Agenda item

Report DCYP11089

The Committee considered an update on the consultation timetable and an outline of emerging findings in order to seek Members initial views before a full report on the outcome of the consultation was provided to the Committee in September 2011.  The report also provided an outline and rationale for the revised commissioning process in light of potential changes following the outcomes of the consultation.

A Member sought assurances that representation that had been sent to the Leader of the Council would be included in the consultation responses, and these assurances were provided by the Assistant Director (Access and Inclusion).

The Chairman noted that paragraph 3.7 of the report highlighted that the Department for Education had notified Officers that if the Centres did not continue to be used primarily by and for children aged 0-5 and their parents and carers, the existing funding stream AND capital (previously granted and expended on these Centres) would be recovered by the DfE.  For Bromley, this amounted to £5.4 million for all the centres and should 16 centres close and not deliver services to children, a large proportion of this funding would be recovered.  The Committee agreed that it would be prudent to ensure that some centres continued to provide services to children aged 0-5 in order to secure the funding and avoid additional expenditure on accommodation for other Council services.

In acknowledging that savings had to be made, a Member of the Committee highlighted that given the significance of early years learning and early intervention on later outcomes the closure of Children and Family Centres in some of the more deprived areas of the Borough would contribute to the widening of the gap in performance of the highest and lowest achievers in Bromley.  The Member agreed that 17 or 18 Centres in the Borough was a lot however, he felt that cutting back to only three Centres was moving too far in the opposite direction.

The Portfolio Holder stressed that savings and efficiencies had to be found and there was no easy solution to finding these savings.  The Portfolio Holder reported that all the issues would be examined over the summer and he and Officers from the CYP Department would do their upmost to mitigate against the disadvantages any closures may cause.

Alison Regester expressed concerns that the Early Intervention Grant was not being used for early years.  The Director CYP responded that older adolescents were included in the terms of the grant and the needs of older vulnerable children needed also to be considered and addressed.

The Committee noted that a further report would be presented in September 2011 and at this time Members would consider the issues in greater depth.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder be recommended to:

(i)  note the interim report;

(ii)  note that a full report on consultation outcomes will be provided at the next CYP PDS Committee meeting on 6 September 2011; and

(iii)  note the revised commissioning process and proposed timetable for statutory, private, community and voluntary sector agencies to bid for delivery of services.