education and skills equality &vcs analysis of medium term...

of 124

Education and Skills – Equality &VCS Analysis of Medium Term Planning Proposals

For budget proposals made as part of the medium term planning process, services are required to undertake an initial equalities

screening to assess actual or potential impact relating to equalities and / or the voluntary and community sector. A full impact analysis is

then completed in cases where the screening identifies that this is necessary.

This document contains:

Part 1: Full impact analysis documents

The following full impact analyses were completed because the initial screening identified the proposal had a high relevance to equalities

and / or the voluntary and community sector.

Home to school transport Reconfiguration of Youth Centres

Review of Educational Psychology Service Early Years Services

Review of Family Information Service Connexions Re-commissioning

Review of Children’s Partnership Team Review use of Children’s Voluntary Grant

Further reduce Family Information Service Childminding Support Services

Part 2: Summary of initial screenings

The table included in this document lists the budget proposals that have been made and shows the outcomes of the initial equalities

screening for each proposal.

Summary of initial screenings

of 124

Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)

You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the

proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.

Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these

What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in

Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you

know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus

groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service

monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other

information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the

In February 2012, the Council made a significant policy change decision to one

which provides home to school transport for children of compulsory school age only

in accordance with the statutory entitlement but with some additional provisions to

deal with particular Buckinghamshire issues. This decision was made to support

the achievement of a £1.4m saving target. There is a separate EIA regarding this

decision (Feb 2012):

MTP Ref: ES14BS07 - BS11; BP04

Line title and

description of

change:

Client Transport – Home to School Transport Savings

Officer contact name and telephone number for further

information:

Sue Butt (Operations Manager) x7394

Brian Miller (Commissioning Officer) x2881

Date assessment completed: 6th December 2013

Who else involved in the assessment: Ben Thomas (Head of Prevention and Commissioning)

Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this

impact assessment and any resulting actions.

Name: Mike Appleyard

Signature:

Portfolio: Education & Skills

of 124

website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.

What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of

implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with

protected characteristics)?

http://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/documents/s23098/Equalities%20Impact%20Ass

essment.pdf

The Council has now identified further savings that need to be made from the

provision of home to school transport and this Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)

addresses the broad themes of these proposals. A detailed business case to

appraise these proposals will then take place followed by a full public consultation

regarding the specific changes proposed.

This EIA considers the following proposed projects:

1. Increasing Fares i) under 16s discretionary & ii) over 16s/out of

county/Milton Keynes discretionary (paid for) seats

Increased drop out where fare rises unaffordable

Parent/carer dissatisfaction

2. Volunteer Driver Scheme

New pilot project

Associated risks of: drivers not turning up, running late, limited back up to

cover illness, vehicle breakdown or no show, or choosing to leave volunteer

role at short notice.

If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination1 you must

demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated

legitimate business aim.

How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,

what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the

existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who

should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to

address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from

being addressed?

Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery

methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with

protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs

Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?

Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their

mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing

the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased

dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?

1 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s

protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and

the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate

business aim

http://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/documents/s23098/Equalities%20Impact%20Assessment.pdf

http://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/documents/s23098/Equalities%20Impact%20Assessment.pdf

of 124

Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving

preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group

have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these

fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy

groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or

intent.

Increased risk of children not arriving at school on time

Safeguarding assurances required

3. Multi pick up points for SEN

New pilot project

Assumes 20% non-take up per school but this could be higher for certain

Special Schools with pupils with significant behaviour issues where shared

vehicle transport is not a safe option.

4. Efficiency of route optimization

Reducing costs through more efficient procurement practices.

5. Increased use of public transport network

Currently 7.5% of home to school transport is delivered through

public transport however other local authorities have a higher

percentage which supports sustainable modes of transport

strategies.

Those unaffected by the proposals:

Those with a statutory entitlement as set out in the home to school

transport policy agreed in February 2012

Those retaining an entitlement under a previous edition of the policy

which is phased out over 2012-16, though this group will continue to be

charged a small administrative fee that may increase in line with

inflation.

16-19 travel bursary scheme run through education and training

of 124

providers.

Those affected by the proposals:

Those pupils who make a choice to attend a school that is not their nearest

appropriate school.

Fare increases for non-statutory home to school transport provision for

under 16s and over 16s/out of county/Milton Keynes travelling pupils.

Alternative transport options for pupils attending mainstream school

provision through volunteer driver run transport rather than current taxi

operations.

A change in pick up points for some children who attend Special Schools in

Bucks.

Impact on Different Groups

For under 16s not choosing to attend their nearest appropriate school, the proposal

is to increase fares where this provision is non-statutory.

There is a strong likelihood of increased dissatisfaction from current users of the

Home to School transport service through these proposals of increased fares.

However, fare increases are only to those who are not entitled to free home to

school transport and in accordance with statutory guidelines it is parental

responsibility to take their child to and from school.

There are also implications in regards to pupils having to get to pick up points for

the SEN multi-pick project and potential reliability issues of volunteer driver

schemes, though equally these may be more reliable. The multi pick up points and

volunteer driver scheme are both untested and are proposed as pilots to determine

their success and potential to realise savings.

of 124

Home to school transport policy is separate to school admissions policy and this is

already communicated in the current home to school transport policy and guidance.

The change in home to school transport policy in February 2012 has already seen a

shift in who the Council transports for free to school. Following full implementation

will see the number reduced from 10,000 to 4,000 and this was widely consulted

on. Equally, increased fares for discretionary (paid-for) spare seat paying pupils

were widely consulted on last year.

School travel arrangements are detailed in both printed school admissions

materials, and on the Council’s web-site. All schools will be written to via to

Council’s Schools Bulletin and pupils affected by any changes will be notified in

writing.

Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)

You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory

agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with

separately in Section D.)

Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings

Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs

for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,

what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for

the increased demand/costs?

Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:

The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management

capability?

the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also

The Council’s managing agent contractor for home to school transport, Amey Client

Transport’s, will be required to manage the pilot projects of the volunteer drivers

scheme and SEN Multipick up points.

The operational delivery of the pilot schemes will be through Amey Client Transport

existing contractual envelope with the Council.

Statutorily entitled pupils will remain entitled to free home to school transport

through all these proposals. School transport law makes no general provision for

the Council to provide transport to particular types of school other than by age or

mainstream/special. These proposals do not impact statutory entitlement to home

of 124

contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)

Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?

The wider local community?

Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?

What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches

under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will

compliance monitored?

to school transport.

The Client Transport contract is subject to robust monitoring alongside detailed

statistics regarding types and needs of pupils travelling on home to school

transport. The Contractor is required to work to all equalities legislation.

Exceptional criteria for consideration of specific cases for home to school transport

will not change and the panel and Appeals Process for consideration of these cases

will remain the same.

Complaints/appeals will continue to be monitored by protected characteristics.

Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)

You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate

and relevant to the proposal.


How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are

absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,

being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by

their absence?

How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or

indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?

Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made

to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?

If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that

employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to

do so?

How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s

This is a contracted out service to Amey Client Transport who manage their own

staff. Proposals for the pilot schemes have derived from shared plans drawn up by

Amey and the Council. No additional resource is necessary to deliver these

projects. Amey are responsible for managing their staffing arrangements to ensure

sufficient resources in place to implement proposed schemes.

Management of the supply chain is the responsibility of Amey. Contract monitoring

of Amey is in place through BCC Contract Management processes and will continue.

Amey are contracted to monitor the supply chain with BCC contract management

oversight of this delegated process.

The Council’s complaints handling procedures are in place and will continue, with

dissatisfaction and issues raised directly with Amey in the first instance, and then

stage 2 and 3 complaints handled by BCC.

of 124

policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do

you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the

proposal?

Amey undertake Customer Surveys each year to assess parent / pupil satisfaction

with services. These are currently being reviewed to update questions to ensure all

service users have the opportunity to share their views with alternative formats of

survey delivery techniques for certain user groups e.g. focus groups for those with

disabilities.

Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)

You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant

funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.

Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.

Questions to consider The Findings

Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved?

Not applicable to this proposal

What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding

stream)?

What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?

% reduction in BCC contribution

% reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)

What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or

organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide

a breakdown.

What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?

of 124

How will the proposal impact on:

• The organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?

• The future of the service*

• Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?

• Volunteers currently providing the service?

• Any assets used to provide the service*?

• The wider local community*?

• The supply chain, especially where locally sourced?

Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from

which organisations?

Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary

sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased

demand?

Is there a particular geographical impact?

Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to

encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?

of 124

Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)

Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.


Equalities Perspective:

Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly

affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate

an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will

this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet

the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which

groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?

Multi pick up points and volunteer driver scheme are both pilot projects and a

targeted communication plan will be put in place to ensure all affected are properly

consulted and informed.

Monitoring of the pilots will be ongoing throughout the pilot year and form part of

contract monitoring practices by Amey and BCC Commissioners.

Detailed consultation with families regarding any potential fare increases will also

be undertaken using a variety of communication channels including webbased and

face to face.

VCS Perspective:

How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS

organisation(s) involved?*

*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future

resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give

organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,

respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”

N/A

of 124

Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)

Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.


How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on

the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant

voluntary and community sector?

You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you

to analyse and interpret information in relation to:

Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what

outcomes they experience

Show under-use of a service by an equalities group

Show over-use by an equalities group

Reveal discrimination

Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory

Measure the effectiveness of service changes

Identify the need for new or changed services

The proposals will be monitored as part of contract monitoring and performance

monitoring processes. Where changes are required these will be assessed and

implemented where necessary to improve services and ensure those travelling with

protected characteristics are not disproportionately impacted.

Complaints and appeals will be monitored according to council policy and guidance

with equalities categories identified where possible to ascertain whether there are

any disproportionate impacts.

Service user surveys with families and schools using multi-pick up points transport

scheme.

Service user surveys with pupils, families and schools experiences of volunteer

driver transport scheme.

Service user surveys with pupils and families regarding potential migration to public

transport network.

of 124

Assessment - Actions Arising

Action Officer responsible By when

Establishment of termly meetings between BCC service teams (CYP and Place) and providers (Amey

and Ringway Jacobs) to review and discuss policy and operational impacts across the home to

school and public bus transport network. Meetings will take place on a termly basis in line with

parent’s renewal of passes and checking of paid-for (discretionary) applications.

Sue Butt December 2013

Review Amey contract (signed 2008, extended in 2013) around equality to determine what is

contained within the contract around monitoring of equality, in particular in light of changes post

the Equality Act 2010.

Brian Miller December 2013

Ensure monitoring of pilot schemes is in place as part of contract monitoring and plans in place by

Amey for their own monitoring of these.

Brian Miller April 2014

Public consultation on details of the proposals. Sue Butt / Ben Thomas Completed by end April 2014

Service user surveys for volunteer driver and multi-pick up points to be established to baseline at

start of scheme and then regular measurement through pilot phase

Amey Client Transport April 2014

Review impact of volunteer driver pilot on potential reduction in SME taxi contracts Amey Client Transport April 2014

.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

of 124













This proposal is based on the EPS reducing services or by getting further income of

100K for services (this equates to 200k or income as 100k is already in the Medium

Term Financial Plan). If this is possible then no impact on service delivery will occur.

Therefore no impact should occur.

However currently no profit making EP services exist. A traded service delivers at

cost with a turn-over of 120K per year. Therefore if it is not possible to generate

100K profit and service delivery reductions are necessary then the following

MTP Ref: ES14BS18 PBR - EPS

Line title and

description of

change:

Review of Educational Psychology services (EPS)


information:

Chris Munday

Date assessment completed: 6.12.13

Who else involved in the assessment: No-one at present. Data used from various sources.




Signature:

Portfolio: Education and Skilsl

of 124



impacts may occur:

Reduction in EP service delivery will directly impact on families of children with

Special Educational Needs and disabilities by reducing the level of service provided

to them.

Families from lower SES categories tend to have children with more SEN and

disabilities. Therefore they could be disproportionately affected ( national data)

Families of Pakistani pupils may be disproportionately affected as Pakistani pupils

are currently over represented in the number of children with statements of SEN

(SEN Review 2011).

SEN Review 2011 states that the data over the previous five years show an

increasing tendency for Black Caribbean and Mixed Black/White Caribbean pupils to

be over-represented in the percentage of pupils receiving a statement for

Behavioural, Emotional and Social Difficulties and for White pupils to be

consistently over-represented in the percentage of pupils with a statement for

Specific Learning Difficulties. Therefore again these groups may be

disproportionately affected by the proposed cut.

National statistics (2009/2010) show that Black Caribbean pupils are 4 times more

likely to be permanently excluded than the school population as a whole.









being addressed?












business aim

of 124






intent.

(Exclusions Data 10/11-EWO service). Excluded pupils are targeted for support by

the EPS and therefore may be disproportionately affected by these cuts.

Pupils with SEN are also more likely to be permanently excluded from school

(Exclusions Data 10/11-Education Welfare Officers service). Therefore again this

group may be particularly affected if EP service delivery is reduced.

Increased levels of dissatisfaction with the service and the county council are a risk,

but appropriate action to address this is possible to take.

Actions to reduce/avoid the impact of these cuts will be developed by the EPS.

Adverse publicity is likely if cuts are unavoidable, as cuts to the EP service generally

creates a level of publicity.












capability?


If the proposal is implemented and leads to a reduction in overall service provision

then there may be an impact on:

Other budgets such as:

SEN Budgets overall.

Residential Out county budget-increased demand

Children in Care-increased demand

of 124








Mitigating action to be taken would include a focused effort to create a profit

making traded service.








their absence?







do so?


If redundancy is required this will be followed according to normal Cc procedures.

If the proposal is accepted then mitigating action to try to avoid redundancies will

be taken as noted above.

of 124



proposal?









stream)?






a breakdown.


of 124


• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?

• the future of the service*

• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?

• volunteers currently providing the service?

• any assets used to provide the service*?

• the wider local community*?

• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?





demand?




of 124











Full consultation with the EPS will be required in order to gain agreement and

commitment to building up a profit making service.

VCS Perspective:











of 124














The EPS already has a comprehensive monitoring system with reviews built in to

monitor and take action where necessary.

of 124



Scoping of a possible profit making business will take place EPS MLT April-13-August 13

Action’s agreed to create a profit making business capable of making 100K profit each year.

Products/courses developed capable of making profit

EPS MLT August-13/14

Profit making business advertised/publicised/launched EPS MLT Autumn 14-Spring 15

Delivery of profit making business to start EPS MLT Sep 15

Redundancy process to be considered EPS January 14

of 124













The work undertaken by the Family Information Service (FIS) is to meet the Local

Authority’s duty to provide Information Advice and Assistance (IAA) to parents and

prospective parents with children from 0-19 or up to 25 with a disability. The

information available through FIS provides a front-facing platform supporting the

following strategies:

Families First – professionals database support for professionals

Early Intervention & Prevention – universal parenting offer for Bucks available

MTP Ref: CS14BS27

Line title and

description of

change:

Reduce Family Information Service


information:

Liz Smith

Date assessment completed: 3rd December 2013

Who else involved in the assessment:




Signature:

Portfolio:

of 124



through FIS & professionals support

Child & Family Poverty – promotion of all money & finance support

Armed Forces Covenant – promotion of all Service families support

SEN reforms; Local Offer – promotion of all Special Educational Needs and

Disability (SEND) provision families support

FIS is delivered by telephone, email, social media, website and outreach. The

service supports families in the following ways (average per month)

Telephone, email, text: approx 300

Outreach: approx 250 adults, 50-60 young people

Website: approx 15 000 individual people

Social media: 1 500 Facebook followers, 600 Twitter followers

The service prioritises work for target groups which include:

BME adults (approx 50 people per month)

Absent parents (1-2 per month)









being addressed?




business aim

of 124









Carers working with Looked After Children (LAC); Adoptive, Foster & Residential

Care (1-2 per month)

Adults with English as an Additional Language (EAL) (approx. 20 per month)

Families in the Armed Forces (approx. 3-4 events = 30 people)

Families with a parent in prison (1-2 per month)

Gypsy, Roma Travellers & of Irish Heritage parents (working with Children’s

centres when appropriate)

Grandparent (1-2 per month)

New arrivals, refugees and asylum seekers (1 – 2 per month)

Parents eligible for short breaks (approx. 7-8 per month)

Parents of children with a disability or a special educational need (SEN) (approx.

25-30 per month)

Parents unemployed or on low income (approx. 40 per month)

Parents who have a disability (approx. 2-3 per month)

Young carers (1-2 per month)

Young parents (approx. 10 per month)

The figures above reflect direct contacts to staff in FIS through telephone, email,

text, social media or outreach. Figures for unique visitors to respective pages on the

FIS websites to support these target groups is also available if required.

A reduction in resource for FIS would have a direct impact on the number of target

families listed above receiving support and being signposted to further support






intent.

of 124

services. This support covers topics including money & finance, SEN and/or

disability, childcare, Children’s Centres, staying safe and being healthy, activities,

voluntary & community groups and Youth Zone for young people.

As the main barriers to accessing information have been 1) not having information

all in one place and 2) making information available via a channel preferred by

families, FIS has developed the service to:

1) Manage 6000 records of information and 500 managed content pages via their

website

2) Develop new channels for communication on social media e.g. Facebook, Twitter,

Google+.

This has had a direct impact on the number of target families we have been able to

support particularly parents with SEND children, parents on low income or

unemployed and BME families. The website offers a Google translator and voice-

enabled software to ensure it is accessible for as wide a range of needs as possible.

The development of new information channels responsive to families need would

be unachievable with the proposed reduction.

A reduction in FIS would result in families having to source information themselves

through Google, where quality of data cannot be managed. Face to face and social

media support would also no longer be available to families with greatest need

which has the potential for them to be placed at an even greater disadvantage than

other families in the county.





of 124








capability?









The likely model for delivery if FIS were reduced and then removed is that the

telephone and email facility could be delivered by the Buckinghamshire County

Council (BCC) contact centre (currently the first point of contact). This would

require greater training and knowledge base for staff to be able to respond to all

enquiries as the current model is that the Contact Centre respond to simple

enquiries (60% of telephone enquiries, 0% of email enquiries) using FAQs and the

website. Without FIS managing the website as a source of information the quality of

the information would drop and the quality of the responses to enquires would

drop. There would also be a cost in terms of expertise in the Contact Centre Agents

(currently paid on range 3) to deliver a higher level of specialist knowledge as a

Contact Centre specialist, equitable with the FIS staff (current pay range 5). There

would also be a cost in terms of training for the Contact Centre staff to perform and

deliver bespoke searches for families which is currently undertaken by the FIS staff

through the backend system.

The website could be managed by the BCC corporate web team but they do not

manage content (current model is that the responsibility for the content is

delegated to each service). As content of the FIS website covers a much wider

partnership than just BCC services e.g.: Jobcentre plus, health services etc. it is

unlikely the 500 content pages would continue to be managed. There would also be

a requirement to increase their resource (staff and costs of the database system) to

manage the 6000+ records.

Outreach provision could be satisfied to a degree by Children’s Centre Family

Support Workers but would be limited to families with children under 5. The Youth

service also operate a limited service of outreach but this is a targeted resource and

only available for young people 13+. There would be a significant gap of face to face

support for families who have children of primary school age which could not be

delivered by services in the current BCC structure.

of 124

Social Media could be delivered by the corporate communications team but again

this relies on the quality of the data in the database and the website content which

potentially would not be continued.

All these solutions would require greater resource to ensure messages, data and

content were consistent to ensure families received the support necessary, if all the

channels were being delivered by different services rather than centrally within FIS.

This would have a direct impact on all families in Bucks (listed above) in terms of

the quality and consistency of advice and information available to them. There

would also be a greater demand and resource on voluntary sector organisations to

deliver a level of signposting and information which would not necessarily be

consistent across other organisations in Bucks. Ultimately this could mean that

families no longer receive early intervention and prevention advice and support and

therefore increase the numbers accessing costly statutory services.








their absence?





One member of staff is on a 1 year secondment in Bucks and will be included in all

future correspondence and processes. All other staff are in post.

of 124



do so?




proposal?


You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector (VCS) organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of,

grant funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.



Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? VCS organisations are not funded through FIS.

There may be an impact on the VCS to deliver information, advice and support to

families in Bucks if the FIS provision is decreased.


stream)?






a breakdown.


of 124













demand?






of 124









Communication about the proposed change in delivery will not be required until

later through the Medium Term Plan due to a year on year reduced resource to

deliver FIS. This will impact on the working agreement to manage data that we

currently have with providers and key stakeholders i.e. currently 5 working days

which will need to be extended to 10 working days due to reduced resource. At the

point when FIS is removed (2017-18), extensive communication would be required

with all providers registered with the service to set an expectation about how FIS

will be delivered in the future. Further extensive communication would be required

with all families in Bucks, particularly the target groups listed in A, to signpost to

equivocal information and support services. The target groups listed in A are likely

to require greater support to manage this change in the form of face to face

communication and support from other existing organisation e.g.: voluntary groups.

VCS Perspective:







Communication can be managed via email with all VCS organisations that are

registered with FIS.




of 124














We will analyse the number of unique visitors to the BFIS website for

sections of website to support the target groups listed in A

We will compare against the current baseline to understand the impact of

the change.

We will report on the number of telephone, email, text and social media

enquiries received by email and telephone to see if there has been an

increase. This reporting contains equality group data which will be used as a

comparison.

We will obtain anecdotal evidence from key stakeholders who support the

delivery of our outreach programme about the number of parents who

have accessed sessions.

of 124



We will analyse the number of unique visitors to the BFIS website for sections of website to

support the target groups listed in section A of this assessment.

Linda Slim/Liz Connick Ongoing monthly

We will compare against the current baseline to understand the impact of the change. Linda Slim/Liz Connick Ongoing monthly

We will report on the number of telephone, email, text and social media enquiries received

by email and telephone to see if there has been an increase. This reporting contains

equality group data which will be used as a comparison.

Liz Connick/Della Holmes Ongoing monthly

We will obtain anecdotal evidence from key stakeholders who support the delivery of our

outreach programme about the number of parents who have accessed sessions.

Liz Connick/Della Holmes December 2013 onwards

We will communicate any changes in resource to the whole team in a timely and

transparent manner.

Liz Smith December 2013 onwards

We will consider a future delivery model of FIS through a partnership of Contact Centre,

Children’s Centre, Youth Service, Corporate Communications web service, Corporate

Communications social media team.

Liz Smith March 2014 onwards

We will communicate the changes to the delivery of FIS to families and key stakeholders in

Bucks in a timely and transparent way. Methods of communication will be determined by

the needs of the families.


.

of 124













The proposal is the removal of all staff working in the team and the reallocation of

the functions elsewhere as they cannot be stopped.

The proposal will have a significant impact on children living in poverty as work in

this area will cease or need to be allocated to other staff to deliver. It links to the

impact assessment that has been undertaken for the Family Information Service

(FIS) which is part of the Children’s Partnerships Team but a separate Business Case

has been requested. Much of the work is done in partnership with FIS so the impact

MTP Ref: ES14BS17

Line title and

description of

change:

PBR – review of Children’s Partnerships Team


information:

Ed Mallam 01296 382253


Who else involved in the assessment: Yvette Thomas




Signature:

Portfolio: Education and Skills

of 124



of this joint cut will be significant.

Child poverty in Buckinghamshire stands at 12,115, (10.6%) of those aged 0-18

years living in poverty.

Research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies indicated that child poverty is projected

to rise from 2012/13 with an expected 300,000 more children living in poverty by

2015/16. This upward trend is expected to continue with a projection of 4.2 million

children living in poverty by 2020. (M Brewer, J Browne and R Joyce, Child and

working age poverty from 2010 – 2020, Institute for Fiscal Studies, October 2011)

The requirement of the Child Poverty Act 2010 is to have a local Child Poverty

Needs Assessment (CPNA) and a Strategy with an Action Plan linked to the Needs

Assessment. The Act does not state how the actions should be delivered but does

require the Local Authority to make arrangements for partners to work

cooperatively.

A broad range of additional projects delivering directly to over 3,000 children,

young people, parents and carers a year will have to end. Demand for these

projects is evidenced on the JSNA, the CYP’s Residents Survey 2013 and

development work undertaken with over 800 children, young people, parents and

carers for the new Children and Young People’s Plan 2014/18.

These are often delivered to the more vulnerable groups or those with particular

needs including children and young people who are:









being addressed?




business aim

of 124









Disabled

Looked after/care leavers

Victims of bullying

BME

Living in rural areas.

LGB and T.

Young parents.

Lone parents.

Young Carers

NEET

Receiving free school meals.

Service children.

No consultation has yet been done so it is not possible to say what the impact will

be, and, therefore not possible to confirm that this is the least discriminatory way

of achieving the business aim.

Work on European funded projects will cease as no capacity to deliver this work.

Currently 45k Euros per project with future funding not applied for this could be a

significant loss to the Portfolio. Schools who participate in these EU projects will

not have that experience or professional development of staff. Innovative work

currently undertaken will cease.

The team has attracted income of over £150,000 this year. Potential to earn future






intent.

of 124

income will be lost.

A broad range of projects that deliver directly to children, young people, parents

and carers, will end. These projects include:

UNICEF Rights Respecting Schools Award which delivers to 40 schools

and early years settings,,

Employability Events.

Loan sharks work.

Fuel Poverty projects.

Pupil Premium – take up and the effective use of this for those on free

school meals, looked after and Service children

Family budgeting.

Job Clubs.

Foodbanks.

Children’s Commissioner for England’s Takeover Day,

Progress Project which is working with 100 families many of whom are

in considerable need,,

Welfare Reform projects,

Service families work.

Apprenticeships and work experience programme.

School Linking Network with over 1800 children involved

of 124

Model United Nations annually 100 Secondary students involved

This will result in work ending with over 3,000 children and young people and

families each year. These are primarily from areas of deprivation and face multiple

issues and therefore , benefit considerably from additional opportunities and

support which have proved particularly successful in equipping the more vulnerable

and non-academically achieving with key life skills including developing economic

skills and work readiness

School and Early Years Closures on the web site – there will be no one to support

this key method of informing parents and carers regarding closures. Schools and

Early Years settings will have to put in place individual systems and parents /carers

will no longer have the information in one easy to access place. This will lead to

increased dissatisfaction with the Council from all of these groups.

The loss of this support is also likely to impact on the Admissions web site as there

will be no staff to support this area either – this is the most accessed section of the

Council web site and disruption to this will course significant dissatisfaction.

The Equality Act 2010 specifically identifies 3 general duties on public authorities.

Through the work done with schools these duties are carefully monitored and

evidenced. If the service were not available there is a greater risk for issues related

to the protected characteristics being missed which could lead to discrimination

occurring unwittingly. Legal challenge and judicial reviews occurring at high legal

costs to the Council

All schools in Buckinghamshire have access to support and guidance on equalities

issues and this has contributed to Schools being identified in Buckinghamshire for

their positive work in relation to anti-discrimination practice. In eleven years only

one school has had racism highlighted in their Ofsted report all other schools

inspected have had no negative comments about children’s experiences in schools

related to their protected characteristic. Buckinghamshire schools have

of 124

approximately 25% of children from BME backgrounds and issues of community

cohesion are managed within the team

Preventing Violent extremism work has recently been announced will be a statutory

duty on local authorities. The expertise and knowledge from within the team will be

lost and outside providers will have to be sought to deliver this work with schools

creating more financial strains on budgets. Support for vulnerable young people at

risk of extremism is given within this team and the National trainer sits within this

team thus support offered when appropriate to schools to support young people at

risk. Training to School leaders including Governors on meeting their Equalities duty

will require commissioning in as the expertise will be lost.. Training has consistently

had over 98% good or very good over the past 11 years. In an effort to show due

regard the Local Authority has offered training to schools which they purchase if

this work ceased increase pressure on schools to get outside County training

providers to deliver this work at a higher cost. Loss of potential earning s for the

Council will be lost.

Monitoring of discriminatory incidents in Buckinghamshire schools will no longer

take place and the good practice developed over many years will lead to greater

risk of discriminatory incidents increasing as the support to ensure understanding

and compliance with statutory duties will be lost. . Racist incidents have decreased

over time but other discriminatory incidents are now being monitored and

reporting will cease if schools no longer have access to The work to establish a

Community Consultative group which works in collaboration with the Local

Authority to support Raising Achievement of BME groups will fold as no support will

be available to work with this community group who have been able with support

with increasing the numbers of BME Governors where there was huge under

representation 2% 10 years ago to approximately 6 % in 2012

Yes work is targeted at those most in need if they no longer receive this it could

well be seen as the Council withdrawing essential support for them to achieve their

of 124

potential and achieve in life.







for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies?

If yes, what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those

services/organisations for the increased demand/costs?



capability?






As the team will not exist the majority of its work as detailed below will need to be

allocated elsewhere or no longer be delivered to children, young people, parents

and carers.

Substantial range of innovative partnership work delivered via the CYP’s Plan

and Child and Family Poverty Strategy. This will lead to ineffective use of

resources and duplication of services.

Large number of direct delivery of projects with children, young people, parents

and carers will end e.g. UNICEF Rights Respecting Schools Award, Employability

Events, and Children’s Commissioner for England’s Takeover Day and Progress

Project. Model United Nations and Schools Linking Network

Communications and links with Schools and Early Years settings would suffer –

there would be no resource to support Schoolsweb provision. Schoolsweb is

very popular with schools and is a trusted source of information to

Headteachers and Governors. This would result in the end of key

communications tools i.e. School Bulletin and Governor Times as well as

maintaining the Council’s web presence for Children’s Services and developing

of 124




new web sites such as the one done for the Bucks Learning Trust.

School and Early Years Closures on the web site – there will be no one to

implement and maintain this.

Inability of Children and Young People’s Portfolios to contribute too many

corporate initiatives e.g. Welfare Reform Armed Forces Community Covenant,

Chesham wellbeing project.

Range of projects delivered with all the 35 Children’s Centres will end.

The Team provide project support on a needs basis to other parts of the

Service. Current projects include supporting Children’s Services to be Inspection

Ready and on Munro Strand 3 (4 days time per week), supporting

Commissioning by reviewing Children’s Centres Annual Conversation and

project managing Children’s Centre Tender. (2 days per week). There will be a

similar need going forward and other staff will need to undertake these roles

which will significantly reduce their delivery.

Workforce Development for Children and Young People’s Services and partner

organisations not in place.

Income generation, including European funding will cease.

The ability to update on regular basis the Information and Policy Bank will result

in staff not having the latest information on Government changes, legislations

and statutory duties.

Successful work projects on Equality Duties and reducing the gap such as the

Model United Nations and the Schools Linking Network will stop.

Anti-bullying, including cyberbullying, work will stop.

The Equality Act puts statutory duties on Local Authorities and schools to show

of 124

due regard. There is a high risk that if these are not met, children & Young

People Services and schools in Buckinghamshire could see themselves with

Legal Challenges resulting in high payments in compensation and loss of

reputation.

Termination of Community Consultative group potentially leading to a decrease

in recruitment of BME Governors and loss of Parent Conferences for BME

parents identified as ‘hard to reach or seldom heard members of the

community.

At this point it is not known what the impact will be as no work has been done to

assess this. What is known is that a lot of the work is statutory and will therefore

have to be delivered by other Council services. This will need to form part of the

consultation considering impact.

Current contract with Show Racism the Red Card and Stonewall will stop and

schools will have to incur more costs to receive training for staff and pupils on anti-

discrimination issues again one of the three duties they are bound to show due

regard for. Show Racism the Red Card and Stonewall rely on funding for their staff

costs so the implication is that staffing will be cut as a result of loss of contract with

BCC.

All of the statutory responsibilities will need to be allocated to other teams. It is

extremely questionable if there is any capacity for them to deliver this and certainly

not to the same level – no consultation has yet been done to establish the impact

on other services to deliver.

It is possible that some of the services we provide regarding equalities work with

school could be commissioned but the cost would significantly increase as trainer

rates for outside providers can potentially be double what schools currently pay for

Children & Young People’s staff . Difficult to say currently how compliance will be

monitored in the future as Transformation Phase 2 is underway and not yet

of 124

completed. Schools would have to take full responsibility to monitor themselves

and Ofsted will make judgements during inspections








their absence?







do so?




proposal?

At this stage we can only say that we would be complying with BCC Policies &

Procedures.

of 124






Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? Contracts with Charitable organisations, most notably Show Racism The Red Card

and Stonewall will need to cease. Currently offer free support to all schools and

employees across CYP via one contract. This will need to be devolved and costs will

be higher for schools should they wish to continue to receive the support in order

to meet their equality duties


stream)?


• % reduction in BCC contribution

• % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year

income)



a breakdown.


of 124













demand?






of 124









The proposal will require engagement with a broad range of partners, including

children, young people, parents, carers, schools, early year’s settings, community

groups and other Council service areas that will be directly affected by the end of

the services provided.

Further work is required to develop the detail of this consultation as no

consideration has been possible to date due to the timescales of this process.

VCS Perspective:











of 124














A method will need to be put in place from 2015/16 to monitor this – as the team

reduced significantly from this time there will be no capacity to undertake this.

of 124



Once a decision has been taken a consultation will need to be undertaken in 2014/15 with children,

young people, families, schools, early year’s settings, community groups and other Council service

areas that will be directly affected by the end of the services provided.

Ed Mallam 2014

If the proposal is confirmed an action plan will need to be developed in 2014/15 to minimise the

impact and disruption. The change is too significant i.e. the end of the team and its work to

undertake in this format.

Ed Mallam 2015

of 124












There are 2 Statutory duties delivered by the Family Information Service (FIS) on

behalf of the Local Authorities:

1. To provide Information, Advice and Assistance (IAA) to parents and

prospective parents with children from 0-19 or up to 25 with a

disability (section 12, Childcare Act 2006)

2. To keep a database of disabled children to help with planning and

MTP Ref: CS14BS27

Line title and

description of

change:

PBR – Further reduce Family Information Service.


information:

Liz Smith 01296 387473

Date assessment completed: 3rd December 2014





Signature:


of 124




monitoring services (Schedule 2, Children Act 1989)

In addition the legislation within the Children & Families Bill, which is due for Royal

Assent in April 2014, will place a statutory duty on Local Authorities to deliver a new

system of support for children and young people with Special Educational Needs

and/or Disability (SEND). Local Authorities will be required to publish in one place

the education, health, social care and voluntary & community sector provision for

children and young people with SEND. This is the Local offer. The SEND reforms

Local offer provision is being developed and will be delivered through the FIS,

primarily through the website. This will result in a third Statutory Duty delivered by

FIS.

If the proposals in PBR are adopted these 3 statutory duties would no longer be

able to be delivered by FIS and either alternative provision would need to be

established or the Local Authority would be held to account for not meeting their

statutory duties. This is a significant risk to the PBR proposals.

The information available through FIS provides the only front-facing platform

supporting the following strategies:

Families First Programme– professionals database support for professionals

Early Intervention & Prevention strategy – universal parenting offer for Bucks









being addressed?












business aim

of 124






intent.

available through FIS & professionals support

Child & Family Poverty strategy – promotion of all money & finance support

Short Breaks provision – promotion of all short breaks and respite care support

Childcare Sufficiency strategy – universal Ofsted registered childcare provision and

identification of sufficiency trends across the county

Armed Forces Covenant – promotion of all Service families support

SEN reforms; Local Offer provision – promotion of all SEND provision families

support.

FIS is delivered by telephone, email, social media, website and outreach. The

service supports families in the following ways (average per month)

Telephone, email, text: approx 300

Outreach: approx 250 adults, 50-60 young people

Website: approx 15 000 individual people

Social media: 1 500 Facebook followers, 600 Twitter followers

The website offer a Google translator and voice-enables software to ensure it is

accessible for as wide a range of needs as possible. The development of new

information channels responsive to families need would be unachievable with the

proposed reduction.

The service prioritises work for target groups which include contacts from:

BME adults (approx 50 people per month)

Absent parents (1-2 per month)

of 124

Carers working with Looked After Children (LAC); Adoptive, Foster &

Residential Care (1-2 per month)

EAL adults (approx 20 per month)

Families in the Armed Forces (approx 3-4 events = 30 people)

Families with a parent in prison (1-2 per month)

Gypsy, Roma Travellers & of Irish Heritage parents (working with Children’s

centres when appropriate)

Grandparent (1-2 per month)

New arrivals, Refugees and Asylum Seekers (1 – 2 per month)

Parents eligible for short breaks (approx 7-8 per month)

Parents of children with a disability or an SEN (approx 25-30 per month)

Parents unemployed or on low income (approx 40 per month)

Parents who have a disability (approx 2-3 per month)

Young carers (1-2 per month)

Young parents (approx 10 per month)

The figures above reflect direct contacts to staff in FIS through telephone, email,

text, social media or outreach. Figures for unique visitors to respective website

pages (eg: Adoption & fostering support, BME families support, lone parents

support) on the FIS websites to support these target groups is also available but

cannot evidence that those target groups are the ones that access the respective

website pages.

of 124

The information available through FIS supports families with Money & finance,

Special Educational Needs and/or Disability, Childcare, Children’s Centres, Staying

Safe and Being Healthy, Activities, Voluntary & Community groups, Youth Zone for

young people. The PBR proposal for FIS would have a direct negative impact on the

number of target family groups listed to receive the support above and being

signposted to further support services.

As the main barriers to receiving support are:

1) not having information all in one place

2) making information available via a channel preferred by families

FIS has developed the service to 1) manage 6000 records of information and 500

managed content pages via their website 2) developed new channel for

communication on social media eg; Facebook, Twitter, Google+. The target family

groups listed above would potentially become indirectly discriminated against if FIS

was reduced and removed as the information would become disaggregated across

many services, therefore decreasing the quality and consistency, and would not

address the primary barrier the receiving support as mentioned above.

The direct impact of the PBR proposals cannot be calculated at this stage as

proposals have only recently been received. An extensive period of consultation

and monitoring would need to be conducted to evidence the impact of the

reduction and removal of FIS and this is included in the Action Plan page 12.

The proposals will have a significant impact on future service users as current

projections for Buckinghamshire identify unavoidable growth for:

1. The numbers of Looked After Children

2. Support services to support the protection of Children in Need

3. The Impact of SEN legislative changes (investment to meet the

of 124

requirements of SEN legislative changes)

As FIS delivers the countywide universal information service to support families and

professionals in the 3 areas of growth identified above it is logical to predict the

demand on the service will be greater over the 4 year term of the PBR proposals. As

such a reduction and removal of the service will therefore accelerate the potential

indirect discrimination of target family groups as resources and accessibility

becomes less and demands becomes more.

In addition the recent Budget Consultation Report identifies that resident’s

expectations for how the Local Authority attributes its funding:

four in ten people (38%) didn’t want to see cuts made to services to

support children with disabilities, rising to half the population (53%) for the

‘Moderate Means’ ACORN group, and those in the 40% most deprived areas

of the county

just under half of the county said that they didn’t want to see savings made

to services for vulnerable children (47%)

30% of respondents were not willing for funding for activities for children &

young people to be cut

34% of respondents were not willing for funding for childcare support,

children’s centres & other support for parents and families with young

children to be cut.

Current data from current service users reflects a high level of satisfaction with the

service and of the parent carers who complete feedback 93% report FIS support

made a positive difference to them and their child.

The proposal will have a significant impact on children living in poverty as work in

this area will cease or need to be allocated to other staff to deliver. It links to the

of 124

PBR proposals and EIA been undertaken for the Children’s Partnerships Team but a

separate Business Case has been requested. Much of the work to reduce the

number of children and young people in the county is done in partnership with

Children’s Partnership Team (proposal to reduce then remove) so the impact of this

joint cut will be significant.

There would also be an impact on the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) families as

FIS work closely with the Community Consultative Group to support BME families in

Bucks. FIS sponsor the BME annual conference which offers a unique and positive

platform to engage with BME families and signpost them to additional services that

can benefit their family.

The Priority Based Resourcing proposals would result in families having to source

information themselves through Google, where quality of data cannot be managed.

Face to face and social media support would also no longer be available to families

with greatest need which has the potential for them to be placed at an even greater

disadvantage than other families in the county. This would be perceived as

disadvantaging some target family groups as the additional support they would

need to access the information would not be available and only families who were

proactive and resourceful would be able to source the information for themselves.

This would also have a direct impact on the families that were then accessing

services and potentially those in greatest need would not be included due to their

lack of knowledge of the service, understanding of what the service offered and

capacity for the delivery of the service.






of 124







capability?









There is no data at this stage to quality the cost impact of the PBR proposal but

extensive consultation will need to be undertaken to quantify the level of risk. Once

this has been completed a process to identify how the degree of risk could be

mitigated will be undertaken.

At this time the general risks of the proposals are identified below:

The likely model for delivery if FIS were reduced then removed is that the

telephone & email facility could be delivered by the Contact Centre (currently the

first point of contact) This would require greater training and knowledge base to be

able to respond to all enquiries as the current model is that the Contact centre

respond to simple enquiries (60% of telephone enquiries, 0% of email enquiries)

using FAQs and the website. Without FIS managing the website as a source of

information the quality of the information would drop and the quality of the

responses to enquires would drop. There would also be a cost in terms of expertise

in the Contact Centre Agents (currently paid on range 3) to deliver a higher level of

specialist knowledge as a Contact Centre specialist, equitable with the FIS staff

(current pay range 5). There would also be a cost in terms of training for the

Contact Centre staff to perform and deliver bespoke searches for families which is

currently undertaken by the FIS staff through the backend system.

The website could be managed by the BCC corporate web team but they do not

manage content (current model is for the responsibility of the content is delegated

to each service). As content of the FIS website covers a much wider partnership

than just BCC services eg: Jobcentre plus, health services etc it is unlikely the 500

content pages would continue to be managed. There would also be a requirement

to increase their resource (staff and costs of the database system) to manage the

6000+ records.

Outreach provision could be satisfied to a degree by Children’s Centre Family

Support Workers but would be limited to families with children under 5. The Youth

service also operate a limited service of outreach but this is a targeted resource and

of 124

only available for young people 13+. There would be a significant gap of face to face

support for families who have children of primary school age which could not be

delivered by services in the current BCC structure.

Social Media could be delivered by the corporate communications team but again

this relies on the quality of the data in the database and the website content which

potentially would not be continued.

All these solutions would require greater resource to ensure messages, data and

content were consistent to ensure families received the support necessary, if all the

channels were being delivered by different services rather than centrally within FIS.

This would have a direct impact on all families in Bucks (listed above) in terms of

the quality and consistency of advice and information available to them. There

would also be a greater demand and resource on voluntary sector organisations to

deliver a level of signposting and information which would not necessarily be

consistent across other organisations in Bucks. Ultimately this could mean that

family no longer receive early intervention and prevention advice and support and

therefore increase the numbers accessing costly statutory services.








their absence?


One member of staff on a 1 year secondment in Bucks and will be included in all

future correspondence and processes. All other staff are in post. No consultation

has been undertaken to date as this proposal has only recently been identified

through PBR.

of 124






do so?




proposal?

of 124






Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? This is not applicable except to note that other than the impact on VCS to deliver

information, advice and support to families in Bucks. VCS organisations are not

funded through FIS.


stream)?






a breakdown.







of 124








demand?







of 124








Communication about the PBR proposal has not yet been conducted but will need

to be done so with the following groups:

Service users/ target family groups

Schools

Early Years providers

Post 16 education providers

Health providers

Social care providers

Activity and short breaks providers

FIS staff

Voluntary and Community sector

The proposals to reduce FIS are likely to impact on the working agreement to

manage data that we currently have with providers and key stakeholders ie;

currently 5 working days which will need to be extended to 10 working days due to

reduced resource. At the point when FIS is removed (2017-18) extensive

communication would be required with all providers registered with the service to

set an expectation about how FIS will be delivered in the future. Further extensive

communication would be required with all families in Bucks, particularly the target

groups listed in A, to signpost to equivocal information and support services. The

target groups listed in A are likely to require greater support to manage this change

in the form of face to face communication and support from other existing

organisation eg: voluntary groups.

of 124

VCS Perspective:







Communication can be managed via email with all VCS organisations that are

registered with FIS.















We will analyse the number of unique visitors to the BFIS website for

sections of website to support the target groups listed in A

We will compare against the current baseline to understand the impact of

the change.

We will report on the number of telephone, email, text and social media

enquiries received by email and telephone to see if there has been an

increase. This reporting contains equality group data which will be used as a

comparison.

We will obtain anecdotal evidence from key stakeholders who support the

delivery of our outreach programme about the number of parents who

have accessed sessions.

of 124





Impact assessment on the reduction of FIS to be conducted over 6 month period to better

understand the potential indirect discrimination to target family groups as a result of the

proposals. This will be done through the following:

Liz Smith December – May/June 2014

o Analysis on the number of unique visitors to the BFIS website for sections of

website to support the target groups listed in A

o Comparison against the current baseline to understand the impact of the change.

o Analysis on the number of telephone, email, text and social media enquiries

received by email and telephone to see if there has been an increase. This reporting

contains equality group data which will be used as a comparison.

o Anecdotal evidence from key stakeholders who support the delivery of our

outreach programme about the number of parents who have accessed sessions.

Della Holmes/Liz Connick Ongoing monthly

Consultation with target families groups, all education providers, health providers, social

care providers, voluntary & community sector providers, Activity and short breaks

providers.


Communication of any changes in resource to the whole team in a timely and transparent

manner


of 124


Consideration of a future delivery model of FIS through a partnership of Contact Centre,

Children’s Centre, Youth Service, Corporate Communications web service, Corporate

Communications social media team


Communication of the changes to the delivery of FIS to families and key stakeholders in

Bucks in a timely and transparent way. Methods of communication will be determined by

the needs of the families


.

of 124













Delivery at the 2 youth centres would be integrated with wider service delivery

using existing qualified youth workers that have a countywide remit and deliver

targeted work.

It is anticipated that reconfiguring the youth centres will provide more

opportunities for those young people most in need to access targeted youth work

activities, and partnerships with the VCS would enable young people in the local

community to continue to access universal provision at the centres.

MTP Ref: ES14BS02

Line title and

description of

change:

Reconfiguration of Youth Centres - 2 remaining Council retained Youth Centres to

be reconfigured to be run on the community model


information:

Lucy Pike

Date assessment completed: 1 October 2013





Signature:


of 124











being addressed?












business aim

of 124






intent.












capability?






Not applicable to this proposal.

of 124











their absence?







do so?




proposal?

The reconfiguration of the centres would be implemented as part of a wider Youth

Service restructure, and therefore all BCC policies relating to this would be

complied with. This would include a thorough consultation with all affected

employees, regardless of their personal characteristics; whether they were absent

because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break, being on

maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave.

Selection processes will also comply with BCC policies and all staff will be able to

participate in any selection activity used, with reasonable adjustments made as

appropriate according to individual needs. Training and support is already provided

to all staff, and further training would be provided to ensure employees were

properly equipped to deliver as required.

Numbers of staff at risk and subsequently made redundant would be collated. This

would include gender, ethnicity and disability data to enable any issues to be

identified. Selection processes would be clearly evidenced to demonstrate how

appointment decisions were made.

of 124







By freeing up some of the sessions at the Youth Centres the voluntary, community

and private sector will have increased access to the facility to provide open access

activities. This will not result in any reduction in, or cessation of, grant funding, or

non-renewal of contracts nor does it relate to a new contracts are at a reduced

level of funding. Specific providers will be identified once the proposal becomes

public although we are confident we can achieve this as we have already been

approached by providers requesting increased access.


stream)?


o % reduction in BCC contribution

o % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)



a breakdown.


of 124













demand?




of 124











Affected employees will be consulted as part of the process to ensure any adverse

impact is identified at an early stage and considered as part of the way forward. A

consultation document will be produced and meetings will be held to discuss its

content. Opportunities for one to one discussion will also be offered to ensure

communication needs are met.

VCS Perspective:







VCS providers would be included in the consultation process to ascertain their

views on delivering open access provision at the centres. This would be achieved

through discussions with existing VCS partner organisations.

of 124

















Management information will continue to be collected on the delivery at the

centres, including any input by VCS providers. This data would be analysed to

ensure equity in the provision offered and a complimentary offer by BCC and VCS is

delivered.

of 124



Ensure the centres reconfiguration is included in a wider Youth Service restructure, and BCC

processes are followed to enable this change to be implemented effectively and fairly.

Lucy Pike September 2014

of 124













At this stage it is not anticipated that there will be any impact on service users.

Membership of our Directory of Providers who can provide free funded childcare

places for 3 and 4 year olds is now automatic if there is at least a satisfactory

judgement. This means that the Local Authority has a reduced role as it is no longer

required to have a panel process for ensuring the quality of providers before they

are admitted to the Directory. This changed in Sept 2013. This restructure reflects

that change.

MTP Ref: ES14BS04

Line title and

description of

change:

Early Years Services - Review and implement changes in response to legislative

changes


information:

Ben Thomas

Date assessment completed: 7th October





Signature:


of 124











being addressed?












business aim

of 124






intent.












capability?






At this stage it is not anticipated that this will impact on the demand for other

services. Membership of our Directory of Providers who can provide free funded

childcare places for 3 and 4 year olds is now automatic if there is at least a

satisfactory judgement. This means that the Local Authority has a reduced role as it

is no longer required to have a panel process for ensuring the quality of providers

before they are admitted to the Directory. This changed in Sept 13. This restructure

reflects that change.

of 124











their absence?







do so?




proposal?

The saving represents 11% of the Early Years staffing budget and will therefore have

some impact on existing posts which may be mitigated for example, through

vacancy management and redeployment.

However, proposals for a new structure have yet to be developed and, therefore,

the usual staff engagement mechanisms have not yet commenced. The Council

processes for change management will be followed to ensure that the employee

selection processes do not directly or indirectly discriminate against employees

because of a protected characteristic.

of 124






Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? At this stage it is not anticipated that there will be any impact on the VCS, other

than that VCS childcare providers will be entitled to be on the Directory if they get

at least a Satisfactory judgment. Membership of our Directory of Providers who can

provide free funded childcare places for 3 and 4 year olds is now automatic if there

is at least a satisfactory judgement. This means that the Local Authority has a

reduced role as it is no longer required to have a panel process for ensuring the

quality of providers before they are admitted to the Directory. This changed in Sept

13. This restructure reflects that change.


stream)?




income)



a breakdown.


of 124













demand?




of 124











There will be written communications and also meetings with all staff that could be

affected by the proposed restructure which will follow all of the Council policies.

VCS Perspective:







of 124

















Equality Data will be collected for staff before and after the reduction in staffing, to

ensure that no groups of employees have been affected on the grounds of

particular characteristics

of 124



Ensure that Consultation process and re-structuring process follow the Council’s Policies, including

the Council’s Equality Policy.

Ben Thomas August 14

Equality Data to be collected for staff before and after the reduction in staffing, to ensure that no

groups of employees have been affected on the grounds of particular characteristics

Ben Thomas / HR August 14

of 124

of 124











The Connexions Service is targeted at young people who are Not in Education,

Employment or Training (NEET) and therefore vulnerable. All resources are used for

the purpose of either preventing young people becoming NEET, supporting young

people who are NEET or fulfilling Buckinghamshire County Council statutory duties.

Whilst all of the NEET group may not have protected characteristics the group can

MTP Ref: ES13BS06/CS13BS28

Line title and

description of

change:

The Connexions Service - Recommissioning


information:

John Everson

Date assessment completed: 7th October 2013





Signature:


of 124





be broken down into the following groups:

Black and Minority Ethnic Group

Teenage Mother/Pregnant

Child in Care or Leaving Care

Young Offender

Young Carer

Learning Difficulty or Disability

Population data and projections from the 2011 census suggest that numbers of

BME, children in care/leaving care and young people with learning difficulties or

disabilities will all increase over the next 5-10 years. All of these groups are over

represented in the NEET group. For example Pakistani young people are

approximately twice as likely to be NEET as opposed to the population as a whole.

NEET for whole cohort = 3.6%

NEET Pakistani = 6.0%

NEET Caribbean = 6.0%

NEET White and Black Caribbean = 6.7%









being addressed?












business aim

of 124






intent.

(CCIS – July 2013)

Mitigation of potential impacts on the specific groups of young people will be

achieved through the re-commissioning of Connexions services. Competitive

tendering of the service will reduce costs whilst maintaining and or improving

outcomes for young people.

The Connexions service specification will clearly set out that outcomes for over

represented groups will need to be improved over the course of the contract.

Freedom and flexibility within the specification will allow providers to innovate and

target resources to achieve outcomes and deliver statutory duties associated with

the contract.

Monitoring of the contract and analysis of the data produced will allow BCC to

clearly demonstrate the impact of the service and the MTP saving. Further targeting

of resource may be necessary on an on-going basis to ensure that protected groups

of young people are not adversely effected by budget cuts.

If a young person is NEET for a prolonged period between the ages of 16-18 then

there is likely to be a significant reduction in life chances and increases in costs to

the country.

A York University Study (Coles et al 2010) suggested that the life cost of NEET aged

between 16-18 was £104,320 with a total cost to the country of between £12bn

and £32bn.

Reductions in services and support for NEET young people risks increased costs for

vulnerable learners in adult services particularly those who have learning difficulties

and disabilities who risk entry into adult service when at crisis point.

Young people who are NEET have an increased risk of entering the criminal justice

system, misusing controlled substances and have an increased chance of suffering

from mental health conditions. (The Cost of Exclusion – Counting the cost of youth

of 124

disadvantage in the UK – Prince’s Trust) The study estimates the cost of youth

disadvantage to the UK as a whole is £22bn.

Savings will be achieved through the re-commissioning of services. This will allow

the market to innovate to deliver more cost effective services and mitigate the risks

associated with budget reductions. The success of this approach will be monitored

by robust contract management and the possible implementation of a Payment by

Results approach for some elements of the current service.












capability?





Research indicates that increased NEET will bring increased youth crime, increased

substance misuse, longer term unemployment with associated housing, social and

mental health issues.

It is possible that reduced funding of Connexions Services will increase NEET and

therefore effect other BCC services or commissioned services including:

Substance Misuse services

YOS

Adult Family Wellbeing

CAMHS

Adult mental health services

The impact of any services will be monitored through the Client Caseload

of 124





Information System (CCIS) which Connexions are required to complete on behalf of

BCC. This database includes the details of all 16-19 year old Buckinghamshire

residents and is used to track participation in learning. This data can be analysed by

a variety of different characteristics including ethnicity, gender, age, vulnerability

and geographical location.

Using the BCC Contract Management Framework CCIS data will be used to ensure

that the Equality Act 2010 Public Sector Equality Duty is met.








their absence?







do so?




Not Applicable.

of 124

proposal?

of 124






Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? Connexions Buckinghamshire are a charity and deliver the Connexions contract.

They sub-contract to 3 small VCS organisations; Action4Youth, Youth Concern and

Wycombe Youth Action.

The reduction of £100,000 in 2015/16 is equivalent to a 4% reduction in annual

spend.

The reduction of £100,000 in 2015/16 is equivalent to a 3.6% reduction in

Connexions Buckinghamshire total income.

The organisation does not receive funding from other Buckinghamshire bodies but

does delivery a number of other contracts from Department for Work and Pensions,

Department of Education and ESF.

The impact of the change with be achieved through competitive tendering however

it is likely that the premises strategy will change and staffing capacity will be


stream)?




income)



a breakdown.


of 124









reduced.

The impact on service users will be a reduction in services levels and accessibility of

Connexions services.

There is no other organisation which will deliver alternative services.

It is possible that voluntary youth settings may see an increase in attendance but

they are unlikely to be able to meet the needs of young people looking to move in

education, employment or training.

It is unlikely that there will be a geographical impact.

The Connexions service supports young people to become more self-reliant and

make decisions on their futures which empower them and improve their lives. A

reduction will have a negative impact.





demand?




of 124











Young people and partners are being consulted on the future shape of Connexions

services. These views will shape the service specification for the commissioning

process which will take place in 2014.

Focus groups, questionnaires and interviews will be used to collect data with all

information received from young people to be collected via representative focus

groups. Please ensure that Consultation targets specifically those groups most

affected, as listed in Section A

Providers are being consulted through a soft market testing process which will take

place in October 2013.

VCS Perspective:







BCC are in regular communication with Connexions Buckinghamshire about the

future shape of services. They themselves are negotiating with local VCS

organisations in their supply chain about the shape of their tender response in

2014.

of 124

















The impact of the commissioning process and associated savings will be measured

via contract management processes. Performance indicators for the new service

will include measures which will demonstrate equality of service delivery and aim to

“Close the Gap” between different populations in Buckinghamshire.

Key Performance Indicators are likely to be:

NEET

NEET by LDD, BME, Care Leaver, Teenage Parent and Young offender.

Unknowns

Interventions by population

RPA compliant Destinations

of 124



Consultation with Young People on future shape of Connexions services John Everson November 2013

Development of Connexions services specification John Everson January 2014

Re-commissioning of Connexions Services John Everson July 2014

Monitoring of the re-commissioned service to ensure that there are not adverse effects on

protected groups of young people

John Everson October 2014 onwards

.

of 124

MTP Ref: CS14BS25

Line title and

description of

change:

Children’s Voluntary Grants


information:

Claire Knott- Commissioning Officer / Collette McCarthy- Operations Manager


Who else involved in the assessment: Ben Thomas (Head of Prevention and Commissioning)




Signature:

of 124















The current budget funds £163k to ten small voluntary organisations

Two of these contracts came to an end between October 2013 and December 2013

and have already been written to confirming further grant funding until 31/03/15.

Two further contracts have already been subject to budget cuts for the next

financial year and as such will not be included in this proposal.

The remaining six contracts are all due to end between February 2014 and March

14.

To achieve the £50,000 saving, funding to each of the six remaining contracts will

need to be stopped or reduced.

One of the contracts has informed us that they do not require funding for the year

2014/15 as they have sufficient funds for this period already. This will form £16,000







business aim


of 124






being addressed?

of the savings.

Those affected by the proposals

Data provided by the contracts indicate that the groups affected would be:

Children age 4-11 with Autism Spectrum Disorders, parents & siblings

Children of school age in the Wycombe/Chesham area predominantly

from Muslim and African Caribbean families

Young Carers age 11-18

Hearing impaired children, young people and their families.

Children and young people with disabilities.

Evidence collected through contract monitoring shows that children and young

people report an increase in self esteem, gained in confidence and feel supported.

By implementing the proposal it is likely that these services would either be unable

to continue, or would need to start charging service users, or where there is already

a charge, implement an increase.

Due to the nature of the client group it is unlikely they would be able to travel to

access similar services in another area.

The implications would be access to fewer services for this client group.

There is a possibility of groups perceiving preferential treatment of another group,

due to funding to similar services continuing for one further year. These groups will

be assisted with signposting to try and secure other sources of funding, and service

users signposted to alternative provision where applicable.














intent.

of 124












capability?









See section D for VCS organisations

of 124








their absence?







do so?




proposal?

This will not impact on Council employees.

of 124






Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? There are six VCS organisations involved.

The budget is BCC Budget.

For each of these organisations the BCC funding forms the majority of their income,

and it is likely they will be unable to continue to operate if funding is reduced or

ceased.

Other sources of funding for these organisations would be minimal and might be

donations from local businesses, charity fundraising and small local grants &

legacies.

If the services were to end as a result of reduced/ceased funding then all staffing

and volunteers would be impacted significantly. All of the contracts affected

employ paid staff and volunteers.

There is another larger contract for Young Carers.


stream)?




income)



a breakdown.


of 124









It is likely that the proposal could lead to an increased demand on other VCS.

The reduction will have a negative impact on our efforts to encourage people and

communities to become more self-reliant, as the providers will have insufficient

timing to prepare for becoming self-reliant.





demand?




of 124











Contracts with these organisations come to an end between Feb-Mar 2014 and so

they will need to be aware of potential reductions/cessation of funding immediately

in order for consultation with families accessing the services to be undertaken.

VCS Perspective:







The VCS organisations involved will need to be informed immediately to establish

the full extent of potential implications. This will be carried out by meeting each of

the contracts & their trustees where applicable.

of 124

















The proposals will be monitored as part of contract monitoring and performance

monitoring processes. Where changes are required these will be assessed and

implemented where necessary to improve services and ensure those with protected

characteristics are not disproportionately impacted.

Complaints and appeals will be monitored according to council policy and guidance

with equalities categories identified where possible to ascertain whether there are

any disproportionate impacts.

of 124



Meetings with each of the organisations affected to be arranged to inform them of cessation of

funding / reduction on funding where applicable

Claire Knott End Dec 13

Relevant Members notified of proposal Ben Thomas End Dec 13

Parents/Carer communication Claire Knott End Dec 13

Organisations signposted to alternative funding sources Claire Knott Jan-Mar 14

Parents/Carers signposted to alternative services. Claire Knott Jan-Mar 14

Review impact on alternative provisions Claire Knott May 2014

of 124


You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by

the proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.










Background

Buckinghamshire County Council (BCC) has contracted with Professional

Association for Childcare and Early Years (PACEY) (previously known as National

Childminding Association - NCMA) for over 12 years to provide support to

childminders and nannies across Buckinghamshire.

There are currently 929 childminders and 380 nannies in the county.

MTP Ref: ES14BS05

Line title and

description of

change:

Childminding Support Services

Reduction to contract delivery to reflect changes to LA duties and Early Years

regulation


information:

Jane Nicholls, ex 3179

Date assessment completed: 1st October 2013





Signature:

Portfolio: Education & Skills

of 124



The contract includes:

12 Local Authority (LA) approved “CYPOP5” courses per year for

prospective childminders – courses run for 8 x 2 hours for prospective

childminders which is the regulatory requirement for registration with

Ofsted

Development to 30 volunteer ‘Buddies’ to support new childminders

through to registration, annual fee paid to Buddies to cover tel. costs etc.

Management support and quality kite mark accreditation to childminders

(currently 107 achieved)

Support and development of childminders to gain approval for provision

of funded early education (currently 86)

Management of Buckinghamshire Community Childminding Network

(BCCN) providing childcare to vulnerable children and families (currently

32, aim to extend to 45 by March 2014 and 60 by March 2015). BCCN

provides childcare which is funded by LA (outside of this budget) to

families identified through early intervention streams i.e. Social Care,

Family Resilience Service, health visitors as part of the LA early help offer.









being addressed?









10 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service

user’s protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected

characteristic and the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of

achieving a legitimate business aim

of 124






intent.

Universal information, support and advice to sector

The proposed cost saving will be achieved through:

Reduction from 12 to 8 “CYPOP5” course - £17,100 saving

Reduce buddies from 30 to 20 - £5,000

Increase “CYPOP5” fee from £20 to £100 per course = £13,440

Saving of annual quality accreditation fee - £806

Reduction of 50% to core service delivery excluding Buckinghamshire

Community Childminding Network (BCCN) - £92,817. Any staff savings

should not be at the detriment of support to BCCN

Reduction to core Management Fee by 50% - £20,836 – PACEY has

included a management fee within their overall price based on a % of

total costs, this fee should therefore reduce in line with other costs.

Total projected savings - £149,999 per year from Oct 2014

PACEY engages 9 staff to deliver the contract, working a variety of full and part

time hours. All staff are female, white, British without any disclosed disability.

The proposed cost saving is likely to require the deletion of 3 posts.

Current and future service users are Buckinghamshire’s childminders and

nannies. Government has recently amended regulation through the Children &

Families Bill so that the LA is not the sole provider of services and training to

childminders. In the future childminders will be able to access support and

training through a range of providers including new agencies – of which there is a

pilot provider in Oxford (Trio Childcare Connections) who could expand and offer

of 124

services in Buckinghamshire.

If Trio did offer services into Buckinghamshire this would be an additional offer

and would not replace/reduce what is planned to be available through the LA.

Bucks Learning Trust (BLT) is commissioned to provide a comprehensive training

programme for all early years providers including childminders.

The main training programme provided through this contract is “CPOP5” which

every prospective childminder is currently required to complete prior to

registration. Every year approximately 150 childminders resign and new minders

are trained. Not all individuals trained progress to registration.

The LA currently provides support for free and training at a significantly

subsidised price. The proposal is to continue to provide support services for free

but support will be prioritised to those who need it most to improve quality

and/or are supporting vulnerable children. Increasing the “CPOP5” fee may

reduce the number of non-registrations and drop outs.

Comparison of training charges for “CPOP5”:

LA Fee for “CYPOP5”

Buckinghamshire £20

PACEY direct £189.60

Oxford £141

Hertfordshire £200

RB of Windsor & Maidenhead £223

of 124

Individuals on low incomes may find the proposed fee increase prevents them

from registering as a childminder. However, £100 is a small fee to pay to

establish and train to enter into a new profession and potential career.

Universal support and advice now is more widely available through web media

thus reducing the need for face to face support. Childminders are required to

access information from DfE and Ofsted through the web and therefore have to

be media savvy and connected to run a professional business. Childminders who

are judged by Ofsted to ‘require improvement’ will be prioritised for face to face

support from PACEY.

Accredited childminders may feel that the time and effort put into qualifications

and accreditation is no longer valued. It will be key to stress that Ofsted has

stated that those providers who don’t have a full and relevant qualification, or

equivalent experience, are unlikely to be able to attain a good or better

judgement. It is proposed to introduce a tiered support package which allows

childminders to self- select CPD, utilising our most experienced childminders to

provide voluntary peer to peer support. Childminders have responded positively

to this proposal and feel valued.

In comparison to many other LAs, Buckinghamshire currently provides a ‘gold’

level package of support which is no longer affordable in the current climate. The

market place is rapidly changing with new companies providing services directly

to childminders so a reduction in BCC provision is required to ensure it remains

efficient and value for money.

Groups with protected characteristics will not be affected differently to other

groups in Bucks by this proposal. The reduction in universal support will be

applied to all 900 childminders. There are currently 107 ‘Accredited’ childminders

of 124

who receive additional support and mentoring to achieve a quality benchmark.

The proposal is to withdraw this accreditation as it is no longer a sector

regulatory requirement for Directory providers, nor are they a priority group for

quality improvement. This change removes a benefit received by a few, who are

predominantly higher achievers and enables childminders without sector

qualifications to access early education funding for the families to whom they

supply services.

BCC doesn’t currently record the demographic profile of childminders although it

is known that the majority are female. By the nature of the work and through

regulatory requirements, childminders have to demonstrate that they are

physically able to meet the needs of young children and demonstrate

competency in English language.












capability?

A reduction may impact as increased take up of training provided by The

Buckinghamshire Learning Trust (BLT). As training courses are currently

subsidised, this may have a financial impact unless prices are increased to cover

cost. Courses currently cost between £25- 35 depending on length.

Current course programme:

https://schoolsweb.buckscc.gov.uk/schools/documents/early_years/training/Wa

llchart_Spring_2014.pdf

https://schoolsweb.buckscc.gov.uk/schools/documents/early_years/training/Wallchart_Spring_2014.pdf

https://schoolsweb.buckscc.gov.uk/schools/documents/early_years/training/Wallchart_Spring_2014.pdf

of 124









Training is provided by BLT through a Service Level Agreement (SLA) managed by

Early Years (EY). Through the SLA, EY will be able to monitor any impact and

respond to increases in demand and subsequent budget pressures.

The reduction to the contract will provide opportunities for other external

agencies, including BLT, to develop local services, which is in line with

Government preferences - i.e. childminding agencies.

PACEY has recently rebranded itself moving from solely childminding to

marketing itself to the whole early years sector. This move is in recognition of the

changing market and evaluating its future market position. Childminding is a

specialist market area; tendering the contract last year resulted in three

acceptable responses.

The proposed changes to the contract delivery are significant but still ensure that

the LA delivers its statutory duties. The early years duties were changed in

September 2013:

Guarantee an offer of funding for all providers of a quality assessed by

Ofsted, or an inspection body approved by the Secretary of State, as

‘satisfactory’, ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ where there is an eligible child wanting

to take up an early education place;1

Guarantee an offer of funding for new early education providers, which have

been registered with Ofsted, prior to their first full Ofsted inspection;

Limit the extra conditions that local authorities can place on private,

voluntary and independent (PVI) early education providers in order for them

to qualify for funding to deliver places

Refocus the LA’s Information, Advice and Training (IAT) duty. LA’s are

required to secure information, advice and training for childcare providers,

of 124

ensuring that it is voluntary for provider judged good or outstanding to take

up. LA’s have the power to offer IAT.

Reform the early education funding system, by encouraging local authorities

to simplify their funding formulae (EYSFF) and to limit the amount of centrally

retained spend.

In addition to the IAT change, the removal of processes from providers seeking to

provide early education funding will create capacity within the contract to

redirect towards targeted quality improvement.








their absence?







do so?


Currently there are no staff on long term sick, maternity, secondment or career

break.

All staff will be placed at risk and invited to apply for the remaining posts. PACEY

will apply their usual recruitment procedures to ensure that staff are selected

following best practice and complying with HR & Equality of Opportunity

regulation.

PACEY provide services in other LAs following the proposed priorities and focus

set out in this proposal for Bucks. Staff will receive training and guidance from

their Service Manager to redirect their focus and will also work with the Early

Years Team to ensure approaches are consistent across all providers. Early Years

provides support to pre-schools and nurseries and has been prioritising support

following a data driven approach so will share their learning with PACEY.

of 124



proposal?






Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? PACEY (Professional Association for Childcare and Early Years)

PACEY is a registered charity and not for profit organisation. Registered charity

number: 295981.

Accounts registered with charities commission:

Income £000

2012 £11,241

2011 £16,104

2010 £15,971

2009 £15,648


stream)?


o % reduction in BCC contribution

o % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)



a breakdown.


of 124









2008 £16,765

BCC current contract is funded from LA base Grant which was £416,262 for 2013/14

% reduction from Bucks = 36% from October 2014.

% reduction in PACEY total income based on 2012 = 1.33%

PACEY doesn’t receive any other income from Bucks organisations.

PACEY recently lost their contract with Birmingham City Council. A request has been

made to PACEY regarding business turnover and reductions for this year but they

have not responded. PACEY recently rebranded their organisation as a support

service for the whole of the childcare sector rather than just childminders as part of

their business strategy recognising a potential reducing market place.

See above for funding impact on delivery.

Childminding agencies may benefit from the reduced contract. This is a new

delivery concept which is currently in the pilot stage with the Department for

Education (DfE).

No geographical impact.





demand?






of 124









PACEY and BCC has been discussing the proposed changes with childminders over

the last six months as part of an informal consultation process. Discussions have

taken place regarding proposed changes at network events which are open to all

childminders.

PACEY staff will receive face to face discussions and be offered 1-1 meetings to raise

any concerns/questions.

VCS Perspective:







Early discussions are already underway as the contract key priorities need to change

in response to changes in regulation from Sept & Nov 2013. The planned changes

are due for implementation from October 2014 which will allow sufficient time for

discussion and consultation.




of 124














The contract changes will be monitored through Key Performance Indicators(KPIs0

and outcomes matrix. This will require the contractor to gather feedback from

service users and families about the impact and quality of the service.

of 124

Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000

15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000

Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)

Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)

Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)

Comments

ES14BS07/14 BP04

Client Transport

Home to School Transport

Home To School Transport Efficiencies - Strategic Review and explore opportunities for savings (income generation including increased charging, more efficient routing, alternative methods i.e. public transport and volunteer drivers, contract efficiencies, exploration of reducing

-1,191

-2,607

-3,552

-3,828

Y

E

Y

There may be some impact on different groups but the full extent will not be known until pilot schemes are fully evaluated. Removal of post 16 transport for low income and SEN may impact on Not in Education or Employment (NEET) targets if young people are unable to attend learning opportunities due to the removal of this provision.

of 124

demand)


15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000




Comments

ES14BS19

LA Learning, Skills & Prevention

Use of new funding streams for skills agenda

0 -50 -50 -50 NA NA NA Review undertaken over the next year to determine impact as no savings to be made in the first year

ES14BS18


Review of Educational Psychologists Team

-100 -100 -100 -100 Y E Y EP service will require to increase traded services or there will have to be a cut in serivce

of 124


15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000




Comments

CS14BS27


LA Children's Partner-ships

Review of FIS - (Family Information Service)

-30

-30

-30

-30

Y

E&V

Y

A reduction in FIS would result in families having to source information themselves through Google, where quality of data cannot be managed. Face to face and social media support would also no longer be available to families with greatest need which has the potential for them to be placed at an even greater disadvantage than other families in the county. Outreach provision could be satisfied to a degree by Children’s Centre Family Support Workers but would be limited to families with children under 5. The Youth service also operate a limited service of outreach but this is a targeted resource and only available for young people 13+. There would be a significant gap of face to face support for families who have children of primary school age which could not be delivered by services in the current BCC structure

of 124


15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000




Comments

ES14BS01



Review of Children's Partnership Team

-34 -34 -34 -34 Y E Y

As this relates to staffing reductions, the relevance identified is to the Council's duty as an employer to ensure its policies and procedures are fairly applied.

ES14BS17



Review of Children's Partnership Team

-41 -162 -203 -203 Y EV Y

A cut in the service over a four year period will see cessation of the team. All statutory duties managed within this team will have to be delivered by other services where expertise may be problematic

ES14BS02


LA Fair Access & Youth Provision

Reconfigur-ation of Youth Centres - 2 remaining Council retained Youth Centres to be run on the community model

-80 -160 -160 -160 Y E Y

As this relates to staffing reductions, the relevance identified is to the Council's duty as an employer to ensure its policies and procedures are fairly applied.

of 124


15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000




Comments

ES14BS03


LA Fair Access & Youth Provision

Implement-ation of Adventure Learning Foundation Efficiencies gained through the implement-ation of the Adventure Learning Foundation

0 -40 -80 -120 Y E N

As this relates to employees being TUPE transferred into a new organisation, the relevance identified is to the Council's duty as an employer to ensure its policies and procedures are fairly applied.

ES14BS15


LA Prevention & Commissioning

Children's activities - Public Health contribution to activities relating to Children's

-500 -500 -500 -500 Y E N

There will be no change to these services and it is only the funding stream that will change. The exception is the expansion of the support to Children at risk of Sexual Exploitation through increased capacity to RU Safe, increased work with Schools and Youth Centres, increased awareness raising and training and increased expertise and social work capacity.

of 124


15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000




Comments

ES14BS04



Early Years Services - Review and implement changes in response to legislative changes

-100 -100 -100 -100 Y E Y

As this relates to employees being TUPE transferred into a new organisation, the relevance identified is to the Council's duty as an employer to ensure its policies and procedures are fairly applied.

ES14BS05



Childmind-ing Contract Savings - Childmind-ing Support Service contract costs to be reduced through renegotiation of the contract

-50 -150 -150 -150 Y V N

Impact on staffing will require further consultation and all efforts made to comply with BCC procedures This service is provided by a national not for profit organisation. While the overall impact on the organisation will be small (e.g. a reduction of approx 1.5% based on 2012 budget), the proposal is likely to have staffing implications locally.

of 124


15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000




Comments

ES14BS06



Connexions recommis-sioning - Connexions contract due for renewal with efficiencies and savings being achieved through retender

0

-200

-200

-200

Y

E&V

Y

Population data and projections from the 2011 census suggest that numbers of BME, children in care/leaving care and young people with learning difficulties or disabilities will all increase over the next 5-10 years. All of these groups are currently over represented in the NEET group. Young people who are NEET have an increased risk of entering the criminal justice system, misusing controlled substances and have an increased chance of suffering from mental health conditions. (The Cost of Exclusion – Counting the cost of youth disadvantage in the UK – Prince’s Trust). Approximately a 7% reduction on current contract value which is currently held by a not-for-profit provider.

of 124


15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000




Comments

CS14BS25


LA Prevention & Com-missioning

Review use of Children's Voluntary Grant

-50 -50 -50 -50 Y E&V Y Full impact assessment required awaiting info from Ben Thomas

ES14BP02


LA SEN Increase capacity for monitoring SEN cases - To ensure compliance with the actions agreed following an inadequate audit report, increasing capacity for case monitoring

100 150 150 150 Y E N No adverse impacts identified in the screening assessment

of 124


15/16 £000

16/17 £000

17/18 £000




Comments

ES14BS16


LA SEN Savings to meet grant reduction

0 -994 -994 -994 NA NA NA Further work required to determine any impact. This will be conducted during 2014/15 as no savings required until 2015/16.

ES14BP05


LA SEN Impact of SEN legislative changes - Investment to meet the requirements of SEN legislative changes

0 0 60 150 Y E N No adverse impacts identified in the screening assessment

education and skills equality &vcs analysis of medium term...

Documents