Agenda item
SCRUTINY SPOTLIGHT - EDUCATION, SOCIAL CARE AND WELLBEING DIRECTORATE
To receive an oral presentation from Councillor Oliur Rahman, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Councillor Abdul Asad, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing, with a focus on early education provision for two year olds.
Minutes:
Councillor Abdal Asad, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing, gave a short presentation, which provided the OSC with a requested update on several key issues including:-
· Progress towards targets for individual budgets for social care, and the support available to service users in designing their care packages.
· The number of in house homecare workers retained by the Council following service restructure, and management arrangements during the transition.
· Commissioning of service hubs for people with learning disabilities, and public health commissioning.
Robert McCulloch-Graham, Corporate Director Education Social Care and Wellbeing, Anne Canning, Service Head Learning and Achievement, andMonica Forty, Head of Learning and Achievement Birth to Eleven, were also in attendance for this item and highlighted the main challenges facing the directorate regarding delivery of improved services for children including:
· Pupil Place Planning
· Pressures facing the Special Education Needs (SEN) Service
· Legislative changes underway to SEN Policy
· Adoption targets
· Troubled Families Programme
· Academies and free schools
· Early Learning provision for eligible two year olds (detailed Powerpoint presentation with slides Tabled, a copy of which would be interleaved with the minutes).
A comprehensive discussion followed, which focused on the following points:
· Consideration that Tower Hamlets was under-performing compared with other similar London Boroughs (LBs) in turning troubled families around, with clarification sought as to the reasons for this. LBTH had undertaken significant work in this area for some time, had performed well compared with other LBs and nationally and funding had been secured for another year of the Troubled Families Programme (TFP). LBTH was innovative in approach and Job Centre Plus were now engaged with the initiative, which had previously been a block to progress.
· Whether there were any early indications that conversion to academies and free school status, was impacting on the viability of existing community schools, as subscription to their school rolls fell. Several schools had already converted, others conversions were underway and there would be more in the future. Pupils at an academy/ free school coming from the catchment area for other community schools, would leave places at the latter for take up by other pupils. As the market opened a displacement effect was anticipated, but this was currently manageable, and the LEA would continue to work collaboratively to serve the needs of the community given it had no legal powers over such schools..
· What were the potential consequences of not meeting the statutory entitlement to early learning provision for two year olds (providing the required pupil places). Also whether Children’s Centres provision was included in the figures for early learning provision for two year olds. Government appeared to now realise that expectations of two year old provision placed on local councils were unrealistic/ undeliverable and was looking for ways to scale back required provision. Children’s Centres were not included unless they operated a linked childcare project for two year olds.
· Was there sufficient capital funding for two year olds pupil places, given it was understood a bid for Mainstream Grants Programme funding for a nursery scheme had been unsuccessful. The Council was focused on optimising numbers of pupil places for 2 year olds from spend. Approximately £1.2 million funding was available but over £10 million (based on benchmarking with comparative boroughs) was required to meet the number of places currently required.
· Concern also expressed that capacity was stretched to provide free provision of early learning provision for two year olds, for those eligible, and also 15 hours of this did not fully support families back into employment, what provision was their to top up. Parents in work lost eligibility for free provision of early learning places, unlike those on welfare benefits, and this did result in a tension around provision which the Fairness Commission was examining.
· Both Mayor Rahman and Government had now announced initiatives to provide free school meals; was there a difference in the eligibility criteria, and if the Government scheme would cater for all those intended to benefit from the Mayor’s scheme what would funding for the latter now be used for. Free school meals would be provided to all those eligible under the schemes, and Officers were currently working through the financial implications with the Mayor and Cabinet Member for Children’s Services.
· Absence of a Health and Wellbeing Board (HWB), required under statute since April 2013, and the consequences of that given an understanding that Government Funding of £10 million was at risk unless agreed by such a board. Also commented that despite the remit of the Health Scrutiny Panel to scrutinise Public Health, requests from its Chair to be provided with the agenda papers of the Shadow Health & Wellbeing Board had not been met, and this was a minimum requirement if Board meetings were not public and attendance was by invitation. Government had emphasised the importance of the HWB role regarding Public Health and Adult Social Care and discussions were underway between relevant stakeholders and the Cabinet Member Health and Wellbeing hoped the HWB would be formally established soon. In the meantime he chaired the Shadow Board considered substantive issues as required eg Care Quality Commission inspections underway at Barts and the London NHS Trust. Officers would ensure future provision of such agenda papers to the HSP Chair.
· Assurance sought and given, in the context of anecdotal evidence received, that the commissioning budget for care packages for the disabled had not been reduced. Had there been changes to the care packages for those on personalised budgets? A time limited pilot project with Real[ to provide a support planning service for individuals designing care packages] had now ended and all support was provided in-house; there was no reduction in support.
· Assurance sought and given on the extension of the in-house contract for Domiciliary Care, given discrepancies in information provided on staff numbers and conditions. Was in-house service provision being moved onto provision by contract, and was this a choice or requirement? The quality of the homecare service for existing service users was being safeguarded, but it was no longer accepting referrals. There would be a further review of staffing should numbers fall.
· Given the difficulties in identifying suitable properties for provision of early learning pupil places, what consideration had the Mayor given to using Council assets for this rather than sale to generate income. Had the Cabinet Member with portfolio pressed the case for this approach with the Mayor. Provision of early learning pupil places for two year olds had been added to the key criteria considered by Officers in Development and Renewal directorate when considering the future use/ disposal of assets (Cabinet Member undertook to provide a more detailed written response). However it should be noted that large empty buildings may not be appropriate for such provision, as outside space was key; also revenue funding additional to any LEA grant for a 2 year old provision was essential for project viability.
· What duration of training was required for Child Care staff to reach level 2 or 3 standard. Given the anticipated demand a strategic approach with Development & Renewal to engage local training and education providers to train local residents for this would have multiple benefits. At least a year of training to Level 2. Officers concurred further strategic work in this area would be beneficial although the workforce development team had already examined apprenticeship models with the University of East London and Tower Hamlets College, although this model had disadvantages.
· Requested that the Powerpoint presentation on Early Learning provision for eligible two year olds be emailed to all OSC members.
The Chair:
· Commented that as OSC Chair he would be pleased to put the case on the use of Council assets for the provision of early learning pupil places for two year olds to the Mayor.
· Thanked Councillor Asad and Robert Anne and Monica for attending the Scrutiny Spotlight session.
· Moved and it was:-
Resolved
That the information given in the scrutiny spotlight presentations, be noted.
Action by:
Robert McCulloch-Graham (Corporate Director Education Social Care and Wellbeing)
Anne Canning (Service Head Achievement & Learning, ESCWB)
Angus Taylor (Principal Committee Officer, Democratic Services, CE’s)