Agenda item

(To receive a report from Debbie Barnes, Executive Director for Children's Services which provides the Committee with an update on the savings proposals in the Children's Services budget for 2016/17 and anticipated cost pressures for 2016/17 and beyond)

Consideration was given to a report which provided an update to the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee on the saving proposals in the Children's Services budget for 2016/17 and anticipated cost pressures for 2016/17 and beyond.  It was clarified that these proposals had come before this Committee in November 2015, and this report was a reminder of the savings which had been agreed and implemented.

The Committee received a presentation which provided members with more detailed information in relation to the following budget areas:

·         Readiness for School

·         Learn and Achieve

·         Readiness for Adult Life

·         Children are Safe and Healthy

·         Cost Pressures

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and presentation, and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was queried whether the government covered the cost of the 67 Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children (UASC) as it was listed as a zero value in the budget table.  Members were advised that young people who came into the country and were assessed as being under 18 and without a guardian were the responsibility of the State.  The numbers did vary, but on any given day there would be between 40 -70 UASC in the care of Lincolnshire County Council.  The authority did receive a grant from the government, which did cover the costs of supported accommodation for over 16's.  Children assessed as under the age of 16 would be placed in foster care.  The issues arose with those children under 16 who had complex needs.  However, officers currently thought that caring for these children was cost neutral for the authority, but it was not known how this could change in the future if the needs of the cohort were different.  Members were assured that officers were committed to continually reviewing this situation.

·         Whether children with Special Guardianship Orders (SGO's) transitioned to adult care would depend on their needs, such as if they had mental health issues or a disability.  However, if a child had an Education, Health and Care plan in place, they would be transitioned in accordance with their plan.  Members were advised that case law in relation to SGO's meant that children which were subject to a SGO tended to be younger and that it would be quite a few years before transition to adult care would be required for those with a SGO.

·         It was commented that investing in preventative services for children was the ultimate invest to save option, as well as being morally the right thing to do.

·         It was queried whether there was any way of measuring the impact of the introduction of signposting in place of services such as early health or careers.  Members were advised that in relation to NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training), those groups of young people who were classed as vulnerable were measured so data was collected on NEET via vulnerable group.  It was too early to see whether losing the careers guidance service was having an impact but it may encourage schools to increase their offer in relation to careers.  Removing careers guidance from schools was a risk, and this was acknowledged, but the council was now making decisions about 'least worst' proposals.

·         It was acknowledged that capacity in terms of sector led work was a concern.  Lincolnshire was seeing a growth in schools that wanted to be part of multi-academy sites or teaching schools, and they were working really well together, but it was recognised that there was a gap on the east coast.  97% of schools had joined the Lincolnshire Learning Partnership.  Schools were undertaking peer reviews and engaging with the local authority on the peer reviews.

·         There was a challenge with small rural schools in Lincolnshire, and there was an opportunity for them to work in collaboration.  It was no longer desirable for schools in Lincolnshire to stand alone and work in isolation.  It had been slow progress but it was reported that now a tipping point had been reached and people were seeing it as something different, there was a need to sustain the momentum.

·         It was queried what the effect of budget savings had been on staff, such as the number of compulsory redundancies and the effect of these redundancies on the remaining staff.  It was reported that the most significant redundancies were in the Careers Guidance service.  It was thought that there were about 70 compulsory redundancies, but they were not all full-time.  It was also noted that the costs of these redundancies were met from the corporate redundancy budget, not the Children's Services budget.  The Director agreed to send out details of all redundancies after the meeting.  Members were advised that morale was positive.  Management had worked hard to ensure that the workload which was left behind was manageable for staff, and also there had been a lot of work on staff engagement to ensure that management team were visible.

·         There were currently no plans to undertake impact assessments around previous savings.

·         In relation to the supported accommodation contract, it was reported that Public Health used to have responsibility for all supported housing in Lincolnshire.  The contract was set up so that the provider managed which people they would take.  However, the authority believed that it should decide who was more suited to supported accommodation and contracts re-tendered to that effect.

·         It was queried whether there was anything which could be done to challenge the courts if the authority felt that the wrong decision had been made.  Members were advised that there were avenues which could be pursued if it was felt this was the case, but it was not a common situation.

·         Concerns were raised that the impacts of making cuts were not always captured.

RESOLVED

That the comments made in relation to the current position of the 2016/17 saving proposals for Children's Services and anticipated cost pressures for 2016/17 and beyond be noted.