Meeting documents

The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services will attend the meeting to explain the reasons behind Cabinet’s proposal to create a new Early Help service, as set out at the Cabinet meeting on 8 January 2017.

There will be 20 minutes to present the case, followed by an opportunity for the Committee to ask any questions.

Contributors:

Mr W Whyte, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services

Supporting Officers:

Mr T Vouyioukas, Executive Director, Children’s Services

Mr P Dart, Programme Director, Change for Children, Children’s Services

Ms J Tisbury, Project Manager, Early Help, Children’s Services

Supporting Papers:

·         Response to the call-in request from Mr W Whyte, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services

·         Response to the Supporting Paper from Julia Wassell - paper to follow

The Chairman welcomed Mr W Whyte (County Councillor) who introduced his supporting officers: Mr T Vouyioukas (Executive Director, Children’s Services), Mr P Dart (Programme Director – Change for Children) and Ms J Tisbury (Project Manager – Early Help). The group were advised that they would have 20 minutes in which to present their case followed by questions from the Committee.

Mr Whyte made the following key points in his presentation, in response to the written call-in request made by Julia Wassell:

• Response to point 1:

Research had identified the key issues that were driving demand for children's services. Using advice and guidance, such as the Early Intervention Foundation, the view that the Troubled Family Outcome Measures were appropriate had been confirmed and these measures would be an appropriate delivery method. The Early Help Strategy contained other existing measures.

• Response to point 2:

The Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) was detailed and clear that the new service would provide enhanced outreach to families finding themselves in difficult situations.

• Response to Point 4:

As a corporate parent the County Council had a duty to make sure that Children’s Services were as effective as possible with the resources available.

When the consultation started, Mr Whyte e-mailed all Members with details of the consultation and invited them to submit any questions.

All Member briefings were unfortunately poorly attended.

Members had the opportunity to present information on the Early Help Review at Local Area Forums.

• Response to Point 5:

Mr Whyte reiterated that workers had the discretion to meet in a place that would be agreed by the families.

• Response to Point 6:

Under the new model, families would engage with one professional rather than speaking to a number of staff at different agencies to receive support.

• Response to Point 7:

From mid-October Mr Whyte authorised formal fact-finding discussions with a number of sites, including schools, to consider how the Local Authority might make better use of the Children’s Centre sites and service provided. 

Cabinet report recommendation 2 was a direct result of the consultation process.

• Response to Point 8:

It was acknowledged that the initial consultation document was too high-level about the proposed outcomes and this was clarified later in the second stage.

The design of the new Early Help model would make it easier for workers to engage with families in areas of deprivation.

• Response to Point 9:

The consultation responses showed the importance people place on buildings as focal points for communities. The Early Help model was not a building specific service and would make use of community facilities.

The Cabinet decision authorised discussions over the next 6 months to explore how buildings could be re-purposed.

• Response to Point 3:  While it was accepted that the consultation could have been clearer, it was evident from the representations received from the press and members of the public that there was an overall understanding of the proposals.

Mr Whyte confirmed that he was confident that the consultation process was robust and representative of the public’s views. Mr Whyte reiterated the importance of recommendation 2 in the Cabinet report from 8 January 2018 that said that discussions would be held with key stake holders in relation to the utilisation of the Children’s Centre buildings. 

An in depth discussion took place regarding the work that had been done to engage the public in the consultation process, in particular with low-engagement families.

Mr Dart referred Members to page 10 of the consultation report which explained the actions taken to ensure maximum engagement.  This included promotion through the Children’s Centres, Buckinghamshire Family Information Service, Schools and published articles.  Mr Dart went on to explain that:

• In terms of the 2 phases of the consultation and the subsequent responses, the consultation report articulated the differences between the levels of agreement. Additionally Local Government Association guidance on how local authorities consult advised about evolving the consultation if required.

An in depth discussion took place in relation to engagement with the Local Area Forums. During which it was noted that all Members were contacted and as such the Local Area Forum Chairmen would have had the opportunity to present the consultation to the Forums. It was noted that the timing of the consultation meant that the information would not have been provided to all Local Area Forums.

In response to questioning, Mr P Dart went into further detail about the Local Government Association guidance on running a good consultation and the steps taken in order to ensure compliance with this guidance.

An in depth discussion took place on the efforts that went in to ensuring that respondents at the first stage were contacted at the second stage to inform them of the new information and to encourage them to respond again.

It was confirmed that all recipients on the mailing list were emailed at both stages.  The following points were made:

• The public’s awareness and the response to the consultation in comparison with the number of signatures on the ‘Save Buckinghamshire's Children's Centres’ petition.

• Attendance levels at briefings and engagement in relation to the consultation.
• The best practice of at least 15 other Local Authorities was evaluated in order to achieve the best coverage from the hubs and decide on the location and the number. The initial number of 9 hubs was not definitive and Mr Whyte would be guided by officers should this require further review.

Mr T Vouyioukas informed the Committee that the Early Help models that had been evaluated as part of the compare and contrast exercise had taken into consideration statutory guidance written in April 2014 which talked about targeted interventions for families with the highest need. Although the current Children’s Centres were highly regarded they were not necessarily offering a targeted service to those families who needed support the most. 

The Chairman thanked Mr Whyte and his supporting officers for their presentation and response to Members’ questions.