Agenda item

(Report by Mr K Abbott, Director of Resources and Planning, Ms R Turner, Managing Director, Children, Families & Education Directorate and Mrs S Hohler, Cabinet Member for Children, Families & Education)

(Mr L Christie, Leader of the Labour Group was present for this Item and was given permission to speak by the Chairman)

(1)   Members considered a report that gave an overview of the CFE restructure, consultation feedback, details of the recruitment process, service planning and model of delivery, savings made and planning for pressures ahead.

(2)   Mrs Turner introduced the report advising that the restructuring of the Children Families and Education Directorate and the review of the Local Children Services Partnerships had helped to reduce the Directorate’s budget by 10%.  After completing phases 1 and 2 the review was now in phase 3 which would be completed by the end of July. 

(3)   Members were given the opportunity to make comments and ask questions which included the following:

(4)   In response to questions that referred to page 37 regarding the Select Committee on Extended Services and page 45 on Early Years by Mr Vye, Mrs Turner explained that she wanted to assure Members that Extended Schools was still a focus that learning continued before school, after school and during the school holiday periods with a connection to family life too. There was a need to build a sustainable model with schools themselves generating that work to be kept going even in light of what may happen with the grants. The School Improvement Officers would have this in their sights.  She mentioned that support would also be given by the Family Liaison Officers and the Preventative Services Managers who would have this within their role.  Raising standards and settings within Early Years this was still a priority.

(5)   In reply to a question by Mr Smith, Mrs Hohler advised that there was agreement to reform the Members Monitoring Group on Attainment, which would allow a small cross party group of Members the opportunity to meet in private to discuss the outcomes of the OFSTED inspection reports in depth.

(6)   In reply to a question by Mr Desmoyers-Davies, Mrs Turner considered that with any process where staff were experiencing change there could be a dip in moral, which needed to be picked back up again to move things forward with following the restructure.  In managing that change there was a need to work in partnership with the Trade Unions. There was now an organisational model that was fit for purpose and more sustainable than previously with a streamlined commissioning centre and twelve local districts.  She concluded that the Directorate would be judged by the results of its services for children and young people in Kent.  Ms Turner noted Mr Desmoyers–Davies view that the process for his trade union members had been unsatisfactory.

(7)   In response to questions by Mrs Allen, Mrs Turner advised that the there would be twelve Preventative Services Managers, one per district, and their role would be the bridge between universal services that were provided for all young children and young people including; health, early years, schools, colleges and at the extreme end; safeguarding, special education, extreme disability and child protection.  They would also be managing Children Centres within their locality, Family Liaison Officers and Parent Support Advisors and a range of preventative services identifying early indicators of need.  The vision was that this role would help the Social Workers and Family Support Assistants get off the back foot, which was where they were at present with the increased demand for their services.  The twelve appointments had now been made and their names would be circulated to Members. 

(8)   With regards to the review of the Kent Children’s Trust, Ms Turner explained that the majority of the review was complete.  There was now a Strategic Board and a Commissioning Group of Chief Officers, which sat below the Strategic Board as the Executive. The establishment of twelve Local Children’s Trust Boards, that would look at the needs of children and families and linked them with the schools and other services within their districts was still being carried out and would be established from September onwards. 

(9)   In response to a question by Mr Christie, Mrs Hohler said that she categorically did not feel that the timing of the restructure had influenced schools to apply for academy status. She had received emails from headteachers who said that they were going to apply for academy status because of the financial incentive but still wanted to work with the County Council.  Mrs Hohler felt confident that KCC would retain a good working relationship with all schools.

(10)    In a follow up question, Mr Christie felt that the schools were offered more money; the CFE restructure was to save money as there was £6.2m less input into education, he suggested that Mrs Hohler’s response did not negate the fact that the restructure, which he said was financially driven had an impact on the schools decision. Ms Turner said that the restructure would yield nearly £9m in savings, which was necessary but it was delivering a much more focused level of service. Schools were use to a level of support from the local authority and schools would be getting a more focused level of support than they had before with the new structure model.

(11)    In reply to questions by the Reverend Canon Smith, Mr Cooke felt that the new structure of the CFE Directorate was fit for purpose.  He advised that there was going to be a huge opportunity to look at the way services were delivered to the public in an efficient and cost effective way whilst maintaining the level of service.  Ms Turner confirmed that the Children’s Trust Board meetings would still have the regular attendance of all partner agencies and would seek to engage, General Practitioners.

(12)    In reply to a question by Mr Sweetland, Ms Turner explained that the District and Borough Councils still had a significant role particularly in housing and leisure services.  In terms of delivery, CFE was looking at its commissioning role in the future where the district and borough councils may play a role.  Mr Cooke added that it was a matter of forging partnerships with both tiers of local authorities.

(13)    Mr Vye paid tribute to the staff in Advisory Services Kent and thanked them for all their hard work and wished them well for the future.

(14)    In response to follow up questions by Mr Vye, Mr Abbott advised that £8.367m was the savings made through the CFE restructure, which exceeded the savings in the budget referred to on page 25 of the report.  This was due to identified savings for 2011 and because there were saving identified at the end of the process of the restructure. The full savings would be known later because of protected salaries for colleagues that may have posts that in the future may be lower paid than their current role.

(15)    Ms Turner agreed to forward a hard copy of the Ofsted inspections which were published by district and reminded Mr Vye that the Members Monitoring Group would be set up to enable Members to interrogate the information in private.

(16)    RESOLVED that:

   (a) the responses to Members questions and comments be noted as detailed in paragraphs (4)-(15); and

   (b) the support of this POSC be given to the CFE Directorates new arrangements as they commence and bed down from the 1 September 2010 onwards and the report be noted.