Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Collins and Councillor Fortune.

There were no declarations of interest.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions to this Committee must be received in writing 4 working days before the date of the meeting.  Therefore please ensure questions are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on Thursday 11^th January 2018.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 26 September 2017, be agreed.

The Sub-Committee considered the following reports where the Education, Children and Families Portfolio Holder was recommended to take a decision.

Report ED18044

The Sub-Committee considered a report outlining the context of the SEND review and how this had been approached.  The report also provided an update on phase one of the High Needs SEND review and set out the proposal to deliver phase two of the review.  To this end the report sought approval to award a further contract via exemption to competitive tendering to SEND4change for delivery of phase 2 of the review.

Following the DfE announcement in March 2017 of the High Needs Strategic Planning Fund (HNSPF) grant, Bromley was in the process of carrying out a strategic review of its high needs provision. Through the use of this grant, the Local Authority was working with education settings, providers, partners and with parents and young people.

A contract was awarded, following a competitive tender, to SEND4change to support phase one of the strategic review.  The contract commenced in June 2017 and came to an end on 31 December 2017.  The contract value was £80k, funded through the HNSPF grant.

A Member suggested that it may be beneficial to liaise with neighbouring boroughs to identify if there was any additional demand.  In response the SEND Operations Manager confirmed that reviews of other London boroughs (not specifically neighbouring boroughs) were being undertaken, but that  a good relationship existed between Bromley and its neighbouring boroughs so the opportunities that this would afford in terms of place planning was being taken into consideration.

In response to a question the SEND Operations Manager confirmed that Officers had been happy with the work undertaken by SEND4change to date.

RESOLVED: That the Portfolio Holder for Education, Children and Families be recommended to:

1.  Note the plans for phase two of the strategic review of high needs provision;

2.  Approve the award of contract for delivery of phase two of the strategic review to SEND4change via an exemption to competitive tender for a contract period of 1 February 2018 to 30 April 2018 at a value of £32k.

Report ED18038

The Sub-Committee considered a report which provided the budget monitoring position for 2017/18 based on activity up to the end of September 2017.

The Schools’ Budget was predicted to underspend by £124k during 2017/18, and this would be added to the £1.6m carried forward in 2016/17.  The Non-Schools’ budget was projected to overspend by £648k.

The Education division was predicted to overspend by £245k.  There were pressures in in-house nurseries of £172k, and other strategic functions were overspending by £163k, partially due to additional costs of business rates together with a £128k of a £300k efficiency target given to the Education division that had not materialised.  SEN and Inclusion was underspending by £54k, mainly due to the transport service contract payments being less than budgeted.  In response to a question surrounding whether the efficiency target had been a realistic expectation, the Head of ECHS Finance confirmed that the efficiency target would not be included in the 2018/19 budget.

The Children’s Social Care division was currently projected to overspend by £403k.  Placements for children continued to be a pressure area and the number of placements had increased above budgeted levels.  Leaving care also continued to be an ongoing pressure for both the 16-17 age group and the 18+for whom housing benefit contributed to the costs.  Current staffing pressures amounted to £650k, although there was a drive to permanently recruit with the ambition to have only 10% of staff being locums by the end of the year.  To help alleviate the overspend pressures, management had introduced a freeze on some areas of the budget in children’s social care.  It was anticipated that this would achieve savings of £350k.

The Head of ECHS Finance reported that the review of in-house nursery provision would continue and Members stressed the need to ensure that the benefits of early years provision was maintained and developed.

A Member suggested that it would be helpful to identify in the report where increased expenditure was the result of increased demand.

The Sub-Committee considered and discussed issues surrounding cover for social worker absence.  The Director of Children’s Social Care confirmed that whilst a 2 week absence could be adequately managed it become more challenging to manage an absence of 4 weeks.  There was a need to ensure that communication with families was maintained and that in the event of staff absence children and families were provided with alternative contact details.

RESOLVED: That

1.  The latest projected overspend of £648,000 forecast on the controllable budget, based on information as at September 2017, be noted;

2.  The full year effect cost pressures of £718,000 as set out in the report be noted;

3.  The comments of the Department set out in the report be noted; and

4.  The Portfolio Holder be recommended to note that the latest projected overspend of £648,000 forecast on the controllable budget, based on information as at September 2017.

Report ED18039

The Sub-Committee considered a report which provided information on the 2018/19 Dedicated Schools’ Grant and how it would be allocated.  The Department for Education had confirmed the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) Allocation for 2018/19 as follows:

The Local Authority (LA) had reviewed each of the four blocks individually to identify any financial pressures.  The Early Years block was shown to be self-funding, whilst there were some areas deemed to be overspent these were being supported by underspends within the same block.  The High Needs Block was projecting an overspend of £2million.  Following the decision of the Schools’ Forum at its meeting in November 2017, the LA submitted an application to the Secretary of State to formally request a disapplication of the regulations which would allow £1million funding to be moved from the Schools’ Block to the High Needs Block without the support of the Forum.  The Head of ECHS Finance reported that the Local Authority had been notified that that the Secretary of State had approved the application.  It was therefore proposed that the remaining £1million overspend would be funded by a contribution of £1million from the Revenue Support Grant, which had been approved by Executive on 10 January 2018.  SEND4change would continue to carry out a full review of current SEND spend and any savings identified would be invested in the transition period as the LA moved towards a more cost effective and more sustainable High Needs Block position.

As a result of the decision from the Secretary of State £202.4million would be allocated to schools.  The LA had the option to either move to the National Funding Formula (NFF) for 2018/19 (and 2019/20) prior to the planned introduction of the NFF in 2020/21, or to remain with the Bromley Funding Formula (BFF). 

In the Central School Services Block there was a projected overspend of £173,000.  Expenditure in this Block had been reviewed and no immediate short-term savings had been identified.  It was therefore proposed that the projected overspend in this Block would be met from any commensurate underspend of DSG in 2017/18.

Prior to the meeting the draft minutes from the Schools’ Forum meeting on 11^th January 2018 had been circulated to Members of the Sub-Committee for information.  In relation to the funding formula, the Head of ECHS Finance informed the Sub-Committee that at the Schools’ Forum meeting views between Primary Representatives and Secondary Representatives had been polarised. The issue had come down to a vote which had supported recommendation of Option 1a (NFF), this was the formula which was supported by secondary representatives on the Forum.  However, Primary Representatives had highlighted that there were two Primary Representatives vacancies on the Forum which would have had an unfair impact on the vote.

In response to a question from the Chairman concerning the recommendation of Officers, the Head of ECHS Finance highlighted that with the NFF there was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35c

Report ED18040

The Sub-Committee considered a report which provided an overview of representation on the Schools’ Forum.  The Head of ECHS Finance explained that representation on the Schools element of the Forum was derived in the main from pupil numbers.  There were thirteen members made up of Heads and Governors.  Whilst current pupil numbers had not changed significantly there had been further movement towards Academy conversion in the Special and PRU areas resulting in small amounts of pupils in these areas being in both Academy and Maintained settings.  Advice from the DfE was that there needed to be a representative for Maintained and Academy in Special and PRU settings if there were settings within the Borough.  This meant that there needed to be an increase in the schools element membership of the Schools’ Forum by two members from thirteen to fifteen, a Special Academy representative and a PRU Academy representative.  All other representation would remain the same.  The overall membership of the Schools’ Forum would increase from eighteen to twenty:

The Sub-Committee noted that members of the Schools’ Forum had asked the Head of ECHS Finance to further review the Head Teacher/Governor split in terms of representation as it was felt that Head Teachers were more likely to volunteer to sit on the Schools’ Forum. 

The Head of ECHS Finance had also been asked to undertake a more comprehensive review of the Schools’ Forum constitution in order to enable a better understanding of the implications of Multi Academy Trusts on the membership of the Schools’ Forum.  The Head of ECHS Finance highlighted that the intention had always been to ensure cross representation across different types of schools. 

The Schools’ Forum had recommended that, subject to some minor amendments to address the comments that had been made concerning the Head Teacher/Governor split, the amendments to the Schools’ Forum Constitution should be put to the Education, Children and Families Budget and Performance Sub-Committee meeting on 17th January 2018 with a full review of the Constitution to be taken within the year.

RESOLVED: That the Portfolio Holder for Education, Children and Families be recommended to approve the constitution of the Schools’ Forum.

Report FSD18005

The report set out changes agreed by the Executive in respect of the Capital Programme for the Education, Children and Families Portfolio. The revised programme for the Portfolio was set out in Appendix A to the report,  and detailed comments on scheme progress as at the end of the 2^nd quarter of 2017/18 were shown in Appendix B.

In relation to unallocated Section 106 money, the Vice-Chairman highlighted that there was often time constraints attached to the use of the funds and emphasised the need to ensure that time did not elapse meaning the funding was lost.

A Member queried whether the proposed college at Biggin Hill would be eligible under Section 106 criteria.  The Head of ECHS Finance agreed to provide a response following the meeting.

Action Point 1: that following the meeting the Head of ECHS Finance confirm whether the proposed college at Biggin Hill would be eligible under Section 106 criteria.

RESOLVED: That the Portfolio Holder be recommended to confirm the changes agreed by the Executive on 6^th December 2017.

Report ED18037

The Sub-Committee considered a report setting out the Portfolio Holder’s draft 2018/19 Budget which incorporated future cost pressures and initial draft budget saving options which had been reported to Executive on 10^th January 2018.  Executive were requesting that each PDS Committee consider the proposed initial draft budget saving and cost pressures for their Portfolio and report back to the next meeting of the Executive, prior to recommendations being made to Council on 2018/19 Council Tax Levels.

The Sub-Committee noted that significant changes had been seen in the universal offer in children’s services with the redesign of the youth service giving a much greater focus on statutory provision.  Key challenges remained in reducing children social care caseloads and improving practice to ensure that children and young people were safeguarded.  A range of actions were be undertaken to address these challenges.  The ongoing risk to the Children’s Service area was the complexity of children requiring a statutory service, the increase and identification of children subject to Child Sexual Exploitation, Missing and Gangs; and some late entrants to care with very complex histories that required specialist placements.

Members noted that the Social Work Act would have a financial and resource impact both in terms of the fact that Care Leavers would be supported by the Local Authority up to the age of 25, and also because any child living within Bromley who had been adopted could expect to be supported by the Virtual School. 

RESOLVED: That the Education, Children and Families Portfolio Draft Budget 2018/19 be noted.

The Sub-Committee considered the Bromley Safeguarding Children Board Annual report 2016-17.  The Independent Chairman of the Bromley Safeguarding Children Board (BSCB), Mr Jim Gamble QPM, attended the meeting and presented the Bromley Safeguarding Children Board Annual report to the Sub-Committee.  Mr Gamble highlighted that the report covered 2016-2017 and therefore reflected the position at that time rather than the current position.  It was good for audit purposes that the Board and the Council reflected on previous years but it also important to acknowledge the progress that had been made in the intervening period.  In May 2016 the Ofsted Inspection had found that there had been a poor ratio of supervision and management oversight, high caseloads for Social Workers and a lack of investment in the Service.  Since that time the Service had moved on and the Service was now on a trajectory of real improvement.  Positive investment had been made by the Council’s Executive and there were clear results in  relation to the investment in leadership that the Council had made.  Spans of management oversight were now more manageable than they had been, staff reported that they now felt better managed and supported, and with the introduction of the Caseload Promise, caseloads were reducing.

The Independent Chairman of the BSCB highlighted in particular the strength of Early Help in Bromley, putting on record his admiration for the Head of Early Intervention and Family Support who had delivered an effective system of early help across the Borough.  The Early Intervention programme was described as “the jewel in Bromley’s crown”.

In terms of changes to BSCB since the Ofsted inspection in May 2016, Mr Gamble explained that there had been a restructure of the Board and partnerships had been improved.  There was now a better infrastructure in place which enabled the Board to work in a more streamlined and efficient manner.  The Community Engagement work of the BSCB, which had been started under the previous Independent Chairman Mrs Annie Callanan, had been positive.  The number of LADO referrals had increased which was a sign of a healthy safeguarding partnership.

In terms of partnership working, Mr Gamble highlighted that more work needed to be done with the Police who, whilst willing to engage in the partnership, had not be able to adequately engage.  The Police had not been present at any of the multi-agency training events that had taken place.  As a result of the implementation of ‘One Met’, the Police appeared to be withdrawing on a number of commitments that had previously been made.  The Chairman of BSCB was clear that there would be robust challenge and that there was a clear expectation the Police remained an engaged partner.

Finally, Mr Gamble highlighted the impact of both the Wood Review and the Children’s Social Work Bill which brought a level of ambiguity to the work of BSCB.  Mr Gamble provided assurances that that in spite of the ambiguity he would keep pushing for commitment from all partners.

In conclusion, Mr Gamble  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

The Sub-Committee considered the annual report of the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) Service for Bromley’s Children Looked After.  The report contained a summary of the work completed by Bromley Independent Reviewing Officers between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017.  The Interim Head of Quality Improvement introduced the report explaining that production of the annual report was a statutory requirement.

IROs ensured that Care Plans for Children Looked After in the Borough fully reflected the needs of each child.  The IRO would listen to the wishes and feelings of the child and look at how the Local Authority could best support the child.  If required, an IRO would challenge a Social Worker or intervene in the event of tensions within caring families.  Every child had an IRO who brought vigour and challenge to care planning and monitored the Local Authority as a corporate parent.  During  2016/17 the IRO Service had been responsible for monitoring between 264 and 301 children looked after which had involved 938 reviews.  95% of these reviews had been undertaken within the statutory timescales.  The Service continued to make steady improvement and there had been consistency of social workers which had made a big difference to the children.

The Interim Head of Quality Improvement reported that the IRO Annual Report for 2017/18 would be published in the Spring, around May 2018.

In response to a question from the Chairman concerning how the quality of reviews was assessed, the Interim Head of Quality Improvement reported that audits and spot inspections were regularly undertaken by Group Managers.  If necessary concerns were escalated to Heads of Service and the Director of Children’s Social Care for resolution. 

The Chairman noted that there had been a rise in the number of IRO escalations and the Interim Head of Quality Improvement suggested that that demonstrated that there was rigor in the process and that IROs were driving performance and ensuring that the needs of the children were met.  The Chairman also noted that the IRO Handbook suggested that in most cases when a child who was the subject of a child protection plan became looked after it would be no longer be necessary to maintain the child protection plan, the logic behind this was queried.  In response the Interim Head of Quality Improvement explained that it was the responsibility of the Local Authority to make children safe.  It was generally considered that once a safe placement had been found for a child there was no longer a need for a child protection plan.

Members thanked the Interim Head of Quality Improvement for the insightful and detailed report noting that the report reflected the human side of the Services provided by the Council.

RESOLVED: That the Independent Reviewing Officers Annual Report 2016/17 be noted.

The Sub-Committee considered the Bromley Virtual School Annual Report 2016/17 which outlined the activity and impact of Bromley Virtual School during the academic year.  The report included full details of the educational outcomes of Bromley Children Looked After and identified areas of future development to achieve improved outcomes for Bromley Children Looked After.

The Bromley Virtual School Head Teacher introduced the report and highlighted that in future years the Annual Report would be presented to the Sub-Committee in November with the caveat that data was subject to change as it would not have not been formally ratified by the Department for Education (DfE).

The Virtual School Head Teacher emphasised the difficulties in planning the Service resulting from the fluctuation in year group numbers which grew significantly during the year.  The Sub-Committee also heard that it was difficult to quantify the impact of the  Social Work Act on the Virtual School but that it was clear that the new legislation would undoubtedly have an impact.  Virtual School Head Teachers were working to standardise the approach of Virtual Schools across London in order to provide greater consistency when children moved to different boroughs.  In addition to this a pan-London position statement had been issued which would be effective until such time as guidance on the new legislation was issued.

Bromley Virtual School was proud that it rested in the top 5-10% in terms of GCSE results but recognised that the Service could not stand still and that there was still more that could be done to support children looked after to have greater success at 16+.  The Virtual School was also reviewing the quality of Personal Education Plans (PEPs) and working with Social Workers to deliver improvements in quality.  The Virtual School Head Teacher also noted that the Virtual School was having to deal with increasingly complex issues as well as provide support to a much wider age range (from 2 years to 25 years).

The Head of CLA and Care Leavers emphasised that the impact of the Virtual School in planning and placement moves could not be under estimated.  The Virtual School was now being drawn into every aspect of care planning.

Members of the Sub-Committee congratulated Bromley Virtual School on the number of children in their care that went on to complete A-Levels, apprenticeships, and university degrees.  The Head Teacher of the Virtual School highlighted that staff supported children to look at the subjects and make appropriate choices.  A great deal of work was being done with the current Year 8 cohort as in Bromley children were expected to make their GCSE choices in Year 8.  As this posed a significant challenge for this cohort of children, the Virtual School had developed a programme in partnership with Greenwich University which was specifically targeted at these Year 8 children to help influence GCSE choices.  The programme aimed to widen the horizons of the children, and expose them to life experiences that, due to their circumstances, they may not otherwise  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

Report ED18043

The Sub-Committee considered a report setting out the proposed reporting regime for key performance measures to be reported to the Sub-Committee at future meetings.  Key findings of the Ofsted inspection in May 2016 included that senior leaders, including elected members, and managers lacked a comprehensive understanding of the strength and weaknesses of the services provided and that performance management information was not being used effectively to improve practice and service delivery.

As a result of this, part of the improvement plan had been the development of a more robust approach to performance management at all levels of the organisation.  The Performance Management Framework before the Sub-Committee had been designed to articulate key roles and responsibilities in respect of performance management for staff, managers, elected members and partners in the arrangements for appropriate oversight of performance going forward.

The Assistant Director for Strategy and Performance introduced the report setting out the context of the Performance Framework which had been developed following the key criticism from Ofsted Inspectors that management oversight at all levels of the Council had been ineffective.  The proposed Performance Framework before the Sub-Committee emphasised key roles and responsibilities ensuring that there was the necessary oversight.

The Assistant Director introduced Paul Ballatt to the Sub-Committee.  Mr Ballatt had been working on the development of the Performance Management Framework.  Mr Ballatt explained that the Departmental Management Team were proposing that the Sub-Committee received a regular performance update which reflected a basket of key performance indicators requiring consideration by the Sub-Committee.  There was a need to ensure that information was received by the Sub-Committee in a timely manner in order to enable Members to undertake their scrutiny role.

The Chairman emphasised that the development of the Performance Framework fitted well with the Sub-Committee’s own journey to performance monitoring.  In particular the Chairman welcomed the inclusion of datasets of quantitative, qualitative and outcome performance indicators which would form the core of the Sub-Committees work.  Members noted that outcome measures were a crucial evaluation tool and highlighted that it was also important to include a measure of whether value for money was being achieved.  It was also suggested that consideration be given to benchmarking against neighbouring Local Authorities as well as including relevant case studies in order to enhance Members understanding of issues.

The Sub-Committee welcomed the development of the Performance Framework and encouraged further corporate roll out.

RESOLVED: That:

1. The Performance Management Framework be noted;

2. The Sub-Committee receive a report at its next meeting in March 2018 providing options and rationales for key performance indicators to be reported to the Sub-Committee; and

3. Thereafter, the Sub-Committee receive a quarterly report on the agreed performance indicator set commencing with quarter one 2018/19 data.

This item will only be discussed if a member of the Committee requests a discussion be held, in which case please inform the Democratic Services Officer 24 hours in advance indicating the aspects of the information item you wish to discuss.  Questions on the briefing should also be sent to the Democratic Services Officer at least 24 hours before the meeting.

Report ED18041-1

The Sub-Committee considered an extract from November 2017’s Contract Register.  The report was based on information produced on 21 November 2017.

A Member highlighted the need to ensure that there was consistency between the contract title inputted onto the Contracts Database and the title of reports presented to committee to enable Members to identify contracts and understand what they were being asked to approved.

RESOLVED: That the Contracts Register be noted.

Briefing ED18036

The Sub-Committee reviewed the ECHS Departmental Risk Register – the output of a ‘check and challenge’ process undertaken by Zurich, the Local Authority’s insurers.

RESOLVED: That the ECHS Departmental Risk Register be noted.

There was no other business.

7.00pm, Tuesday 27 March 2018

The next meeting would be held on 27^th March 2018.

RESOLVED that the press and public be excluded during consideration of the items of business listed below as it was likely in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present, there would be disclosure to them of exempt information.

The following summaries

refer to matters involving exempt information

RESOLVED that the Exempt (Part 2) minutes of the Education, Children and Families Budget and Performance Monitoring Sub-Committee meeting held on 26^th September 2017 be agreed, subject to an amendment on page 22/1.

The Sub-Committee considered the following Part 2 (exempt) reports where the Education, Children and Families Portfolio Holder was recommended to take a decision.

Report ED18042

The Sub-Committee considered a report seeking authorisation for an extension to the contract to provide short breaks for disabled children.

Report ED180041-2

The Committee noted the exempt contract register.