Cabinet Member decisions

Reason for the decision:

The Decision is necessary to clarify that KCC, as the responsible Local Authority for the Kent SACRE, maintains the membership arrangements in full compliance with the relevant national legislation.

 

Crucial to this particular consideration is that the legislation as it stands prohibits the inclusion of Humanist representatives as appointed voting members within Group A.  Updated guidance on the matter has been issued by Government in Wales but this does not apply in England so until legislative change updates the position, KCC is seeking to make the eligibility situation clear via this decision.

 

The decision will not prevent the inclusion of Humanists or other relevant groups within SACRE as observers or non-voting co-optees (such arrangements for the welcoming of observers or co-optees are matters for determination by SACRE, subject to advice from the Local Authority).

 

 

Background:

SACRE sits as an outside body, with responsibilities relating to advising the local authority and education providers regarding the teaching of religious education.  It draws membership from a range of people, with the membership separated into specific sections (with each section having one vote at full meetings of the SACRE).

 

(a)      Christian denominations (other than the Church of England) and other denominations and religions as in the opinion of the Authority reflect the principal religious traditions in Kent. The number of representatives approved under the category shall, so far as is consistent with the efficient discharge of this group’s functions, reflect broadly the proportionate strength of that denomination or religion in the area.

 

(b)      The Church of England

 

(c)       Teacher Associations having regard to local circumstances.

 

(d)      The Local Authority

 

KCC is responsible for considering the appropriate representation for Group (a) – Christian denominations and other denominations and religions.  Such consideration may be given from time to time as the Local Authority deems necessary and in response to specific requests for updates to representation.

 

 

Options (other options considered but discarded):

KCC could have sought to include Humanism with Group A but doing so would have been contrary to law.

 

KCC could have continued applying standing membership arrangements, based on the legislation, without specific decision-making but this was discarded as it is helpful to update compliance with long standing legislation to confirm ongoing arrangements and provide more recent authority for local decision-making.

 

Note - Co-optee arrangements for management via SACRE have already been explored for relevant groups and will continue to be considered at the local level.

 

How the proposed decision supports the Interim Strategic Plan:

Appropriate management and delivery of SACRE business is a statutory requirement that contributes towards effective education in Kent.  This overarching education element contributes to economic development and longer-term service demand management through improving outcomes for young people at an early stage.

 

The decision is necessary to ensure continued compliant organisation of SACRE.

 

As Leader of the Council, I agree to;

a)    APPROVE the current Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education (SACRE) membership arrangements without change;

b)    NOTE that the current legislation prohibits the inclusion of Humanist representatives within Group A of SACRE Membership; and

c)    Delegate authority to the Democratic Services Manager to take relevant actions, including but not limited to entering into contracts or other legal agreements, as necessary to implement the decision.

Proposed decision –

 

The Cabinet Member for Education and Skills is asked to agree to alter the school transport assessment process by removing the need for mainstream pupils to apply for free school transport, and instead, proactively contacting parents to inform them that their child’s eligibility status. This will allow Fair Access to allocate a significantly larger proportion of staff capacity to the more complex SEN assessment work. The proposed changes will have no impact on transport eligibility criteria, so will have no material impact on KCC’s Transport Policy.

 

1.     Introduction

 

1.1   The Transport Eligibility Team situated within Fair Access has a duty to assess SEN and mainstream pupil applications for entitlement for free school transport, based on KCC’s transport eligibility criteria. The team process applications throughout the year, but receives its most significant workload between March and September in the lead up to the new academic year.

 

1.2   Following the well-publicised issues surrounding the SEN transport retendering exercise in February 2022, parental faith the KCC’s SEN transport offer has been significantly damaged. Parents and Members have indicated an expectation that preparations for September 2022 must proceed without major issue to both alleviate current concerns and evidence that lessons have been learnt and processes have been strengthened.

 

1.3   The transport sector is experiencing a national crisis as the combined effects for COVID 19, volatility in the fuel prices and driver availability take hold. As such, KCC faces one of its most challenging years in successfully fulfilling its statutory duty to provide free school transport to all entitled scholars. Initiatives are underway to increase market capacity and so are not included in the scope of this paper.

 

1.4   To add to these challenges, two of Transport Eligibility’s most experienced Transport Assistants have secured alternative employment, leaving the team’s 5 FTE structure depleted. While recruitment exercises are nearing completion, the loss of experience within the team will have a detrimental impact to its potential output while training is completed.

 

1.5   Finally, the ongoing increase in EHCP numbers continue to create significant pressures within the team in its current form.

 

2.   Proposal

 

2.1   Fair Access has made considerable improvements in recent years to the processes used to identify pupils that are eligible for free school transport. As a result of these improvements, manual assessment of mainstream cases are no longer required and KCC’s system, making use of local GIS data, automatically identifies a child’s nearest school and confirms to Officers whether it is over the required statutory distance. While SEN transport assessment has benefited from these improvements, it will never be possible to fully automate these processes as Officer assessment will always be required to accommodate each child’s individual need.

 

2.2   Alongside these improvements, Members have raised concerns with Fair Access about the perceived lack of transparency in the transport entitlement process at the point of application for school places. While parents can contact Transport Eligibility for support in this area, this still creates a barrier that Members (particularly those in the Transport Regulation Committee) have requested be improved.

 

2.3   As a result, Fair Access has been working with software providers to make the automated assessment mechanisms parent facing, so that they gain an indication of their child’s free school transport entitlement at the point of application for a school place. These changes will require significant adaptation of systems, so KCC is reliant on investment by software suppliers to complete this work. While this development is progressing, it has been delayed significantly as a result of the impact of COVID, and so is not expected to be available for at least another 18-24 months.

 

2.4   While these delays are frustrating, the available processes and data do allow for KCC to implement a mid-point solution by removing the need for mainstream pupils to apply for free school transport, but rather, proactively contact parents to inform them that their child is eligible. This would remove the vast majority of work associated with the mainstream process during the team’s busiest period, which would allow significantly more capacity to be allocated to the completion of SEN applications.

 

2.5   Under normal circumstances, this type of change would be communicated to parents before the application window for free school transport had opened, at the point of application for free school places, however, with careful communication (including involvement with Kent PACT to ensure SEN parents understand how these changes benefit their child’s application), there is no barrier to make this change as a response to the increased pressure in SEN entitlement assessment. It does mean, however, that a decision must be made quickly, and parents informed of the change in application process as close to the end of May as possible. 

 

2.6   The proposal is also dependent on the necessary changes being made to Public Transport’s Routewise transport database and Cantium provided application processes to allow data from eligible and ineligible pupils to be imported without the need for Transport Eligibility staff to manually input via normal methods. Discussions are underway to ensure this import process can be implemented in time, but will potentially rely on Public Transport liaising with their software supplier and Cantium providing suitable resources.

 

3.     Current Process

•              Mainstream parents are informed of the child’s offered Secondary school on 1 March and parents of SEN pupils are informed from mid-February (although offers continue to be made to date).

•       All parents are advised of the need to apply for transport, via KCC’s online application portal.

•       Parents advised that applications for the forthcoming academic year will not be processed until the start of May to allow current year applications to be prioritised, however, applications are processed in date order once work begins.

 

Where a child is assessed as eligible:

•       Parent emailed application outcome.

•       Pupil details manually entered into Routewise database to allow Public Transport to begin making arrangements to place the child in a suitable vehicle.

•       Public Transport contact the parent with details of provided transport

 

Where a child is assessed as ineligible:

•       Parent emailed application outcome and advised of their right for first stage of appeals process

•       If parent makes use of right of appeal a Senior Officer manually reviews the case to ensure assessment has been completed correctly, taking into account any new information provided by the applicant.

•       If child can now be assessed as eligible, see process above. If a child remains ineligible, parent contacted with details of the decision and advised of their right for second stage of appeals process

•       If parent makes use of second right of appeal, Democratic Services arranges a panel of Transport Regulation Committee Appeals Panel members to review the case. Transport Eligibility Officer present why it has not been possible to offer transport

•       If the child can now be assessed as eligible, see process above. If a child remains ineligible, parent advised of their right to refer the case to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsmen.

 

4.     Proposed process

 

4.1   The proposed changes will be limited to the Secondary Transfer mainstream pupils only, as this accounts for the majority of mainstream assessment in this period. Inclusion of Primary aged pupils is likely to increase parental interest in school transport at an earlier age, which is not currently the norm.

 

4.2   Initial parental contact will make clear that the assessment is based on the school the child was given on National Offer Day. Due to limitations in availability of data, it will not be possible automatically assess a child against low-income criteria, or whether the route is hazardous, so parents will be given an opportunity to submit an application and evidence for further consideration where necessary.

 

4.3   Where a parent is not eligible for free school transport and does not intend to apply under one of the additional categories above, they will be advised that they retain access to both stages of the appeals process to ensure that KCC continues to fulfil its legal duties in this area.

 

4.4   It will be necessary for mainstream parents to be advised of the changes in assessment process this year, but equally for SEN families to be advised that these changes are being made in an effort to ensure their applications can be prioritised and processed more quickly. Without this assurance, it could be misconstrued that KCC is simply improving mainstream applications processes without making similar adjustments for SEN children. Planned improvements to the assessment process will likely allow automation of SEN transport eligibility in the future but will require significant involvement from SEN colleagues to ensure the process is sustainable.

 

4.5   The revised process would work as follows:

 

Mainstream Secondary families contacted and advised of their child’s free school transport entitlement status.

 

Where a child is assessed as eligible:

•       Parents asked to confirm that transport is required and provided an opportunity to submit additional transport related data items including a photo of their child.

•       Pupil data imported into Routewise in batches

•       Public Transport contact the parent with details of provided transport

 

Where a child is assessed as ineligible and parent cannot apply under low income or hazardous route criteria:

•       Pupil data imported into Routewise in batches

•       Parent given an opportunity to submit a Stage one appeal for Officer review and include any additional information about low income status or hazardous route. Senior Officer reviews the case to ensure assessment has been competed correctly.

•       If child can now be assessed as eligible, see process above. If a child remains ineligible, parent contacted with details of the decision and advised of their right for second stage of appeals process

•       If parent makes use of second right of appeal, Democratic Services arranges a panel of Transport Regulation Committee Appeals Panel members to review the case. Transport Eligibility Officer present why it has not been possible to offer transport

•       If the child can now be assessed as eligible, see process above. If a child remains ineligible, parent advised of their right to refer the case to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsmen.

4.     Proposed process

 

4.1   The proposed changes will be limited to the Secondary Transfer mainstream pupils only, as this accounts for the majority of mainstream assessment in this period. Inclusion of Primary aged pupils is likely to increase parental interest in school transport at an earlier age, which is not currently the norm.

 

4.2   Initial parental contact will make clear that the assessment is based on the school the child was given on National Offer Day. Due to limitations in availability of data, it will not be possible automatically assess a child against low-income criteria, or whether the route is hazardous, so parents will be given an opportunity to submit an application and evidence for further consideration where necessary.

 

4.3   Where a parent is not eligible for free school transport and does not intend to apply under one of the additional categories above, they will be advised that they retain access to both stages of the appeals process to ensure that KCC continues to fulfil its legal duties in this area.

 

4.4   It will be necessary for mainstream parents to be advised of the changes in assessment process this year, but equally for SEN families to be advised that these changes are being made in an effort to ensure their applications can be prioritised and processed more quickly. Without this assurance, it could be misconstrued that KCC is simply improving mainstream applications processes without making similar adjustments for SEN children. Planned improvements to the assessment process will likely allow automation of SEN transport eligibility in the future but will require significant involvement from SEN colleagues to ensure the process is sustainable.

 

4.5   The revised process would work as follows:

 

Mainstream Secondary families contacted and advised of their child’s free school transport entitlement status.

 

Where a child is assessed as eligible:

•       Parents asked to confirm that transport is required and provided an opportunity to submit additional transport related data items including a photo of their child.

•       Pupil data imported into Routewise in batches

•       Public Transport contact the parent with details of provided transport

 

Where a child is assessed as ineligible and parent cannot apply under low income or hazardous route criteria:

•       Pupil data imported into Routewise in batches

•       Parent given an opportunity to submit a Stage one appeal for Officer review and include any additional information about low income status or hazardous route. Senior Officer reviews the case to ensure assessment has been competed correctly.

•       If child can now be assessed as eligible, see process above. If a child remains ineligible, parent contacted with details of the decision and advised of their right for second stage of appeals process

•       If parent makes use of second right of appeal, Democratic Services arranges a panel of Transport Regulation Committee Appeals Panel members to review the case. Transport Eligibility Officer present why it has not been possible to offer transport

•       If the child can now be assessed as eligible, see process above. If a child remains ineligible, parent advised of their right to refer the case to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsmen.

 

5.     Financial Implications

 

5.1   As the main deciding factor for transport entitlement in Secondary Transfer is a parent’s expression of school preferences, it is difficult to predict with certainty what financial impact will result in an automatic confirmation of a child’s transport eligibility. The main risk associated with automatic confirmation is the potential for parents who would otherwise fail to submit a transport application being made aware that a free school transport option is available. This could inflate the number of eligible pupils, with an equivalent increase in mainstream transport budgets.

 

5.2   The following table shows the total number of pupils who are eligible for free school transport compared to the applications received and their outcomes. Data is limited to applications that are submitted up to the end of July in the preceding academic year, so are likely to slightly under-represent the total number of pupils who ultimately claim transport they are entitled to:

 

 

Academic Year	Eligible Pupils identified through automation	Assessed Eligible following application	Assessed Ineligible following application	Total Applications
2021-22	1518	820 (54%)	682	1502
2020-21	1628	744 (45%)	531	1275
2019-20	1454	N/A	N/A	N/A
2018-19	1610	1116 (69%)	859	1975

 

 

5.3   COVID has had an unprecedented impact on the transport sector and governmental advice during the application window for 2020-21 and 2021-22 academic years was to minimise the use of public transport as much as possible. These years’ data are therefore not indicative of normal application patterns and so should not be used. Unfortunately, due to limitations in availability of data, it is not possible to report on 2019-20. The last viable year’s data suggests that roughly 70% of eligible pupils claim the transport they are entitled to.

 

5.4   This academic year, 1417 have been identified as being entitled to free school transport within the Secondary Transfer cohort, which leaves a potential for around additional 425 pupils to claim free school transport if all families accept the offer. The current average annual cost for transport for eligible pupils is £700, resulting in a potential increase of £297k although this total figure is unlikely to be realised as a number of parents will continue to prefer to make their own arrangements to transport their child to school. Similarly, parental application rates could be higher this year as they are outside of KCC’s direct control, and KCC has a legal duty to provide school transport to all identified entitled scholars.

 

5.5   The total spend on Mainstream under 16 travel has remained reasonably static since 2017-18, a reflection of the numbers travelling. The mainstream school transport budget is reported alongside the SEN school transport budget in the monitoring reports. For 2022-23 the Mainstream School Budget is £6,551m (this includes an allowance for inflation of £0.228m).

 

Financial Year	Total Spend £’000s	Snapshot count January
2017-18	£6,112	5,912
2018-19	£6,173	5,732
2019-20	£6,001	5,437
2020-21	£4,760 (COVID)	5,328
2021-22	£6,079	5,459
2022-23	£6,551 (BUDGET)	5,650

 

5.6   The MTFP did not include any allowance for potential higher number of applications resulting from changes in process and potentially increased awareness. Therefore, this is a funding risk and will need to be considered equivalent to a service investment or planned overspend. However, it should be noted that the wider planned procedural improvements to the School Admissions application process, outlined in Section 2.3, which will highlight pupil entitlement to free school transport much earlier in the process would have had the same effect and therefore this proposal would bring forward the financial impact of these changes. 

 

Staffing Impact

5.7   If significant procedural changes are not made to the Transport Eligibility Team to accommodate the pressures detailed above, it would be necessary to increase overall staffing capacity instead. The team has made significant efficiencies to the processes over the years that has meant while KCC has seen a 100% increase in the number of pupils with an EHCP, the Transport Eligibility Team has seen no increase in staffing capacity.

 

5.8   It is estimated the procedural changes included within this proposal would free up an equivalent of 2 FTE KR5 Transport Assistants (c £54k).  However, it is also expected to avoid further increases in officers required to deal with higher applications that were expected from procedural improvements to the School Admissions application process outlined in Section 2.3.

 

5.9   It is proposed these posts are diverted to support the increasing number of SEN applications.

 

5.10 An alternative approach would be to retain the current process for mainstream applications and instead recruit further staff to the transport eligibility team to meet the increasing demand from SEN. However, it should be noted that an increase in staff at this late stage is unlikely to provide sufficient additional capacity before September because of recruitment timescales and fail to mitigate against the loss of expertise in the current group. Reduction of mainstream assessment duties will allow the remaining experienced staff to prioritise SEN applications, while newer staff members can support with more administrative functions while their skillset is developed.

 

5.11 One further unspecified financial risk of inaction are the combined costs of another public failure in relation to SEN transport, with the potential for further internal audit exercises or judicial review.

 

6.     Legal Implications

 

6.1   As these changes are as a result of the recent unexpected issues within SEN transport, they did not form a part of KCC’s published guidance to parents this year. While current advice indicates that mainstream parents should submit an application for consideration for free school transport, proposed changes would still fulfil KCC’s duties in allowing an assessment for free school transport to take place, and to provide parents with access to suitable appeals processes. Parents will retain the right to submit an application if they wish, so this adjustment could be considered as an additional supportive step, rather than a major deviation from existing processes.

 

6.2   Proposed changes will have no impact on transport eligibility criteria, so will have no material impact on KCC’s Transport Policy.

 

6.3   In the event that processes and staffing levels remain unchanged, there remains increased risk that KCC will fail in its duty to identify pupils eligible for free school transport within reasonable timescales, with the resultant further reputational damage and erosion of parental faith when school transport is not available in September.

 

7.     Governance

 

7.1   The level of public interest in School Transport, combined with the need to consider potential financial implications involved, indicate that this proposal merits a formal Executive Decision to confirm official approval.

7.2   As the potential impact on the budget is less than £1m and the proposal would not have a significant impact on a significant number of people living in multiple Divisions, it is viable to progress this matter as a non-Key but still significant Cabinet Member Decision.  These are decisions which do not meet the Key Decision criteria but are still deemed suitable for Cabinet Member approval for a variety of reasons (see s12.11 & 12.12 of the Constitution).

 

7.3   The total decision timeframe, providing no valid call-in is received, is 11 clear working days between initial FED & PROD publication and implementation.  As the decision may be taken prior to the next relevant Cabinet Committee, a report would need to be submitted to the next meeting explaining the reasons for the decision being taken without prior Committee consideration.

 

7.4   The above route would allow for the formal evidencing of appropriate Executive Member oversight, accountability and political decision-making without making use of legal urgency procedures.

 

8.     Conclusions

 

8.1   The proposed adaptation to this year’s transport application process offers an opportunity to significantly increase the department’s capacity to process SEN transport applications in a timely fashion. Given the potential financial implications of this change, however, it is necessary for the Cabinet Member for Education and Skills and Director of Education to be in agreement that it is a proportionate and necessary change.

 

 

 

 

As Cabinet Member for Education and Skills, I agree to:

 

alter the secondary school transport assessment process by removing the need for pupils transferring to secondary mainstream to apply for free school transport, and instead, proactively contact parents to inform them of their child’s eligibility status; and

 

delegate authority to the Corporate Director CYPE to take relevant actions, including but not limited to entering into contracts or other legal agreements, as required to implement this decision.

 

Reason(s) for decision:

It has been identified, in response to a complaint, that the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) may have issued statutory guidance that conflicts with primary legislation in relation to this issue, albeit this appears to have been subsequently clarified by DHSC. The Authority has been applying the statutory guidance and not the relevant legislation. Kent County Council’s Adult Social Care Charging Policy for homecare and other non-residential services must comply with the primary legislation and it is therefore necessary to fully review and update the Adult Social Care Charging Policy to bring it in line with the primary legislation.

 

Financial Implications:

The annual cost to the Authority is estimated to be £280k, resulting from lost income from those people who have not had the disregard correctly applied. The cost of £280k in 2022-23 would be reported in budget monitoring and would not necessitate a substantive amendment to the budget. As part of the necessary financial arrangements required to implement this policy, as noted in the decision, the Authority will recommend making an appropriate financial provision for any prior year costs that may arise from the policy change. This will be presented along with other provision requirements to Cabinet in June 2022 as part of the Revenue Outturn report. Subject to further formal governance processes, including appropriate consultation and relevant Executive Decision making, there is scope for the Policy application to be amended to address undercharging and bring all charges in line with the legislation and correct policy approach. This would involve an increase in the charging for some people and therefore could result in an estimated £290k per annum income from year 2023/24 – this sum excludes any effects of increasing debt which may arise should the relevant policy changes be given effect in future. These arrangements would all be subject to future activity and do not impact on the current decision but are highlighted for context and to indicate future financial considerations for longer term management of this issue.

 

 

As Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health, I

a)    APPROVE the amended Adult Social Care Charging Policy;

b)    APPROVE the funding arrangements required to implement the updated policy; and

c)    DELEGATE authority to the Corporate Director Adult Social Care and Health to take relevant actions, including keeping the policy updated as necessary and to implement it in line with the statutory duties.

Reason for the decision:

The current Positive Behavioural Support Framework for bespoke service development and delivery for people with complex needs, including those with learning disabilities and autistic people is due to end on 30 October 2022.

 

There are a significant number of individuals who are currently referred to or waiting for a referral for placement through the Positive Behavioural Support Service. Therefore, there is a requirement for a new 4 year open framework, with a potential of increasing the number of providers available.

 

Experience of challenges within the current Care and Support in the Home market providing support for those with the most individual needs, shows the need to expand access to this framework for bespoke services across all areas of Adult Social Care to potentially include people with Dementia.

 

As Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health, I

a)    APPROVE: The procurement for a new Bespoke Support Service for people with complex needs; and

b)    DELEGATE authority to the Corporate Director, Adult Social Care and Health to take relevant actions and consult with the Corporate Director of Children, Young People and Education, as required to facilitate procurement activity with regard to the Bespoke Support Service.

Proposed Decision:

To agree to provide delegated authority to the Corporate Director of Growth, Environment and Transport to award a contract for environmental remediation works at North Farm Closed Landfill Site.

 

Background:

Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA90), Kent County Council (KCC) is responsible for managing the impact of its closed landfill sites on both the environment and human health.  KCC Waste Management therefore undertakes a programme of managing, control and monitoring of landfill gas and leachate waters at the North Farm closed landfill site. Environmental Monitoring Reports are updated on a rolling 18-to-24-month programme with subsequent reporting defining risks and identifying remediation works necessary.

 

Such works will include those required to be compliant with Part 2A of the EPA90 (Contaminated Land) but will also seek to provide engineered solutions to ensure the site is operated in a safe and efficient manner. At the same time ensuring best value for money in terms of liability and risk to KCC continue to be applied.

 

Environmental issues requiring attention:

Leachate: - Significant and increasing levels of Leachate (reflecting general higher rainfall volumes nationally) is produced as rainfall permeates the landfill capping materials into the waste before being collected via a series of leachate collection drainage ditches where it is collected and pumped to the Southern Water’s Wastewater Treatment Works (WWTW) off-site but close by. These arrangements cost KCC in the region of £100k annually, however recently the volumes have further increased, and it would be unlikely for these limits to be raised.

 

Landfill gas escape to atmosphere - Landfill gas is predominantly methane and carbon dioxide, both powerful greenhouse gases. To control the migration of this gas, a collection/control system, is in place with the network of collection pipes terminating at a gas flare where it is safely burnt off.  A recent audit has identified a number of age-related issues with the collection system such that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to maintain a fully functioning compliant system. Furthermore, capping soils laid when the site was closed are not able to prevent surface emissions to atmosphere across the entire site.

 

Alternatives considered and rejected:

1.            Do nothing. This is not considered to be a viable option, as there are environmental issues that need addressing.  Doing nothing has the potential for harm to the environment or human health to be realised.  In this instance, the site may then be officially classified as Contaminated Land and remediation costs imposed upon KCC.

 

2.            Install Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL) across the top of the site to minimise leachate generation and also upgrade gas collection system to help to reduce harmful greenhouse gases. Whilst there is an initial works cost to install the GCL installation this will result in lower revenue costs through savings realised by a reduction of discharging leachate to the treatment works.

 

3.            Install storage to attenuate leachate on site during heavy periods of rainfall and upgrade gas collection system. This option will also decrease the risk of KCC breaching its discharge consent, but it will not reduce revenue costs and not offer a sustainable solution to mitigate against increasing levels of rainfall.

 

The recommended Preferred Option is No.2 for the authority to award a Contract for environmental remediation works comprising installation of a GCL and upgrade of the gas collection system. This will be the most cost effective and will seek to address the environmental issues identified and reduce risk to KCC.

 

How the proposed decision meets the priority actions of Setting the Course: Kent County Council’s Interim Strategic Plan (December 2020):

The contract if awarded will meet the following priority actions:

 

• Use technology to improve efficiency and reduce cost
• Delivering our target to achieve net-zero emissions for the Kent Estate by 2030 and protect or enhance biodiversity.
• Target resource where it has the greatest impact

 

As Cabinet Member for Environment, I agree to provide delegated authority to the Corporate Director of Growth, Environment and Transport to award a contract for environmental remediation works at North Farm Closed Landfill Site.

Proposed decision –

 

Commence formal procurement activity to tender for additional Educational Psychologist capacity, award a contract and develop robust contract management for oversight of the contract performance.

 

Further information-

 

Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) services in Kent remain subject to a Written Statement of Action (WSOA) following the inspection of the Local Area in January 2019 which identified weaknesses in nine key areas. One of those areas was the ability of the Local Authority to deliver Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) in a timely manner and to an agreed quality, meeting statutory duties to provide educational psychology assessment advice for all children for whom the Local Authority was carrying out an Education, Health and Care needs assessment.

 

In July 2020, the figures indicated that only 29% of EHCPs were delivered in line with statutory timescales, a key determinant being the provision of educational psychology advice within a six week timescale.

 

In 2020, an external provider was commissioned to provide additional capacity for the educational psychology (EP) advice necessary for education, health and care (EHC) needs assessment under the duties set out in the Children and Families Act 2014. This has reduced the number of initial assessments waiting over 20 weeks and brought Kent County Council closer to meeting its statutory duty.  The volume of requests for EHC needs assessment remains high and capacity to provide EP assessment advice remains dependent on the additional capacity of locum agency EP provision.

 

The contract with the current provider ends on 30 November 2022, the proposal is to recommission a service with no break in provision with a new service in place from 1 December 2022.

 

The Council is seeking the provision of high-quality locum support to complete statutory    assessments in accordance with the template provided by the local authority and within designated time scales.  Ongoing support to the service will be provided, through the award of a contract to a third-party provider, to significantly reduce the likelihood of a future backlog.

 

 

 

 

As Cabinet Member for Integrated Children’s Services, I agree to:

A.   Scope and develop a specification for a commissioned service to provide additional capacity for the provision of Educational Psychology services

B.   Commence a procurement to tender for a service, award a contract and develop robust contract management for oversight of the contract performance.

C.   Delegate authority for the Corporate Director Children, Young People and Education, in consultation with the Cabinet Member, to award a contract and implement the Decision.