferred to the new provider.

The ‘legacy’ EV Network was installed in 2012. Birmingham where was a pilot city for an OLEV funded roll-out of publicly accessible EV charging points through its “Plugged-in Places” (PiP) programme. The Council was a partner in this development, led by Cenex, a Transport Consultancy, with other regional cities, including Coventry. The programme was branded “Plugged-in Midlands” (PiM) under the Plugged-in Places programme. Over time, a network of EV charging infrastructure at 18 locations around the city was deployed to support the take up of electric vehicles.

The maintenance and back office costs of the charging network were paid up front as part of the OLEV grant agreement. On 25 June 2016 the first of the arrangements established for maintenance and electricity costs of the Council’s network started to come to an end. This was a staggered arrangement as the charges points were deployed at 18 sites over a period of time of the project life. Subsequently maintenance arrangements only started when the individual charge points were deployed and working resulting in contractual arrangements ceasing over a period of time.

Added to this, the remaining contractual arrangements that were held with the maintenance and servicing contractor were novated by Cenex to ChargeMaster in June 2016, leaving complicated arrangements in place when the PiM project also ended in June 2016. A key issue was that APT, the original contract holders for service and maintenance, cannot provide parts to ChargeMaster, as they are no longer under contract. This creates problems at times when the charge point assets, now under the ownership of the City Council following the end of the project, break down or are vandalised. The assets are now of limited zero/value and sit outside the Amey/PFI contract.

The Council is now left with a failing EV charge point infrastructure. Given the age of the charge points, the old technology is no longer reliable and regularly breaks down.

The Council could continue to operate this legacy EV network under the existing conditions in response to public demand for an EV charging facility. The Council are currently liable for the cost of the electricity, limited servicing and maintenance for which there is no current mechanism for the Council to recoup costs. These costs are £5,400 and £14,000 per year respectively. Lessons learned from the PIM programme include;  The need for better alignment with Birmingham Connected transport policy requirements to prioritise modal shift from private cars to walking, cycling, public transport and EV car clubs, the priority of where publicly accessible charge points are located needs to be planned in line with wider community need and equality of access.  The need for rapid and fast charging for a ‘charge and go’ approach of up to 20 minutes within specific city centre locations. This should be supported slower charge points for car parks that allow for up to 3 hour slots.  The need for innovative solutions to suit different ‘charge and go’ strategies and flexibility of location charging e.g. roadside vehicle to grid, vehicle to lamp post or community EV charging hub.

Page 3 of 23 January 2018

Air Quality The context for the EV Network Development Programme is part of the Council’s priority to achieve air quality compliance by 2020 required by the Environment Act 1995 (Birmingham City Council) Air Quality Direction 2017. The EU Air Quality Directive 2008/50/EC sets out the national targets on emission of pollutants, including nitrogen dioxide (NO2). The directive and target emission levels are set out and implemented in England under the Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 and 2016. Under S.82 Environment Act 1985 the Council is required to review air quality locally and to designate Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA), where air quality objectives, as set out under the Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 and 2002, are not being met.

The Government has since issued the UK Plan for Tackling Roadside Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations in July 2017 which identified Birmingham as one of the areas experiencing the greatest problem with NO2 exceedances.

The UK Plan requires the Council to undertake assessments aimed to deliver the best option to achieve statutory NO2 limit values to improve air quality within the shortest possible time. The Council’s plan for tackling NO2 exceedances will need to be finalised by Summer 2018.

The take-up of ultra-low and zero emission vehicles is set to be one of the measures towards achieving air quality compliance, as soon as possible, before 2020. The timeline for the proposed EV charge point network development plan will align with the Council’s submission of its plan for tackling air quality NO2 exceedances. The EV development programme will address this requirement, alongside other developments such as the deployment of hydrogen buses and alternative fuel technology retrofits, such as LPG (liquid petroleum gas).

Establishing an Electric Vehicle Network There is urgent need to ensure that an EV charge point network is ‘fit for purpose’ with the required level of investment made. This needs to be appropriately managed to provide an integrated city level EV Taxi network and public accessible EV charge point network, and should meet the challenges of different residential locations and provide fast and rapid ‘charge and go’ facilities. As pre- existing arrangements have come to an end, the future of a city level EV charging network has to be considered in the context of the following constraints:  A requirement for taxi and publicly accessible EV network to be cost neutral to the council;  The Council does not have the resources, expertise or capacity to deploy or manage a taxi-only or publicly accessible EV network.

With the opportunity of the OLEV funded EV taxi charging network resource, the Council will look to attract further investment from the procured EV Network Development Partner to develop a publicly accessible EV charge point network as a commercial opportunity. For the Council, this will address the current failing and limited EV charge point network at 18 sites (see appendix 1) set up 5 years ago which is no longer ‘fit for purpose’ given its age.

Building on the taxi charge point network development, the publicly accessible network will provide fast/rapid charging within 20 minutes, as opposed to the current standard 7-10 hour charging that the existing PiM network provides.

A fast and rapid public accessible network will open up equality of access to electric vehicle charging, which to date has been limited, benefiting only a few. A strategy of ‘charge and go’ will allow many more users, by virtue of a 20 minute rapid charge.

Page 4 of 23 January 2018

The existing network only allows for two to three users per day per charge point, where the vehicle is parked up in a parking bay from three to seven hours. The new fast and rapid charging network will also provide for innovative charge point solutions to include the use of smart technology in developing the EV charge point access. This will be particularly aimed at locations that present challenges such as terraced housing and blocks of flats, as well as innovative ways to widen take up of electric vehicles by multiple charge points at key locations to enable EV Car Club provision and commercial vehicle EV charging requirements.

The project will be managed by the Air Quality Manager, Transportation and Connectivity with support from the Category Manager, Procurement Services following contract commencement in July 2018. Project management will also align with the Council’s obligations under the Highway Maintenance and Management Private Finance Initiative (HMMPFI) contract. Highways and the Street Services Division have been formally notified of proposed changes to the highway inventory arising from the proposed EV Taxi charge point scheme. Additionally, an EV Network Project Board will be set up with representation from the EV Development Partner, Highways Maintenance and Management Private Finance Initiative (HMMPFI) contract personnel, Street Services Division, the Transportation & Connectivity EV Network Project Manager and Procurement Services, to oversee proposed works as an ‘inclusive package’ outside of the PFI. The EV Development Partner will own, operate, maintain and manage the EV Network, but overall programme co-ordination will be through an EV Network Development Project Board in line with other programmed activities on the highway network and public car parks

Financial implications Capital Costs Proposed Taxi charge point network The capital cost of the taxi EV Charge Point equipment is £2.929m. This will be funded from capital grant approved by OLEV on 22nd March 2017, subject to acceptance being approved. These resources are allocated specifically to fund the 197 charge points for the Taxi EV charging network within Birmingham city centre and wider Birmingham local areas.

The EV Network Development Partner will be required to install the 197 taxi charge points in total, which will incorporate two key taxi charge point hub locations (with a minimum of six rapid charge points each), one at Tyseley Energy Park and the other at Birmingham New St, along with other key city centre taxi charging locations which will provide a minimum of two charge points per location. This will be supported by an out-of-city Taxi EV charging network

The capital costs that are covered through the OLEV grant, are outlined below.

Charge Point No. of Cost per Charge Total Infrastructure Infrastructure Charge Point Cost Points Required

Fast charge 97 £7,000 £679,000 points Rapid charge 100 £22,500 £2,250,000 points TOTAL 197 £2,929,000

Page 5 of 23 January 2018

The number and type of Taxi charge points funded through the OLEV scheme was identified as a result of the Energy Saving Trust feasibility study. The cost of charge point equipment, outlined above, is as per the public OLEV fund guidance which sets out the price per charge point .The EV Network Development Partner will cover the additional cost of installation and connection to the electric grid.

In addition the grant resource will be used to lever in external investment from the appointed EV Network Development Partner through the commercial opportunity to develop, install and operate a publically accessible EV charge point network across the city alongside the EV taxi charge point network. Levels of investment and deliverables will be explored and negotiated as part of the procurement process for the EV Network Development Partner with the minimum value set at £1m.

Current publicly accessible EV charge point network In the case of the Council decommissioning the current public EV network of 36 charge points at 18 locations, it has been estimated that the Council would be required to spend £9,000 in order to remove the current EV charge point network and associated highway markings. This is based on estimates of removal fees of £500 and £250 for on and off-street chargers respectively and £25 per metre of paint removal from the highway.

In the case of continuing to operate the EV network under existing conditions of the current much slower PiM chargers that range from 3kw-7kw (7-10 hour per EV charging session enabling only 2 or 3 users per 24 hours), the Council would need to cover the un-planned capital costs. If any of the current charge point network breaks beyond repair, the Council would need to replace the 3kw/7 kw charge units at a cost of approximately £3,500 per stand-alone charger and £1,500 for wall mounted charge points. In addition there would be installation costs ranging between £1,500 and £6,500.

Revenue Costs As substantial investment will be required from the EV Network Development Partner, it is not thought viable for the Council to generate income from this contract in the early years. However, the contract will allow for arrangements to be reviewed through an open book policy with the EV Network Development Partner. The tenders will be evaluated on both the level of investment proposed by the EV Network Development Partner (set at a minimum of £1m) and the percentage and timing of gross income to be shared. The EV Network Development Plan will set out the detail of the publicly accessible EV Network, the associated investment and potential income. No decisions relating to the use of any potential income generated for the Council will be made until the likely values and timing are more certain however, possible uses could include reinvestment into development of the EV Network or other projects supporting improvements to air quality, reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and improving the local environment.

The current limited network of charging points operated by the Council will also transfer to the selected provider for decommissioning/replacement in line with the

Page 6 of 23 January 2018

EV Development Plan. The Council currently covers the costs associated with this ‘legacy’ provision, circa £19,400 per annum. These costs will cease to be incurred by the Council once the assets transfer to the new provider and so represent a saving. Please refer to paragraph 5.8 for further information.

The costs associated with the development, legal, procurement, implementation and management of the programme will be contained within current resources, as outlined in section 3 of this FBC.

There are no other revenue cost implications for the Council arising from this proposal. As part of the contractual arrangement the EV Development Partner will incur all revenue costs as they will own, operate and maintain the taxi and publicly accessible charge point network. They will cover their costs through EV charge point customers’ use of the EV network, where the customers will pay for their electric charge use in re-charging their vehicles.

Options The options that have been considered in the full business case are as follows:  Do Nothing - Allow Charge Master to continue to manage the existing network without formal agreements. This option was discounted as it would not demonstrate value for money and would result in the Council having to maintain the existing network, at a current annual cost of £19,400, which is limited by the number of available working charge points and the low charging level up to 7 kw which is only suitable for a 7-10 hour charge, significantly reducing the amount of users who can benefit from the charge point network. This conflicts with the priorities set within the Birmingham Connected Transport Strategy to encourage Green Travel Districts and the emissions reduction targets set through the Government’s air quality compliance targets. The £2.929m grant for the taxi-only EV charging network would be returned to OLEV.  Decommission the existing PiM EV charging network (at both on-street and car park locations), and not seek to develop a publicly accessible EV charging network, only taking up the OLEV funded taxi EV charge point network – This option would limit the level of investment made in the city, where EV network demand has already been demonstrated by the level of information requests and complaints by members of the public who want to either purchase an electric vehicle or have experienced problems in using the current ‘legacy’ EV charge points. Additionally, the City Council is under pressure to meet compliance with air quality targets, where any transition to electric car use would provide an immediate impact of reducing emissions. This requires a city wide publicly accessible EV charging network to be available.  Tender a City Council Contract for the EV Charge Point Network development programme. This is the recommended option as it would minimise legal, financial and reputational risks whilst enabling the council to improve current provision according to policy and insight on a cost neutral basis. The new contract will select an EV Network Development Partner to deploy an EV network that brings together the OLEV funding grant requirements aligned with the recommendations of the EST feasibility study for an EV taxi charge point network. They will also collaborate with the Council in planning and deploying a ‘fit for purpose’ and innovative publicly accessible EV charging network. The contract would specify requirements for the operator to coproduce and execute a plan shaped by Council priorities for zero emission taxis, car clubs and flexibility of accessible EV charging across the city for the public and commercial vehicles. Such a network would make use of on-street and off-street parking locations including Council owned car parks, to provide a mix of short stay charging and longer stay parking/ EV charge facilities where appropriate. The OLEV funding of £2.929m would be the incentive for the Development Partner to commercially invest in the charge point networks

Page 7 of 23 January 2018

and would take away some of the financial risk they could be exposed to.

Legal Implications Under the general power of competence per Section 1 of the Localism Act 2011, the Council has the power to enter into the arrangements set out in this report and are within the boundaries and limits of the general power of competence Section 2 and 4 of the Localism Act 2011.

Where public land is used to locate the EV charge point network, the relevant primary legislation required to enable this project to install a charge point network in regard to where it is located and to support specification requirements for civil works on the public highway, includes the use of Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO’s), the Highways Act 1980; Road Traffic Act 1974; Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and Traffic Management Act 2004.

Where private land is identified as the most appropriate location given proximity to electric grid or private wire network, the EV Network Development Partner will liaise directly with the land owner where the primary legislation is not required, but planning permission may be required.

The Government are set to mandate Birmingham to introduce a Clean Air Zone (CAZ) by December 2019 to enable compliance with the Environment Act 1995 (Birmingham City Council) Air Quality Direction 2017 and EU Air Quality targets by 2020. The minimum vehicle standards will be Euro 6 level for diesel vehicles and Euro 4 for petrol vehicles. Increased use of electric vehicles will support the City in achieving compliance and this project in turn supports this transition.

Procurement Strategy The procurement of an EV Network Development Partner for a contract duration for a period of 7 years with the option to extend for a further 3 years subject to satisfactory performance regarding installing the 197 Taxi EV charge point network, an EV Development Plan and installation of a publically accessible EV network to support EV take-up by citizens and Council priorities, including potential future EV Car Club provision and commercial vehicle EV charging requirements. This period has been chosen in consultation with the market as it represents a reasonable period for a return on investment taking into account the high level of investment required by operators.

Procurement Options The following procurement options were considered:  Use of the Amey PFI Contract This option was considered and discounted as the scope of this project falls outside the existing contractual agreement with Amey Under the PFI.  Use a collaborative framework agreement - There is a collaborative framework agreement in place that cover EV charging points awarded by Crown Commercial Services - Traffic Management Technology 2 (TMT2). The framework call-off process restricts bidders to submitting a single tender and does not allow for dialogue meetings or revisions to be made to the Council’s requirements. The complexity of this project, (e.g. the charging technology, the taxi/public infrastructure implementation and operation, hubs, pricing, level of private investment and potential income), is likely to result in a variety of possible solutions. Without the ability to enter into competitive dialogue it was not felt possible to deliver the best outcome for the Council. For this reason the TMT2 framework was discounted.  Tendering a Birmingham Only Contract using the Competitive process with Negotiation-This route will provide the most flexibility in specifying the

Page 8 of 23 January 2018

Council’s requirements. Working with suppliers through a competitive dialogue process will enable the Council to consider a variety of options in working towards a tailored solution, whilst also allowing for negotiation on the level of investment and pricing for the network, resulting in best value for the Council. This is the recommended option.

Scope and specification  EV charging network development strategy for Birmingham city centre and local city area to ensure a network of accessible EV charging locations for taxis, public use and commercial vehicles.  The EV Development Partner investment for the EV charge point network in excess of £1m detailed through the Competitive process with Negotiation. This will cover installation costs and development of a ‘fit-for-purpose’ taxi and publicly accessible EV charge point network.  Transfer and/or removal of existing EV network assets in line with EV network strategy as below;  Responsibility of ownership for operation, development and maintenance of the EV charge point network;  Requirement for the operator to: o Operate, upgrade (when necessary), and develop the EV network at no cost to the council and to consider income and revenue share arrangements between operator and the council at contract negotiation stage and during the life of the contract through an open book policy. Set the price of charging in order to recover the cost of operating, and developing the EV network. o Co-produce with the Council an overall strategy (The EV Development Plan) to deploy the network in the city based on the council’s principles, market information and grid capacity which will include the priority for ‘charge and go’ rapid and fast chargers and use of innovative solutions to ensure equality of accessibility to EV charging. o Collaborate through the EV Network Project Board that has representation from the EV Development Partner, Highways Maintenance and Management Private Finance Initiative (HMMPFI) contract personnel, Street Services Division and the Transportation & Connectivity EV Network Project Manager, to oversee proposed works as an ‘inclusive package’ outside of the PFI. o Provide data analysis of network usage for the duration of the contract o Liaise with Distribution Network Operators o Comply with relevant industry standards to protect the public and provide best service o Contract appropriate civil and electrical works o Arrange for purchase, delivery, installation & commissioning of EV chargers o Make necessary changes to associated infrastructure e.g. road signs from the highway network if appropriate and obtain the relevant approvals from the highway authority. o Indemnify the Council in the event of early termination of contract or a dispute of non-performance (including covering reasonable costs that the council would incur in respect of re-procurement, management and other reasonable fees).

Page 9 of 23 January 2018

Procurement Route As the Competitive process with Negotiation procedure does not impose any time restrictions on the process, it provides increased flexibility to both the Council and tenderers. It also allows for early due diligence for all parties and should reduce bid costs for unsuccessful tenderers as there are gateways at each stage of the process that allows tenderers to either drop out or to be discounted from the process.

The procedure is conducted in successive stages, with gateways. It is proposed that tenderers will make an initial tender submission based on the provided specification. This will be evaluated and followed by dialogue with individual tenderers to discuss the proposed solution. This part of the process allows for the refinement of a solution that is most likely to lead achieve the project outcomes.

Throughout the course of the process the evaluation will provide coverage of fundamental measures such as, but not limited to, cost, quality, risk, operational capacity, KPIs, technical expertise, customer care and affordability. Other dimensions such as value for money, performance, strategic vision, innovation and creativity, integration and implementation will also be incorporated.

To assist tenderers with the construction of their bids, the Council will, prior to the commencement of each stage of the process, supply more detailed information on the evaluation criteria for that particular stage. This will be issued alongside the invitations to participate, providing clarity on the key areas the Council will be assessing and the weighting that will be applied to each.

The process can be divided into stages:

 Stage 1: SQ. This stage allows the Council to assess for example tenderers status and legitimacy, commercial, technical ability and professional competence, financial standing, insurance, environmental, health and safety to determine whether they meet the minimum criteria of the contract. The aim at this stage is to deselect down to 5 tenderers.

Competitive process with Negotiation Structure:  Stage 2: Invitation to Submit Initial Tenders. This is the beginning of ‘ The Dialogue Phase’ which formally acknowledges the need to talk around solutions, develop ideas and explore options and provision of the required service. Tenderers long-listed from the SQ stage are invited to submit an initial tender and participate in dialogue with the This will effectively be the first gateway of the process where some tenderers may choose to drop out of following feedback of their initial tender.  Stage 3: Invitation to Submit Detailed Tenders. The dialogue in the ‘ISDT’ stage focuses on the development of a detailed proposition of how the required services will be organised, delivered, and governed. The dialogue will continue until the Council has clearly identified and specified its detailed requirements, and solution(s) capable of meeting these have been determined acceptable by the Council. These solutions will then form the basis upon which Final Tenders (FT) will be submitted. The Council will formally declare when the dialogue has been concluded and will notify which of the remaining tenderers are invited to submit Final Tenders.  Stage 4: Invitation to Submit Final Tenders. The Council will invite selected tenderers to submit their final offers. The Final Tender must contain all the elements required and necessary for the performance of the proposed contract. A preferred tenderer will be appointed and there will be limited scope to make any amendments to the FT. The core purpose of the Dialogue is that negotiations are brought upstream in the procurement

Page 10 of 23 January 2018

process, helping to shape the tender and limit the need for further amendments at a later stage. The aim at this stage is to conclude with a single tender that can be recommended for award.

Contract Duration The proposed duration of the contract will be for a period of seven years with the possibility to extend for a further three years, subject to satisfactory performance and take up by citizens and Council priorities.

Evaluation and Selection Criteria A full detailed tender and selection process will be carried out according to Birmingham City Council procurement policy and obligations to find an organisation that can operate and develop the existing publicly accessible EV charging network.

The evaluation and selection process will be split into 4 stages as follows: Stage 1 – Selection Stage (SQ) (Pass/Fail)  Company Information  Grounds for Mandatory Exclusion  Grounds for Discretionary Exclusion  Economic and Financial Standing  Technical and Professional Ability  Additional Selection Questions o Environmental Management o Insurances o Compliance to Equalities Duties o Health & Safety o Compliance to the Birmingham Business Charter for Social Responsibility o Technical & Professional Experience (Scored) The top 5 ranked tenderers will proceed to Stage 2.

The following evaluation process will apply to each tendering stage (ISIT, ISDT, ISFT).

Stage 2 – Quality (60% weighting) Sub-Criteria Sub-Weighting Data Security Pass/Fail Network Strategy 25% Network Management 25% Equipment 10% End User Experience & Pricing 10% Marketing & Promotion 10% Management Information 10% Customer Care 10% TOTAL 100%

Tenderers who score less than 60% of the quality threshold i.e. a score of 300 out of a maximum quality score of 500 will be deselected from taking any further part in the process.

Page 11 of 23 January 2018

Stage 3 – Social Value (20% weighting) Sub-Criteria Sub-Weighting Local Employment 20% Buy Birmingham First 10% Partners in Communities 20% Green and Sustainable 40% Ethical Procurement 10% TOTAL 100%

Tenderers who score less than 40% of the social value threshold i.e. a score of 200 out of a maximum social value score of 500 will be deselected from taking any further part in the process. Stage 4 – Pricing (20% weighting) Sub-Criteria Sub-Weighting Investment alignment 70% Proposed profit share 30% TOTAL 100%

Overall Evaluation The evaluation process will result in comparative quality, social value and price scores for each tenderer. The maximum quality score will be awarded to the bid that demonstrates the highest quality. The maximum social value score will be awarded to the bid that demonstrates the highest social value. Examples of social value outcomes could include local employment in the installation of the EV Network, apprenticeships created and local initiatives to enable people living and working in challenging locations to gain easier access to EV charging.

The maximum price score will not be awarded on the basis of highest/lowest investment, but how the investment aligns with the quality of the network strategy, equipment, network management, consumer pricing, as well as level of profit share. Other tenders will be scored in proportion to the maximum scores.

Following the evaluation of the Invitation to Submit Detailed Tenders suppliers will be ranked and the top three suppliers will proceed to the Final Tender stage.

Evaluation Team The evaluation of the tenders will be undertaken by officers from Transportation Policy and Transportation and Connectivity Project Delivery (Transport Policy Manager, Air Quality Manager and Senior Transportation Officer) to be delegated by Assistant Director. The team will be supported by the Assistant Procurement Manager of Corporate Procurement Services.

Planned Procurement Timescales Cabinet approval to strategy 24th January 2018 OJEU notice issued 1ST February2018 Clarification period 1ST-28TH February 2018 SQ return date 5th March 2018 SQ evaluation 5th-6th March 2018 – 2018 Invitation to submit initial tenders (ISIT) sent 7th March 2018 Clarification period 7th March – 3rd April 2018 ISIT return date 6th April 2018 ISIT evaluation period 9th –13th April 2018

Page 12 of 23 January 2018

First round of negotiation 16th– 20th April 2018 Invitation to submit detailed tenders (ISDT) 23rd April –4th May 2018 ISDT evaluation period 8th – 11th May 2018 Notify Bidders of outcome of evaluation of detailed tenders and invite shortlisted Bidders to participate in the final round of negotiations 11th May 2018 Final round of negotiation 14th – 18th May 2018 Invitation to submit final tenders (ISFT) 21ST May-1st June 2018 Final tender evaluation 4th-8th June 2018 Delegated contract award 11th – 22nd June 2018 Contract Start 1st July 2018

Service Delivery Management The contract will be managed operationally by the Assistant Director Transportation and Connectivity (who may delegate this task to a member of their team) and commercially by the Contract Manager, Contract Management Team, Corporate Procurement Services.

*Links to Birmingham City Council’s Priorities Corporate and Service The proposal supports the City Council’s Vision and Forward Plan 2017 and Outcomes supports the following priorities:

 Job & Skills - Build upon our assets, talents and capacity for enterprise and innovation to shape the market and harness opportunity.  Health - Help people become healthier and more independent with measurable improvement in physical activity and mental wellbeing.

Birmingham Development Plan This proposal also links into the Birmingham Development Plan, Birmingham Connected, West Midlands Combined Authority Strategic Economic Plan and Movement for Growth by supporting improvements to air quality and reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and improving the local environment.

Birmingham Connected This project is linked to the following core objectives: Efficient Birmingham  Birmingham Connected will facilitate the city’s growth agenda in the most efficient and sustainable way possible, strengthening its economy and boosting jobs. o Efficient and sustainable movement of people. o Efficient and sustainable movement of goods. Sustainable Birmingham  Birmingham Connected will specifically reduce the impacts of air and noise pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption.

Page 13 of 23 January 2018

o Reduced greenhouse gas emissions from transport. Healthy Birmingham  Birmingham Connected will contribute to a general raising of health standards across the city through the promotion of walking and cycling and the reduction of air pollution. o A reduction in air pollution. West Midlands Combined Authority Strategic Economic Plan This project is linked to the following SMART objectives: Environment  Improved competitiveness through energy and resource efficiency, stimulating new technology and business o Carbon dioxide (CO2) produced from direct emissions by transport, businesses and housing based on 2010 baseline will be 40% less. Greater Birmingham and Solihull Strategic Economic Plan This project is linked to the following pillars and enablers: Place  Optimising physical, cultural and environmental assets Transport for West Midlands, Movement for Growth This project is linked to the following objectives: Environment  To significantly improve the quality of the local environment in the West Midlands Metropolitan Area.  To help tackle climate change by ensuring large decreases in greenhouse gas emissions from the West Midlands Metropolitan Area. Public Health  To assist with the reduction of health inequalities in the West Midlands Metropolitan Area. Birmingham Business Charter for Social Responsibility (BBC4SR) Compliance with the BBC4SR is a mandatory requirement that will form part of the conditions of contract. Tenderers will submit an action plan with their tender that will be evaluated in accordance with the Evaluation and Selection criteria in the procurement strategy, and the action plan of the successful tenderer will be implemented and monitored by the Council through the EV Project Manager, during the contract period. Project Date of Definition Approval N/A N/A Document Approved by Benefits Measure Impact Quantification Diesel taxis are a key  The taxi EV charge point infrastructure will - Impact on contributor to NO2 emissions support the transition of the Hackney Cab Outcomes in the city, on specific city Vehicles (HCV) and Private Hire Vehicles centre roads where the main (PHV) towards zero emission electric taxi ranks are located. vehicles.

 Reduction in emissions supports better health and well-being benefits.

Page 14 of 23 January 2018

Ownership and responsibility  The cost of electricity used by the network for the existing network will that is currently paid by the council will transfer to a new EV charge reduce to nil. point operator who will  replace with new EV charge Individual charge-point down time due to point network. malfunction/ damage will decrease. The proposed programme will  Greater numbers of individual EV owners will provide an enhanced electric access the network. vehicle charging network over  time which will provide faster Number of individual uses of the entire charging times allowing more network per year will increase. users access to the network  The efficiency of the use of the on-street and optimised charging network will increase (measured as average access to address issues of charge drawn per minute of time occupied) range anxiety and improve  opportunities for EV owners. The number of off-street charge points will The network will also be used increase. more efficiently by virtue of  Increase the number of electric vehicles the introduction of short stay registered and used in Birmingham, conditions at on-street contributing towards air quality and carbon chargers. reduction targets (indirect benefit). Project  Completed tender and selection process for an EV Network Development Deliverables Partner to deliver an EV charge point network.  A Birmingham EV Charge Point development strategy and EV Development Plan jointly developed with the EV Network Development Partner, that brings together a taxi, public and commercial vehicle accessible EV charge point network.  Removal of current ‘legacy’ EV charge point assets – as a result of transfer of Council ownership of PiM EV charge point network of 36 charge points to EV Development Partner, and replacement as part of the EV charge point network development programme.  Installation of Birmingham EV charge point network.

Scope The scope of service considered in this business case includes;

 The EV Development Partner’s ownership, operation, maintenance and management of the proposed 197 taxi EV charge point network.  Transfer and removal of the Council’s existing EV network of 36 charge point assets (legacy of PiM trial programme) and replacement with upgraded charge points as part of an EV charging network development strategy for Birmingham city centre and wider local areas to ensure a network of publicly accessible EV charging locations, to be owned, operated, maintained and managed by the EV Development Partner.  An open book policy with the EV Development Partner to determine income and revenue share options. Scope The scope of service does not include: exclusions  The provision of public accessible EV charging at locations where there are access restrictions to specific fleets such as; bus, Hackney Carriage and PHV taxis,, council owned fleets, or car clubs .  EV charging provision in other Council facility car parks other than pay and display car parks.  EV charging provision outside of Birmingham geographical boundaries.

Page 15 of 23 January 2018

Dependencies  Appointment of EV Network Development Partner. on other projects or  Agreement with Highways/Car Parking sections/PFI contract activities Achievability A detailed feasibility study was produced by Energy Savings Trust, following a detailed consultation process with the taxi trade from October 2016 to January 2017. The feasibility recommends key sites within the city centre and the outline strategy for radial routes out of the city centre into local areas. This led to securing the OLEV grant funding to deploy the 197 rapid and fast charge points.

Significant work has been undertaken as part of the collaboration led by the proposed Project Board, Procurement and operators which the Council have been engaged with to date as part of soft market testing and have experience and capability in delivering similar projects.

The Council already has a key relationship with Tyseley Energy Park, as part of the Birmingham Development Plan for the Tyseley Environmental District and the Eastern Corridor regeneration plans. Tyseley Energy Park received full planning permission in November 2016 to deliver a range of low and zero emission fuels including electric charging hub facilities, as well as hydrogen, compressed natural gas (CNG), and Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG). Likewise, the Council already has a strategic relationship with Network Rail and where plans are in progress to support the taxi community and the public to access EV charging facilities.

It is anticipated that the successful tenderer will provide a partnership, consortium or a set of contractual arrangements that will cover all parts of the process associated with service delivery. The charge point supplier may subcontract parts of the service (such as back office service provision).

The successful supplier will need to work with the council to develop a strategy for development of the EV network with subsequent detailed designs to bring forward sites. Tenderers will be assessed within the evaluation criteria on their proposed timescales for producing the strategy and plans as well as their project management capabilities. Project Sylvia Broadley – Air Quality Manager – Transportation & Connectivity, Economy. Manager Tel: 07730 282091 E-mail: [email protected] Simon Garrad – Head of Delivery– Transportation & Connectivity, Economy. Budget Holder Tel: 0121 303 7409 Email: [email protected] Phil Edwards – Assistant Director – Transportation and Connectivity, Economy. Sponsor Tel: 0121 303 6467 E-mail: [email protected] Project Andy Price – Finance Manager Accountant Tel: 0121 303 7107 E-mail: [email protected] A Project Board will be set up to oversee delivery of the project. This will include representatives for the successful consortia. The project board will include: Project Sponsor – Phil Edwards Project Board Project Users – Kevin Hicks Members Project Supplier – To be determined through tender Additional support to be provided by Sylvia Broadley (Air Quality Manager), David Harris (Transport Policy Manager), and Kevin Cummins (Senior Transportation Officer). Additional contract management/legal support may be required on an ad hoc basis. Head of City Date of 15/01/2018 Finance Simon Ansell HoCF (HoCF) Approval:

Page 16 of 23 January 2018

2. Initial Options Appraisal Records Option 1 Do nothing Information Policy, EV uptake and EV usage analysis (ANNEX B and C), soft market Considered testing, previous contract management information.

Pros and Cons of Pros Option  The network could continue to provide a level of limited uptake of EVs in Birmingham. No resource implication for Council staff resources to implement the taxi-only charge point network and align commercial opportunity for a ‘fit for purpose’ publicly accessible charge point network. Cons  Given that the contractual relationship between the city council and the current charge point operator has ended along with PiM grant funding that subsidised the cost of electricity used and maintenance costs, the Council is exposed to ongoing revenue risk.  There is a risk that charge point units break down and need repairing or replacing. Therefore the Council is not only exposed to the cost of maintaining the charge points which is estimated at £5,400 per year for the current network, but also replacement cost at approximately £3,500 per unit.  The Council is exposed to the risk of covering the cost of electricity which is estimated to be £14,000 per year for the current use of charge point units.  The Council is exposed to the risk of service ending at any time at the ‘interim’ operator’s discretion causing significant service disruption.  There are no opportunities under procurement regulations that would allow for the current EV network to develop. There is a risk that the Council’s reputation could be damaged if it is not seen to be proactively developing the publicly accessible EV charging network given the significant policy drivers.  The Council will have to maintain the existing network which is limited by its capacity of the number of available working charge points and the low charging level up to 7 kW which is only suitable for a 7-10 hour charge, which significantly reduces the amount of users who can benefit for the charge point network. This conflicts with the priorities set within the Birmingham Connected Transport Strategy to encourage Green Travel Districts and the emissions reduction targets set through the Government’s air quality compliance targets.  The £2.929m for the taxi-only EV charging network would be returned to OLEV.

People Consulted Assistant Director – Transportation and Connectivity, Economy, Transport Policy Manager, Green Fleet Manager, Senior Transportation Officer, Assistant Procurement Manager, Solicitor (Legal), Finance Manager, EV Network providers through soft market testing meetings.

Recommendation That this option not be considered.

Principal Reason for The financial and reputational risk to the Council. Decision

Page 17 of 23 January 2018

Option 2 Decommission the PiM EV Network (at both on-street and car park locations) and not continue to provide a publicly accessible EV charging service, only taking up development of the OLEV funded taxi EV charge point network.

Information Policy, EV uptake and EV usage analysis (ANNEX B and C), soft market Considered testing, previous contract management information.

Pros and Cons of Pros Option  This would minimise risk of unwanted running costs to the council.  Public highway would be de-cluttered Cons  The uptake of ULEVs in the city could stagnate which would mean that air quality and carbon benefits would be jeopardised.  The Council’s reputation could be damaged as it would be seen to be acting inconsistently with its own policy.  There would be a cost associated with decommissioning the 18 existing sites. This is estimated to be £9,000.  Citizens would experience significant service disruption.  Not taking up the opportunity of combining the Taxi funded scheme with the public accessible charge point network would limit the level of investment made in the city, where EV network demand has already been demonstrated by the level of information requests and complaints by members of the public who want to either purchase an electric vehicle or have experienced problems in using the current ‘legacy’ EV charge points.  The Council is under pressure to meet compliance with air quality targets, where transition to zero emission electric cars would provide an immediate impact of reducing emissions. Not going forward with a city wide publicly accessible EV charging network will significantly undermine the Council’s ability to be able to comply with air quality targets.

Recommendation That this option not be considered. The lack of strategic fit with the council’s transport policies, which could be Principal Reason for damaging to the Council’s reputation and ability to meet air quality Decision compliance.

Page 18 of 23 January 2018

Option 3 Enter into a procurement process to appoint an EV Network Development Partner to provide investment towards the £2.929m OLEV funding for the development and installation, operation, maintenance and management of a new taxi EV charging network, incorporating 2 taxi charging hubs in locations specified ; Taking on ownership and subsequent removal of the council’s existing EV network of 36 charge point assets (legacy of PiM trial programme) providing investment to replace with upgraded ‘fit-for purpose’ public and commercial vehicle accessible charge points as part of an EV charging network development strategy within Birmingham city centre and wider local areas; provide an open book policy with the Council to determine potential income and revenue share options.

Information Policy, EV uptake and EV usage analysis (ANNEX B and C), soft market Considered testing, previous contract management information.

Pros and Cons of Pros: Option  This would minimise risk of unwanted running costs to the Council.  There would be minimal disruption to service.  Tendering will allow the council to ensure that the EV network is operated under specification and contract requirements that make provision for the following: o That the EV network will be operated, upgraded when necessary, and developed at no cost to the Council. o The option of a revenue share approach between the EV Network Development Partner and the Council could be considered when the contract is negotiated and annually reviewed through an open book policy. o That the existing city centre on-street charging be repurposed for short stay charging, maximising access for more users and minimising abuse of the current network. o That the Council will set priorities for how the EV network will be further developed. o That the Council will specify the process for the EV Network Development Partner for approval for EV charge point sites. The process will be supported by the initial co-production with the Council of the Birmingham EV Charge Point development strategy and EV Development Plan which will set out detailed proposals for each charge point site and will have been approved by Project Board of stakeholders which also includes the EV Network Development Partner. o That the Council will be able to transfer ownership of the current charge points over to the successful EV Network Development Partner. This will help ensure that the EV Network Development Partner can upgrade equipment with minimal bureaucracy and risk of unforeseen costs to the council are minimised. o That the EV Network Development Partner would be responsible for covering costs in excess of the OLEV capital grant of £2.92m which is already allocated to the taxi element of the EV charge point network o The EV Network Development Partner would set the price of charging in order to recover commercial investment costs. o That the operator would have to provide the council with usage data on the network.

Page 19 of 23 January 2018

o That the network would be operated by an EV Network Provider with appropriate expertise and experience. o The network would continue to stimulate uptake of EVs in Birmingham and would develop as required to ensure that this continues into the future. Cons  The highlighted model would represent a change for the industry current operators given that EV charge point networks are primarily focussed only on providing charge and park facilities with a particular preference for on- street locations. This introduces a level of commercial risk for the operator.

People Consulted Taxi drivers, operators and representative organisations, OLEV, Energy Savings Trust, DEFRA, EV Infrastructure companies, Tyseley Energy Park, Network Rail, and Transport for West Midlands consulted and support the project. Internal consultees who support the project include Assistant Director Transportation & Connectivity; Transport Policy Manager, Director for Public Health, the Head of Licencing and the Operational Manager for Air Quality and Environmental Services have been consulted and support the proposal; Procurement , Solicitor (Legal), Finance Managers and the Council’s. Air Quality Members Steering Group (AQMSG) which includes the Cabinet Member for Clean Streets, Recycling and the Environment, Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads, Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care, Chair of Licensing and Public Protection Committee and Chair of Planning Committee. As part of the City Council’s obligations under the Highway Maintenance and Management Private Finance Initiative (HMMPFI) contract, Street Services Division have been consulted on proposed changes to the highway inventory arising from this scheme and support the proposal.

Recommendation That this option be taken forward. This option provides the council with a way of minimising risk (financial and Principal Reason for reputational) whilst continuing to encourage and facilitate the uptake of EVs Decision to significantly impact on air quality compliance.

Page 20 of 23 January 2018

2017/2018 2018/19 2019/20 2020/2021 Totals £ £ £ £ £ EV Taxi-only charge point infrastructure Capital Costs and Funding

Expenditure

City Council – 811,000 1,044,250 1,073,750 2,929,000 97 fast charge points x £7k 100 rapid charge points x £22k

Total Capital Spend 811,000 1,044,250 1,073,750 2,929,000

Funding

OLEV Taxi-Only Grant 811,000 1,044,250 1,073,750 2,929,000

Total Capital Income 811,000 1,044,250 1,073,750 2,929,000

Revenue Costs and Funding

Expenditure

Development costs to proceed to Full 10,000 10,000 Business Case Procurement development costs 12,000 4,000 16,000 Staff project management resources 15,000 10,000 10,000 35,000

Total Revenue Spend 22,000 19,000 10,000 10,000 61,000

Funding

Future Council Programme – SN2 – 22,000 19,000 10,000 10,000 61,000 Clean Air Zone

Total Revenue 22,000 19,000 10,000 10,000 61,000 Income

Page 21 of 23 January 2018

Notes:

Capital Implications

As ownership, upgrade and development of the network will be totally transferred to the EV charging network operator, it has been determined that there will be no capital implications for the Council in progressing this project.

It should also be noted that the current charge points that will transfer to the new operator are believed to have negligible residual value as they are now old technology.

4. Milestone Dates

Remaining key milestones for this project have been assessed and are listed in table 1 below:

Table1: Key Milestones

Milestone Target Date Cabinet approval to strategy 24th January 2018 OJEU notice issued 1ST February2018 Clarification period 1ST-28TH February 2018 SQ return date 5th March 2018 SQ evaluation 5th-6th March 2018 – 2018 Invitation to submit initial tenders (ISIT) sent 7th March 2018 Clarification period 7th March – 3rd April 2018 ISIT return date 6th April 2018 ISIT evaluation period 9th –13th April 2018 First round of negotiation 16th– 20th April 2018 Invitation to submit detailed tenders (ISDT) 23rd April –4th May 2018 ISDT evaluation period 8th – 11th May 2018 Notify Bidders of outcome of evaluation of detailed tenders and invite shortlisted Bidders to participate in the final round of negotiations 11th May 2018 Final round of negotiation 14th – 18th May 2018 Invitation to submit final tenders (ISFT) 21ST May-1st June 2018 Delegated contract award 11th – 22nd June 2018 Contract Start 1st July 2018

Page 22 of 23 January 2018

5. Checklist of Attachments included in the FBC: Item Mandatory Number attachment? attached Financial Case and Plan: Detailed Workings in support of budget implications Mandatory Included in Section 3 Statement of required resource (people, equipment, N/A N/A accommodation) – append a spreadsheet or other document Project Development products: Milestone Dates and Timing Plan Mandatory Included in Section 4 Risk Management Assessment Mandatory Included in Appendix 3 Other Attachments (list) Map of current PiM legacy EV charging locations and proposed Non-mandatory Included in city centre taxi locations. Appendix 1 Summary of PIM background details and key policy relating to the Non-mandatory Included in provision of EV charging Appendix 2

Page 23 of 23 January 2018

Appendix 1 – Map of Current PiM Publicly Accessible EV Charging Locations

Page i of xvi January 2017

Proposed city centre taxi charge point locations

The locations displayed on the map as below are shown in the table. The proposed charge point locations A to I are listed in priority order, based on their importance to the continuity of the existing taxi trade as indicated by survey responses from the industry. Ellis St Car Park and Tyseley Energy Park will be taxi charging hubs with approximately 6-10 charge point units each. In addition, a further 150 taxi charge point units will be located in proximity to the outer circle route covering each arterial route in/out of the city centre from local areas.

Location Summary Indicator Charge Speed Ellis Street Car Park A Rapid Tyseley Energy Park B Rapid Albert Street Car Park, off Freeman Street C Rapid Sheepcote Street Car Park, off Broad Street D Rapid Birmingham Coach Station E Rapid University of Birmingham/Queen Elizabeth Hospital F Rapid Star City G Fast Vesey Street Car Park H Fast Moseley Hall Hospital I Fast

The high-priority points (A-D) are intended to cover busy, central locations and, as such, are all recommended to be rapid charge. Points A, C and E are all based near to popular public transport hubs. The results of the survey indicated that Point A at New Street Station was the most desirable location for taxi drivers to work and that the majority of drivers would utilise a charging hub at the Ellis Street Car Park, making this an ideal top-priority location to install rapid charging infrastructure and develop into a taxi charge point hub.

Point B at Tyseley Energy Park as the second charging hub will have rapid charging infrastructure installed. The drivers’ survey indicated that most drivers would use this location to charge their vehicles, and its location is ideal to cover journeys to the east and southeast

Page ii of xvi January 2017

including Birmingham International Airport, the NEC and Coventry. This point is also recommended for rapid charge speed as it will be used in transit as well as a location to take a longer break. Further analysis of Licensing Authority data showed that a large proportion of drivers live on the east side of the city around Tyseley, Nechells, Bordesley, Small Heath and South Yardley wards. The location of the proposed Tyseley Energy Park hub and the ability to rapid charge within 20 minutes for a full charge would benefit these drivers either at the start or at the end of their shifts- especially those that do not have drives, garages or other access to overnight charging.

TOA taxis, a key Birmingham Taxi Operator, who operate around 400 vehicles and have contract work within the airport/NEC area, were very strongly supportive of this location. Many of their drivers are hackney drivers working for them in a private hire capacity. Point C, at the uncovered area of the Albert Street Car Park, would add similar infrastructure for drivers working at Moor Street Station. Point E is based on the Birmingham Coach Station in Digbeth, where many drivers indicated that they frequently work.

Point D is based in Sheepcote Street Car Park, a side-road off of Broad Street. The most common feedback given by drivers in the survey was that the most ideal location for charging infrastructure would be on or near to Broad Street. Installing infrastructure on Broad Street may prove challenging, owing to the developed and busy nature of the street. As an alternative, it is recommended that a charge point site in a car park, a very short distance from Broad Street should be located.

Point F is based to the southwest of Birmingham City Centre in a location intended to service drivers picking-up or dropping-off passengers at both Queen Elizabeth Hospital and The University of Birmingham. These were both raised in the drivers’ survey as popular pick-up and drop-off locations. This site will also be rapid charge, as drivers do not rank or break here, meaning little time will be available to charge their vehicles.

The lower priority points (G-I) are all recommended for fast charge speed, as they are all appropriate locations to take longer breaks. Point G is Star City, a popular attraction for residents and tourists, with a good amount of local amenities to make it an ideal location to take breaks. Point H at the Vesey Street Car Park is another central location near to destinations including Aston University, Birmingham City Council offices and Birmingham Children’s Hospital, with amenities making for an ideal break location.

Finally, point I is proposed in proximity to Moseley Hall Hospital, firstly as it is a potential pick-up and drop-off location, but also to provide charging infrastructure near to the homes of many of the drivers in Birmingham. It was seen in the drivers’ survey that the majority of taxi drivers in Birmingham would like to see charging infrastructure installed near to where they live. It was indicated that many drivers live in and around this area of South Birmingham.

Page iii of xvi January 2017

Appendix 2 – Background on publicly accessible charging including summary of key policy relating to the provision of EV charging

Background History of the Existing Publically Accessible EV Network Building Birmingham’s EV Charging Network In 2012, the Office for Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV) offered 60% match funding to organisations for the installation of EV charging points through its “Plugged-in Places” programme 3 year trial. Birmingham was located in an area that was branded “Plugged-in Midlands” (PiM) under the Plugged-in Places trial. The Council used the available funding to implement a network of Electric Vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure at 18 locations around the city. This included the upgrade of 4 locations that were originally installed as part of the Coventry and Birmingham Low Emission Demonstrators (CABLED) project. Administration of PiM OLEV originally appointed Cenex to administer PiM on their behalf. The Council entered into a contract with Cenex in September 2012. The primary role of the PiM administrator was to provide data on the usage of the PiM charging points to OLEV. This was required in order to honour the Council’s obligation to OLEV to provide this data as part of the OLEV grant conditions; this obligation lasted for 3 years following installation of sites and has now ended. Managing Birmingham’s EV Charging Network Initially, the maintenance and back office costs of the charging network were paid up front for three years (as part of the OLEV grant agreement). Maintenance The warranty and maintenance agreement which was in place with the charge point supplier, APT has now lapsed on all sites, however, under the novation agreement between Cenex and ChargeMaster, maintenance responsibilities have been passed over to ChargeMaster at no cost to the Council. Unfortunately APT have refused to supply parts to any third party which has resulted in ChargeMaster being only able to carry out basic maintenance of the charge point units but unable to replace any faulty or broken parts. The maintenance arrangement that we are currently operating under is not sustainable; any major repairs or replacements may have to be procured by the council on an ad hoc basis, or sites may have to be decommissioned. It is estimated that the council is potentially exposed to a financial risk of £5,400 per year. Chargemaster have offered to replace the units at no cost to the Council, however, legal advice suggests that this would not be appropriate as it would allow Chargemaster to take on Birmingham’s charging network without the Council determining whether they are the appropriate service provider through an appropriate procurement route. Back Office Support Back office support was originally delivered by Pod Point; however, in August 2014 BCC transferred this responsibility to Charge Your Car under recommendation from Cenex as the information supplied by Pod Point on the EV network’s usage to the PiM administrator was deemed insufficient. Back office support includes the following:  Software to provide charge point location and status to BCC and members  Booking and prepayment systems for charging spots  Payment, billing and account status  24/7 contact centre

Page iv of xvi January 2017

Electricity Charges As part of the PiM arrangements E.ON agreed to provide free electricity up to an agreed maximum cap of £3,500 over the first three years. It was the responsibility of the council to pay for usage over and above this level. This meant that end users would not have to pay for electricity during this period (however, end users of the off-street car park charging points were and are still required to pay a parking charge). The electricity charges over and above the maximum cap set by E.ON have been paid for out of budgets determined largely by the location of charge points; charges for electricity for on-street sites have been paid for out of Growth & Transformation budgets whereas charges for EV charging points in Council car parks have been covered from Highways budgets and off-set by the parking charges. Based on recent usage of the EV network, the cost of electricity used across all 18 council owned sites is estimated to be £14,000 per year (see ANNEX B). End of the OLEV Agreement On 25 June 2016 the arrangements established for the back office support (including network usage data and charging management), maintenance and electricity costs of the Council’s network came to an end. This marked an end of the three year PiM trial and the Council took ownership of assets and must decide how it wishes to proceed with the network. The assets are now of limited zero/value and sit outside the Amey/PFI contract. For now, Chargemaster has agreed to continue to administer, provide back office support and maintain (to the extent of their capability without APT cooperation) the EV charging network on a voluntary basis at no cost to the Council. The arrangement that the City Council is currently operating under is not sustainable as it is liable to cover the costs of electricity and maintenance without the necessary budget or user charging model to account for the costs. The total financial risk represented by this is approximately £19,400 per year. Additionally, the current arrangement is voluntary and so imminent disruption to service could result from the current operator withdrawing their service. Council Policy and Other Drivers The provision of an electric vehicle charge point network is consistent with the policies in the Birmingham Development Plan, Birmingham Connected, the Birmingham Blueprint for Low Carbon Fuel Refuelling Infrastructure and the Carbon Roadmap. Additionally it will be a key measure to support the success of the Clean Air Zone to ensure compliance with air quality legislation by 2020. Birmingham Development Plan and Birmingham Connected Future demand for travel into the city centre is forecast to increase, not only in the context of major developments such as the Enterprise Zone and HS2, but the city’s expanding population and significant housing growth. By 2031 work undertaken as part of the Birmingham Connected transport strategy (which considers land use changes proposed in the Birmingham Development Plan) forecasts 150,000 new residents, 80,000 more cars on the roads and 200,000 extra daily trips. Circa 4 million daily trips are expected across the city by 2031, an increase of 30% from today’s levels. The Birmingham Development Plan includes a low emission vehicles policy (TP42) for city connectivity. Accordingly proposals for Low Emission Vehicles will be supported by a range of measures including:  Where appropriate the City Council facilitating the introduction of charging points in public places. Whilst the policy clearly indicates that the city council supports the provision of adequate infrastructure for EV charging where appropriate, terms such as “adequate” and “where appropriate” provide significant scope for interpretation. Birmingham’s Clean Air Zone In December 2015, Birmingham City Council received a mandate from Government to implement a Clean Air Zone so as to achieve compliance with UK and EU air quality legislation in the shortest possible time. In order for the CAZ to be a success, it is accepted that two effects need to be seen:

Page v of xvi January 2017

 A reduction of vehicles on the road (as a result of people making smarter, more sustainable decisions over the way they travel)  An increase in the proportion of cleaner vehicles on the road (including electric vehicles) Carbon Roadmap and Blue Print for Low Carbon Fuel Refuelling Infrastructure In 2013, the Birmingham Green Commission published the Carbon Roadmap which is a strategic plan that highlights the key initiatives that Birmingham will aim to complete to ensure:  the city achieves its vision of becoming a leading green city  a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 60 per cent by 2027 (when compared to 1990 baseline levels) The Carbon Roadmap highlighted that transport emissions account for 23% of Birmingham’s CO2 emissions and therefore is a key area for improvement. By reducing NO2, CO2 is proportionally reduced as a result. Supporting the fleet share of low emission vehicles and encouraging adoption of green fleets is a key component of the approach for improving the carbon footprint of transport in the city which also impacts on other emission reduction of NO2, NOX and particulate matter (PM 2.5 and PM10) A Birmingham Blue Print for Low Carbon Fuel Refuelling Infrastructure was published in 2015. This report outlined a route forward for developing the city’s low carbon fuel refuelling infrastructure. The report outlines the best way forward to grow the city’s EV charging network. For light plug-in vehicles (taxis, cars and vans) the main charging mode is likely to be residential charging where this can be made possible, which requires charging facilities to be installed at the driver’s home or wherever the vehicles are kept. Also, depending on the duty cycle for these vehicles which averages at 80 miles per full charge, use of fast and rapid public chargers are required only for fast and rapid “top-up” charging during the day . In supporting EV vehicle take- up, by helping to reduce “range anxiety” ,which has to date been a concern for the wider take-up of electric vehicles, it also moves away from the need for long stay charging requirements which impacts commercial viability, by enabling multiple users of the charge point network.

Page vi of xvi January 2017

Appendix 3 – RISK REGISTER

Owner / Inherent Risk Residual Risk No Risk Description Measures in place to manage/mitigate Further Action Manager Impact Likelihood Exposure Impact Likelihood Exposure There is a risk that reducing the Before the conditions on charge points max stay at city centre EV charge are changed, the city council will work points or removing underused Air Quality with the EV network operator to charge points will be met by Manager / EV Moderate Likely Significant communicate the changes and the Minor Possible Moderate No further 1 resistance from vocal EV owners Network (3) (4) (12) reasons for the changes to the general (2) (3) (6) action required. who use the current network. This Operator public and targeted at EV charge point could cause reputational damage users. This will reduce the likelihood and to the council. impact of the risk. Before charge points are added, the city There is a risk that adding charge council will work with the EV network Air Quality points in new locations (that may operator to engage with the public on the Insignifi Manager / EV Minor Possible Moderate Unlikely Low No further 2 replace existing parking bays) will proposed changes and communicate cant Network (2) (3) (6) (2) (2) action required. be met by resistance from local reasons for the changes to the general (1) Operator residence. public. This will reduce the likelihood and impact of the risk. There is a risk that there will be a Dialogue with key officers to ensure delay in commencement of the procurement plan timescales are met. project due to the time required for Advance briefing of Cabinet members the procurement process. During Modera Green Fleet Major Likely High and chief officers achieve political buy-in Possible Significant Risk will be 3 this time, the council will continue te Manager (4) (4) (16) and create urgency. (3) (9) accepted. to be exposed to the cost of (3) BCC to negotiate new tariff with energy electricity from the network and a supplier to reduce the impact of bills on high risk voluntary arrangement budgets. with Chargemaster. Ongoing market engagement with taxi EV manufacturers. Focus on Private Hire taxis will be prioritised as the There is a risk that the availability current fleet is around 4,500 vehicles of electric taxis (specifically EV and the vehicle types are smaller saloon Hackney Cabs) on the market and vehicles where the cost of an EV is the cost particularly of the electric Air Quality Major Likely High much lower/more affordable. Ongoing Major Possible Moderate . Risk will be 4 hackney carriage vehicles will Manager (4) (4) (16) work/campaigning with communications (4) (2) (8) accepted delay take-up and will impact, on team on improving air quality will support generating sufficient interest from the uptake of EVs by the public which charge point operators to provide will enable sufficient scope and further investment. confidence to satisfy charge point operators that they will be able to make a commercial success of the venture.

Page vii of xvi January 2017

Owner / Inherent Risk Measures in place to Residual Risk Further No Risk Description Manager Impact Likelihood Exposure manage/mitigate Impact Likelihood Exposure Action The chosen charge point operator may experience financial problems leading to Financial checks will be carried out them withdrawing from the during the tender evaluation process. No further Air Quality Catastrophic Unlikely Significant Moderate Rare Low 5 contract leaving the council with Additionally, the operator will be action Manager (5) (2) (10) (3) (1) (3) costs associated with re- required to indemnify the council against required. procurement, temporary an early termination of the contract. network management, network decommissioning. Effective marketing to promote awareness of the charge points. Making use of all opportunities to promote the scheme. The successful bidder will be required as part of the social added value element of the procurement There may be a lack of demand process to work with local organisations EV Network No further at chosen/changed sites Major Likely High / schools etc. to develop effective and Moderate Unlikely Moderate 6 Operator / Air action meaning that the network would (4) (4) (16) localised marketing campaigns - (3) (2) (6) Quality Manager required. be less commercially viable. specifically targeting the target groups and raise awareness around ultra low emission vehicles. In addition, the charge point operator will be required to account for the selection of new sites for EV charge points within business plans to justify their selection. The Project board will review the EV charge point network development strategy and plans will have representatives from both Air Quality Transportation & Connectivity and Proposals may conflict with Manager/Assist No further Major Likely High Highways who will be able to spot Minor Unlikely Moderate 7 wider works such as the change ant Director action (4) (4) (16) potential conflicts. In addition the (2) (2) (4) in parking policy. Highways required. contract must detail a resolution process Infrastructure for cases when a council decision requires the removal of a charge point, this may include provisions for relocation of sites. The procurement process is designed to Expenditure is not incurred to EV Network identify a network operator with the No further Major Unlikely High Moderate Rare Low 8 deliver the Air Quality Operator / Air most appropriate experience of action (4) (2) (16) (3) (1) (3) Improvements by 2020 Quality Manager delivering such networks and the required. timescales are clearly identified.

Page viii of xvi January 2017 Equality Analysis

Birmingham City Council Analysis Report

EA Name Electric Vehicle (EV) Charge Point Network Development Directorate Economy Service Area Economy - Transport And Connectivity Type New/Proposed Function EA Summary This Equalities Assessment reviews the request for Cabinet to accept the recommendation to receive grant funding from the Office of Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV); and procure an EV network development partner to install 197 Electric Vehicle (EV) rapid + fast charge points for taxis, with two taxi charge point hubs at the Birmingham New Street / Ellis St car park and Tyseley Energy Park (TEP). The EA also reviews the recommendation for the Cabinet to accept OLEV funding to act as a lever to attract commercial investment to develop a publicly accessible EV charge point network to replace the current 'legacy' EV network, which is no longer fit for purpose. This is part of the Air Quality Programme to reduce emissions to enable the city to reach air quality compliance by 2020. Reference Number EA002592 Task Group Manager [email protected] Task Group Member Date Approved 2018-01-08 00:00:00 +0000 Senior Officer [email protected] Quality Control Officer [email protected]

Introduction

The report records the information that has been submitted for this equality analysis in the following format.

Initial Assessment

Relevant Protected Characteristics

For each of the identified relevant protected characteristics there are three sections which will have been completed. Impact Consultation Additional Work

If the assessment has raised any issues to be addressed there will also be an action planning section.

The following pages record the answers to the assessment questions with optional comments included by the assessor to clarify or explain any of the answers given or relevant issues.

1 of 4 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:47:13 +0000 1 Activity Type

The activity has been identified as a New/Proposed Function.

2 Initial Assessment

2.1 Purpose and Link to Strategic Themes

What is the purpose of this Function and expected outcomes? The purpose of this policy is to approve the city council's recommendation to receive the grant funding from the Office of Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV), and procure an EV network development partner to install 197 Electric Vehicle (EV) rapid + fast charge points for taxis, with two taxi charge point hubs at the Birmingham New Street / Ellis St car park and Tyseley Energy Park. The total grant funding from OLEV is £2,929,000 and is to be spent by 2019/20. This policy also reviews the recommendation for the Cabinet to accept OLEV funding to act as a lever to attract commercial investment to develop a publicly accessible EV charge point network to replace the current 'legacy' EV network, which is no longer fit for purpose.

The expected outcome is that the project will proceed with the installation of the EV charge points. Birmingham City Council (BCC) is focussed on improving air quality and to be compliant as soon as possible before 2020 and look to be an Ultra-low-emission-vehicle (ULEV) / zero emission city (ZEC) by 2030. To achieve this ambition, the Hackney Cab and Private Hire Vehicle (PHV) fleet will need to be a major contributor to this achievement.

BCC is planning two key taxi charge point hubs with a minimum of six charge points each - the Birmingham New Street / Ellis St car park is a key taxi rank location in the city centre; and Tyseley Energy Park off the A45 (two miles from the city centre) as the main route to Birmingham Airport and the NEC. Both will provide green renewable energy to ensure the maximum environmental impact of ULEV/ZEC taxis. The city centre will be further supported through seven other sites providing fast/rapid charge point facilities.

Every arterial road to the outer city area, where it links with the A4040 ring road, will benefit from a comprehensive infrastructure of charge point sites to support PHV operators and drivers. The total number of city centre and outer city charge points will be 197 - a mixture of fast and rapid chargers.

Building on the Energy Saving Trust feasibility report, BCC is set to implement a 'High' scenario take-up of ULEV/ZEC taxis, which will integrate with the Clean Air Zone work programme, to maximise impact and support for the Birmingham licensed fleet.

The Electric Vehicle (EV) Charge Point Network Development Programme supports the Birmingham Development Plan (BDP) and Big City Plan (BCP) policies; Policy TP1 'Reducing the City's Carbon Footprint' & TP5 'Low Carbon Economy' - The City Council is committed to a 60% reduction in total carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions produced in the City by 2027 from 1990 levels; Policy TP37 'Health', in which the City Council is committed to reducing health inequalities, increasing life expectancy and improving quality of life by seeking to improve air quality and reduce noise within the City; and Policy TP43 - 'Proposals for Low Emission Vehicles' will be supported by working with partners to promote sustainable modes and low emission travel choices.

Birmingham Connected, the Council's Transportation Strategy, has a vision for a Green and Smart City, and to see the widespread use of low and zero emissions vehicles from the public, public transport operators and the servicing/logistics industry.

Internal consultation 2 of 4 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:47:13 +0000 The four council member group (Councillor Lisa Trickett - Cabinet Member for Clean Streets and the Environment, Councillor Stewart Stacey - Cabinet Member for Transport and Roads, Councillor Paulette Hamilton - Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care and Councillor Barbara Dring - Chair of Licensing and Public Protection Committee) have been consulted on the EV Taxi Charging project as part of the wider air quality programme workstream on low/zero emission infrastructure development and the transition to low/zero emission vehicles.

External consultation has been carried out with the Private Hire Vehicle trade, EV network partners and Western Power Distribution in determining the number and location of the charge points.

For each strategy, please decide whether it is going to be significantly aided by the Function.

2.2 Individuals affected by the policy

Will the policy have an impact on service users/stakeholders? Yes Will the policy have an impact on employees? No Will the policy have an impact on wider community? Yes

2.3 Relevance Test

Protected Characteristics Relevant Full Assessment Required Age Not Relevant No Disability Not Relevant No Gender Not Relevant No Gender Reassignment Not Relevant No Marriage Civil Partnership Not Relevant No Pregnancy And Maternity Not Relevant No Race Not Relevant No Religion or Belief Not Relevant No Sexual Orientation Not Relevant No

2.4 Analysis on Initial Assessment

This EA is concerned solely with the receipt of grant funding to enable the progression of the Electric Vehicle Taxi Charging project; and as such, no measures are considered to discriminate against the protected characteristics in terms of age, race, gender reassignment, sexual orientation, sex, pregnancy or maternity, disability, marriage / civil partnership or religion / belief. It has therefore been determined that a Full Assessment is not required.

A further Equality Analysis may be carried out when the project is implemented, as appropriate.

3 of 4 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:47:13 +0000 3 Full Assessment

The assessment questions below are completed for all characteristics identified for full assessment in the initial assessment phase.

3.1 Concluding Statement on Full Assessment

A further Equality Analysis may be carried out when the project is implemented, as appropriate.

4 Review Date

14/01/19

5 Action Plan

There are no relevant issues, so no action plans are currently required.

4 of 4 Report Produced: 2018-01-08 08:47:13 +0000

BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL

PUBLIC REPORT

Report to: CABINET Report of: DIRECTOR OF COMMISSIONING & PROCUREMENT Date of Decision: 24TH JANUARY 2018 SUBJECT: PLANNED PROCUREMENT ACTIVITIES (MARCH 2018 – MAY 2018 AND QUARTERLY CONTRACT AWARD SCHEDULE (OCTOBER 2017 – DECEMBER 2017) Key Decision: No Relevant Forward Plan Ref: n/a If not in the Forward Plan: Chief Executive approved (please "tick" box) O&S Chair approved Relevant Cabinet Member(s) or Cllr Majid Mahmood – Commercialism, Commissioning Relevant Executive Member: and Contract Management Relevant O&S Chair: Cllr Mohammed Aikhlaq, Corporate Resources and Governance Wards affected: All

1. Purpose of report:

1.1 This report provides details of the planned procurement activity for the period March 2018 – May 2018 and all contract award decisions made under Chief Officer’s delegation during the previous quarter. Planned procurement activities reported previously are not repeated in this report.

2. Decision(s) recommended:

That Cabinet

2.1 Notes the planned procurement activities under officer delegations set out in the Constitution for the period March 2018 – May 2018 as detailed in Appendix 1.

2.2 Notes the contract award decisions made under Chief Officers delegation during the period October 2017 – December 2017 as detailed in Appendix 2.

Lead Contact Officer (s): Nigel Kletz - Director of Commissioning and Procurement Corporate Procurement Services Strategic Services Directorate Telephone No: 0121 303 6610 E-mail address: [email protected]

Planned Procurement Activity Page 1

3. Consultation

3.1 Internal

This report to Cabinet is copied to Cabinet Support Officers and to Corporate Resources and Governance Overview & Scrutiny Committee and is the process for consulting with relevant cabinet and scrutiny members. At the point of submitting this report Cabinet Members/ Corporate Resources and Governance Overview & Scrutiny Committee Chair have not indicated that any of the planned procurement activity needs to be brought back to Cabinet for executive decision.

3.2 External

None

4. Compliance Issues:

4.1 Are the recommended decisions consistent with the Council's policies, plans and strategies

4.1.1 Details of how the contracts listed in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 support relevant Council policies, plans or strategies, will be set out in the individual reports.

4.1.2 Birmingham Business Charter for Social Responsibility (BBC4SR)

Compliance with the BBC4SR is a mandatory requirement that will form part of the conditions of the contracts. Tenderers will submit an action plan with their tender that will be evaluated in accordance with the agreed evaluation criteria and the action plan of the successful tenderers will be implemented and monitored during the contract period. Payment of the Living Wage, as set by the Living Wage Foundation, is a mandatory requirement of the BBC4SR and will apply for all contracts in accordance with the Council’s policy for suppliers to implement the rate.

4.2 Financial Implications

Details of how decisions will be carried out within existing finances and resources will be set out in the individual reports.

4.3 Legal Implications

Details of all relevant implications will be included in individual reports.

4.4 Public Sector Equality Duty

Details of Risk Management, Community Cohesion and Equality Act requirements will be set out in the individual reports.

Planned Procurement Activity Page 2

5. Relevant background/chronology of key events:

5.1 At the 1 March 2016 meeting of Council changes to procurement governance were agreed which gives Chief Officers the delegated authority to approve procurement contracts up to the value of £10m over the life of the contract. Where it is likely that the award of a contract will result in staff employed by the Council transferring to the successful contract under TUPE, the contract award decision has to be made by Cabinet.

5.2 In line with the Procurement Governance Arrangements that form part of the Council’s Constitution, this report acts as the process to consult with and take soundings from Cabinet Members and the Corporate Resources and Governance Overview & Scrutiny Committee. It also informs members of the contracts awarded under Chief Officers delegation (the EU threshold of £164,176 and over) between the period October 2017 – December 2017.

5.3 This report sets out the planned procurement activity over the next few months where the contract value is between the EU threshold (£181,302) and £10m. This will give members visibility of all procurement activity within these thresholds and the opportunity to identify whether any procurement reports should be brought to Cabinet for approval even though they are below the £10m delegation threshold.

5.4 It should be noted that the EU threshold has changed from £164,176 to £181,302 and will apply from 1st January 2018 for a period of 2 years.

5.5 Individual procurements may be referred to Cabinet for an executive decision at the request of Cabinet, a Cabinet Member or the Chair of Corporate Resources and Governance Overview & Scrutiny Committee where there are sensitivities or requirements that necessitate a decision being made by Cabinet.

5.6 Procurements below £10m contract value that are not listed on this or subsequent monthly reports can only be delegated to Chief Officers if specific approval is sought from Cabinet. Procurements above £10m contract value will still require an individual report to Cabinet in order for the award decision to be delegated to Chief Officers if appropriate.

5.7 A briefing note including financial information is appended to the Private report for each item on the schedule.

6. Evaluation of alternative option(s):

6.1 The report approved by Council Business Management Committee on 16 February 2016 set out the case for introducing this process. The alternative option is that individual procurements are referred to Cabinet for decision.

Planned Procurement Activity Page 3

7. Reasons for Decision(s):

7.1 To enable Cabinet to identify whether any reports for procurement activities should be brought to this meeting for specific executive decision, otherwise they will be dealt with under Chief Officer delegations up to the value of £10m, unless TUPE applies to current Council staff.

7.2 To inform Cabinet of contract award decisions made under Chief Officers delegation during the period October 2017 – December 2017 detailed in Appendix 2.

Signatures: Date:

Name of Officer: .. Nigel Kletz – Director of Commissioning & Procurement

.. . Councillor Majid Mahmood, Commercialism, Commissioning and Contract Management

List of Background Documents used to compile this Report:

List of Appendices accompanying this Report (if any): 1. Appendix 1 - Planned Procurement Activity March 2018 – May 2018 2. Appendix 2 – Quarterly Award Schedule October 2017 – December 2017

Report Version 1 Dated 09/01/2018

Planned Procurement Activity Page 4

APPENDIX 1 – PLANNED PROCUREMENT ACTIVITIES (MARCH 2018 – MAY 2018)

Type of Title of Procurement Ref Brief Description Contract Directorate Portfolio Finance Contact Planned Report Duration Commercialism, Officer Name CO Commissioning Decision and Contract Date Management Plus Strategy / Technical Consultancy for the Highways TBC The provision of a third party monitoring service for the Highways 2 years Economy Transport and Simon Clive Betts / 13/02/2018 Award PFI Contract PFI contract in accordance with the terms of both the PFI contract Roads Ansell Charlie Short and any Settlement Agreements.

Approval Enteral Feeding spend combined into the TBC Trained health workforce (Complex Care Assistants) deliver safe 1 year Children and Children, Families Anil Nayyar Saadhia 13/02/2018 To Tender Clinical Commissioning Group’s contract and correct administration of enteral feeding support to key special Young People and Schools Kamran / (SCN) with Birmingham Community Health NHS schools during school opening hours and on school premises to Gina Dimarco Foundation Trust ensure children and young people with enteral feeding requirements receive support in accordance with their individual needs and nutritional requirement in a safe and coordinated manner. Approval Provision of Cleaning Service for the S47 Provision of the following services for the Library of Birmingham 1 year, 6 months Place Housing and Parmjeet Marie Hadley 13/02/2018 To Tender Library of Birmingham (LoB) (including the Brasshouse) 7 days a week: Homes Jassal (SCN) Scheduled cleaning (all public areas and office / meeting accommodation); Maintaining washrooms; Specialist cleaning of archive storage areas; Cleaning of external terraces; Pest control; Window cleaning; Ad-hoc Laundry Service; Sanitary consumables; Periodic cleaning of all internal and external areas (for example during events); Any of the above on a reactive or emergency basis. . 1 year plus 1 year Strategic Deputy Leader Thomas Tim Savill / 13/02/2018 Approval Personal Budgeting Support TBC The Council can deliver or commission the support to people in option to extend Services Myers Charlie Short To Tender receipt of Universal Credit. The objective of the Universal Credit Strategy Personal Budgeting Support is: to support tenants transitioning into UC with budget management to enable them to manage their money and pay their bills on time, prioritising rent payments. Strategy / Employer’s Agent Service for the P0426 The additional resource requirements of work for an Employers 7 years Economy Deputy Leader Guy Olivant Debbie Husler 31/01/2018 Award Development of Housing for the Agent service for the CWGV,including the de-conversion of the Commonwealth Games Village (CWGV) village for the sale of housing for sale and rent after the end of the Commonwealth Games.

Planned Procurement Activity Page 5

APPENDIX 2 – QUARTERLY AWARD SCHEDULE (OCTOBER 2017 – DECEMBER 2017)

Type of Title of Procurement Ref Brief Description ContractDirectorate PortfolioFinanceContact Name Comments Contractor(s) Awarded toChief Officer Actual Go

Report Duration Value for MoneyOfficer - including any request from Cabinet Members for more details Live date

and Efficiency

Plus

The Furnishing Service Nigel Kletz 01/12/2017 Cabinet approved the Approval 04/03/2013to Tender and Strategy F0138R Supply and Installation of Furniture, Furnishing1 year and White Goods. StrategicDeputy Leader ParmjeetAndy Perry / Ian Supply and Installation of Furniture, Furnishing and delegated the award to Joint CM/CO. Contract Award Report signed DelegatedWhite Goods Services Jassal Baker / Richard 26/08/2014 by jointly the Cabinet Member for Commissioning, Contract Tibbatts Award Contracting and Improvement and the Deputy Chief Executive. Delegated Extension Award08/09/2016 Report. 2nd signed

Delegated Extension Award Report. signed 24/10/2017 01/06/2017 TBC To provide technical advice, financial feasibility4 monthsand economic Placeimpact Deputy LeaderCabinet Paul Quinney approved Steve the Holliingworth Single Contractor14/06/2017. NegotiationOrigin Sports Group Limited Nigel Kletz / Technical Advice for the Commonwealth Games Bid Delegated Jacqui Submission asessment. Delegated Contract Award 29/09/2017 Report. signed Contract Kennedy

AwardStrategySelf-Drive / Hire Vehicles P0394 Landlord Services require a fleet of various types of light commercial vehicles

Award to carry out its services, and are essential for Street Scene, Elderly Services and Night Security. The vehicles include vans and tippers and are owned by

01/12/2017 4 years Economy TransportGuy Olivant and David Waddington Presented to Cabinet for info Northgate27/06/2017. Limited Strategy / Award ReportNigel Kletz / Jacqui Roads signed21/11/2017 . Kennedy

the Council. On average the fleet is 10 years old, making the current vehicles 20/11/2017 Jessup Brothers Ltd Nigel Kletz / inefficient and incapable of meeting the Council’s emissions targets. Waheed P0399 Construction and delivery of 10 new Council 1homes year for rent at EconomyMontgomery Housing and HomesCabinet Guy Olivant approved Russell to the Knight Tender / Strategy as part of the report titled Nazir Development of Housing at Montgomery Street, Driving Housing Growth and Supporting Young People into DelegatedSparkbrook Street, Sparkbrook. Charlie Short Contract Employment throught the Birmingham Municipal Housing Trust (BMHT) Development Programme15/11/2016.Delegated on the Award Contract Award Report15/11/2017 signed. Delegated Contract Presented to Cabinet for info 13/09/2017.17/10/2017. SCNEast, signed South and North Quadrants Award 4 months Place Housing and Homes Guy Olivant Jane Piovesana / Delegated Award Report signed 16/11/2017. Michelle Holmes / 01/12/2017 Cleaning Services for Temporary AccommodationF0136Cleaning / services and (including general, routine, deep clean and out of hours Wendy O'Malley / Nigel Kletz / where required) for sites across the city for approximately: Marcia Bell Jacqui Communal Areas of Sheltered and F0242Low Rise• 106 sheltered housing blocks (general areas), 1) Hi-Spec Facilities Services Plc Kennedy West and Central Quadrant Accommodation • 644 low rise blocks (communal areas) • 700 homeless disbursed temporary accommodation (properties). STC1) Superclean Energy Management Services Wolthorpe Ltd Nigel Limited Kletz 01/01/2018 John Barr BrigittePresented Kershaw /to Cabinet for info 13/12/2016. Approval to Tender Economy Clean Streets, Strategy Report05/06/2017 signed and delegated the award to CO. Adele Rawlins Energy Broker Service P0365 An energy broker service is required by the Council to provide specialistRecycling and Delegated Delegated Contract Award05/12/2017 Report. signed Environment Contract support for managing water, gas, electricity, oils 2and years, associated plus 1 ancillary Award year option to extend and a 01/12/2017 services contracts including bill checking, tenderingfurther and possible budget management. Home from Hospital Care after Treatment.Nigel Kletz / 1 year option to Graeme Betts extend Shabir Ladak Maria GavinCabinet / Members for Health and Social Care and for Health and Social Expansion of Home Discharge Support Service TBC Provision of the Home2 Discharge years Support Adult Service Social (HDSS). Commericalism, Commissioning and Contract Management jointly Delegated Care Kalvinder Kohliwith the Interim Corporate Director of Adult Social & Health approved Contract Care and the Single Contractor Negotiation21/11/2017 and Report delegated Health Award Chris JordanthePresented / award toto CO.Cabinet Delegated for info Contract22/09/2015. Award Approval Report to signed Tender 1 year Place CommunityParmjeet Safety Strategy (C0224) Report22/10/2015 signed C0224 Legal entitlement advice service for welfare benefits, debt management and Jassal Andrea Webster14/12/2017 . Legal Entitlement Advice Services: Welfare Benefit, and Equality DelegatedDebt management and Employment employment. This is to tackle the huge issue of inequality and promote social Contract cohesion. Award

01/04/2018 Birmingham Citizen Advice Bureau Services Ltd Nigel Kletz /

and delegated the award Jacqui Kennedy to CO. Delegated Contract Award23/02/2016. Report signed

Delegated Extension Award15/12/2017 Report. signed

continued > .. Planned Procurement Activity Page 6

Type of Title of ProcurementRef Brief Description Estimated ContractEstimated Directorate PortfolioFinanceContact Name Comments Contractor(s) Awarded toValue ofChief Officer Actual Go

Report Annual ValueDuration Contract Value Value for MoneyOfficer - including any request from Cabinet Members for more details Contracts Live date

(£) (£) and Efficiency

Plus

P0421 The Business and Commercial Development Team manage a range of Bay Media Ltd £520,000 City Advertising Contract - NOW CALLED Lamp Post Deputy Leader Alison JarrettPresented Helen to Burnett Cabinet / for info 18/04/2017. Approval to Tender DelegatedBanner Advertising contracts generating revenue to the City Council£50,000 from advertising5 years plus on£400,000 CityStrategic Strategy Report04/08/2017 signedand delegated the award to CO. Nigel Kletz02/01/2018 / Contract owned land and property. This contract is for the provision of Lamp PostServices Charlie Short Banner Advertising. (income)option to extend(income) Delegated Contract Award20/12/2017 Report. signed (incomeAngela Award for 3 years minimum)Probert 01/04/2018 £44,000 Little Green Bookworm CIC £220,000 Nigel Kletz /

Presented to Cabinet for info 25/07/2017. SCN approved Jacqui Sutton Coldfield Library – Concession Opportunity P0398 The service will consist of the operation of a facility at Sutton Coldfield 04/08/2017.Delegated Contract Award22/12/2017 Report. signed Kennedy Delegated 3 years with£308,000 Place Deputy LeaderDarren Langley Parmjeet / Contract Library. The Council will sub-let 33% of the First floor at the premises and Sarah ChinnockThe contract / will only be for 3 years with an option to extend for 2 enter into a concession contract with the provider. Theoption concession to extend will be for Jassal Chris Jordanyears, so a maximum of 5 years rather than 7 as anticipated. Award a facility that is complementary to the library; e.g. a coffee shop, play/activity/learning area. for 4 years

Planned Procurement Activity Page 7