Agenda item

Provisional item depending on the discussion at the Cabinet meeting.

Mr Roger Gough, Cabinet Member for Corporate Support Services and Performance Management and Ms Katherine Kerswell, Group Managing Director have been invited to attend the meeting between 3.15pm and 3.45pm to answer Members’ questions on this item. 

Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Corporate Support Services and Performance Management, Ms K Kerswell, Group Managing Director, Mrs S Garton, County Performance And Evaluation Manager, Mr R Fitzgerald, Performance Monitoring Officer, Mr N Chard, Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste, Mr J Burr, Director of Kent Highway Services, Ms C Mckenzie, Greener Kent Manager, Mrs J Whittle, Deputy Cabinet Member For Children, Families & Education and Ms R Turner, Managing Director Children, Families & Education were present for this item.

(1) It was confirmed that each of the elements of the report was scheduled to go the relevant Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and this would be the practice henceforth.

(2) A Member made the point that although the Red Amber Green (RAG) system was useful, the standard by which each rating was determined could change over time and made historical and contextual comparison difficult. It was pointed out that if a position was restated it was possible to restate the historical position and there were also objective criteria that could be used comparative purposes. Furthermore it was emphasised that although the RAG system gave a good starting point, the Group Managing Director’s report, each individual Managing Director’s report and the running commentary on each of the figures were also important context, particularly as there may have been progress made in one particular area or it may be representative of the national position.

(3) The Chairman recommended the Fire Authority report as a good model, since it has been established for a number of years and provided good comparator data from other Authorities along with contextual information. Mrs Garton pointed out that the covering report did contain areas that would be looked at in the future which included comparator groups as well as making graphs easier to read. In response to a query about the accuracy of the data provided, Mrs Garton responded that the section on Data Quality in the covering report contained detail around this point, as well as the source of national data.

(4) The report represented an overview pulled together by the Chief Executive’s Department (CED), but the data came from the Directorates and the individual commentaries were signed off by Senior Management Teams (SMTs) in each Directorate, although it did also refer to national data. Members expressed a desire to be able to scrutinise the report at POSCs in the future, and asked that if this was the case, it was ensured the timing of publication facilitated this.

CO2 emissions from KCC estate

(5) It was explained that 70% of energy use took place in the school estate, and that schools energy usage had increased by 50%, particularly due to the increased use of ICT. However, across the whole KCC estate, CO2 emissions had fallen by 4% over the last 6 years. Furthermore there had been an increase in the physical estate with more air conditioning being used, higher specification lighting and a growth in ICT use in schools, and longer opening hours. There needed to be a step change in how the Council funded energy management and capital investment in the estate and there would be a report on this later in the autumn.

(6) It was asked if there was investment of the superannuation fund in the use of renewable energy in the corporate estate or in schools, particularly since the Council was allowed to sell power to the National Grid. The officer responded that there were risks and issues as well as benefits, and that the Council was currently looking at the feeding tariff as well as ways of funding the investments and had been approached by a number of companies. The various risks and are issues were currently being looked at to formulate an strategy, particularly as individual schools are already starting to be approached by companies.

Routine highways repairs

(7) The question was raised why, with all the additional investment, this indicator had gone from amber to red. The response was that safety repairs undertaken as part of the ‘find and fix’ programme, planned repairs and those identified by highways inspectors had not influenced this indicator. Instead, performance represented on this graph depicted the percentage of small, non-safety repairs phoned in by the public that had been cleared on a month by month basis.

(8) A further question was asked about Average Time to Repair Potholes (days), regarding the fact that there had been a steep rise in June, yet the RAG had remained at amber. This was because a backlog of pothole repairs had recently been cleared, and as longstanding repairs were carried out this increased the average repair time.  

Children's Social Services - Referrals and Social Worker Vacancies – Qualified Case Workers

(9) The two items Children’s Social Services - Referrals and Social Worker Vacancies – Qualified Case Workers were discussed together, in conjunction with the recent Ofsted letter which followed the unannounced inspection of contact, referral and assessment arrangements with KCC children’s services, due to the fact that both were closely related to the points raised in the letter

(10) It was noted that the Cabinet Member would continue to provide details of Ofsted feedback and a response to the safeguarding report to October County Council, and would also report to the Vulnerable Children POSC. CFE were currently preparing for Ofsted’s annual judgement of children’s services performance in December.

(11) The Ofsted letter was distributed to all Members, who were reminded that the letter should be read in conjunction with the statement released by Mrs Hohler on the results of the inspection. The letter identified areas of strength, many areas that were satisfactory, some areas for development and one area for priority action based upon a small number of referrals not dealt with in an appropriate timescale. It was noted that the Director for Specialist Children’s Services had taken immediate action to ensure that these were dealt with and the service also conducted an internal audit.

(12) Members endorsed the view that Kent’s social workers undertook a very valuable job under difficult circumstances, and deserved recognition and support. A member also made the point that a child had not been harmed as a result of the actions identified in the Ofsted report as being in need of addressing.

(13) It was noted that referrals to Children Social Services were continuing to increase and there was also a 20% vacancy rate in social workers, which was a nationwide issue. Other Councils had received similar judgements due to a lack of capacity (evidence of which could be made available to members), and the Government had commissioned Professor Eileen Munro to carry out a national review of Child Protection. CFE faced three key issues: recruitment and retention, bureaucracy faced by social workers and the negative perception of the profession in the media.

(14) Children, Families and Education (CFE) had put in place initiatives to tackle social worker vacancies and other pressures, including:

-         working with partners across Kent to manage number of referrals and to ensure early intervention.

-         appointing 12 preventative services managers to manage demand and increase capacity

-         convening an improvement team involving members, officers and partners

-         ensuring rotation of staff between functions to reduce burnout

-         recruiting additional social workers from Europe and the United States

(15) There were areas that could be looked at to increase efficiency, including reducing high cost placements, working with other councils to drive down costs and more use of call-off contracts, as well as looking at policy areas, such as the use of independent fostering agencies and raising awareness in communities to reduce the number of referrals. Ms Turner stressed that Kent had less looked-after children than its neighbours and comparators, but did have a higher proportion of child protection cases.

(16) In response to a query on what actions had been put in place in the shorter term it was stated that the Director for Specialist Children’s Services had met with operational managers and reiterated minimum standards, including having a manual tracking system. There had also been an appraisal of the contact and assessment service to ensure referrals were being tracked and processed, and staff had been asked to come up with an improvement and development plan and identify what resources were required to action it. In response to a specific area identified in the Ofsted report, there was also a need to evidence decision-making more effectively.

(17) A member noted the difficulty in delivering Government targets without adequate funding, which was likely to worsen with impending cuts, and suggested CFE should make representations to Government. It was unclear whether the budget would be protected going forward, but more would be known after the CSR in October. Ms Turner acknowledged the political nature of the resourcing issue, and confirmed that CFE were working with limited funds under more regulation, which had led to professionals being burdened with administration. Similar modernisation which had taken place in education to address this had yet to happen in the social care arena e.g. allowing social work assistants to take on casework under the supervision and support of a qualified social worker.  

(18) On a specific query around a child protection referral that was still waiting to be actioned after a month, Ms Turner responded that teams were having to make judgements and prioritise cases and might not always comply with the seven working day timescale.

(19) Responding to a specific query about the difference in qualifications between social workers from the UK and abroad, Ms Turner responded that this was something that was checked prior to appointment.

(20) RESOLVED: that the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee:

(21) Thank the Members and officers present for this item for attending the meeting and answering Member’s questions.

(22) Welcome the assurance that the relevant parts of the Core Monitoring Report would be submitted to the Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committees at the most appropriate time, i.e. during the meetings cycle immediately after the report has been considered by the Cabinet.

(23) Ask the Cabinet Member to examine the format of the performance monitoring reports submitted to the Kent and Medway Fire and Rescue Authority, as it was felt that these reports were particularly clear and helpful to Members, to see if any improvements could be made in the format of the Core Monitoring Reports.

(24) Ask the Managing Director, Children Families and Education to ensure that the Council’s responses to the areas for development and areas for priority action, contained in the letter from Ofsted dated 9 September 2010, were included within the report due to be considered by the County Council on safeguarding, so that they could be debated by all Members.

(25) Ask that comparative information on Ofsted’s assessment of safeguarding in other Councils be supplied to Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee Members.

(26) Ask that the opportunity be made available to scrutinise elements of the Core Monitoring report at Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committees in the future, and that the timetable for publication facilitated this.