Meeting documents

Children's Services and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Tuesday 1 April 2008

Web Agenda/Minutes Summary Document

Meeting Name:
Children's Services and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Panel

Meeting Date:
04/01/2008 Pick

Meeting Time:


Location:


Sub Committee / User Forum etc (if required):




Members Present:

Non-Members Present:

Confidentiality: Part I


Document Type: Agenda


Document Status: Final


N O T I C E

O F

M E E T I N G

CHILDREN’S SERVICES AND LEISURE
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL

will meet on

TUESDAY 1 APRIL 2008

at

7.30 pm

in the

COUNCIL CHAMBER, TOWN HALL, MAIDENHEAD

TO: ALL MEMBERS OF THE CHILDREN’S SERVICES AND LEISURE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL
        COUNCILLOR LENTON (CHAIRMAN)
        COUNCILLOR MRS PITTEWAY (VICE-CHAIRMAN)
        COUNCILLORS MISS BARTON, BASKERVILLE, J EVANS, MRS LUXTON & MRS STOCK

        MR GIBBONS (PORTSMOUTH DIOCESAN REPRESENTATIVE) AND MRS MINTERN (OXFORD DIOCESAN REPRESENTATIVE)

        SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS
        COUNCILLORS BICKNELL, MRS BURSNALL, MRS HERDSON, MRS HUNT, MAJEED, MRS NAPIER & MRS NEWBOUND
    Lloyd White
    Head of Democratic Services

    Issued: 27 March 2008

    Members of the Press and Public are welcome to attend Part I of this meeting.

    The agenda is available on the Council’s web site at www.rbwm.gov.uk or contact the
    Panel Administrator Andrew Scott (01628) 796028
    In the event of the fire alarm sounding or other emergency, please leave the building quickly and calmly by the nearest exit. Do not stop to collect personal belongings and do not use the lifts. Congregate in the Town Hall Car Park, Park Street, Maidenhead (immediately adjacent to the Town Hall) and do not re-enter the building until told to do so by a member of staff.


    AGENDA

    PART I

    ITEMSUBJECT
    WARD
    PAGE
    NO
    1APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

    To receive any apologies for absence.
    2DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

    To receive Declarations of Interests from Members of the Panel in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
    3MINUTES

    To confirm the Part I minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 29 January 2008, which was reconvened on 11 February 2008.
    i-v
    4CHILD AND ADOLESCENT MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE (CAMHS) UPDATE – BERKSHIRE EAST PCT

    To receive a report on the Child and Adolescent Mental Health service.
    All
    1
    5*APPROVAL OF THE CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE PLAN 2008-2011

    To comment upon the report being submitted to Cabinet on 22 May 2008 on the draft Children and Young People Plan 2008-2011.
    All
    3
    6*HOME TO SCHOOL TRANSPORT POLICY: GENERAL POLICY AND POLICY FOR POST-16 TRANSPORT

    To comment upon the report being submitted to Cabinet on 24 April 2008 on the Council’s Home to School Transport Policy and Policy for Post 16 Transport.
    All
    9
    7*CODE OF PRACTICE FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF LEA REPRESENTATIVES TO GOVERNING BODIES OF SCHOOLS IN THE ROYAL BOROUGH

    To comment upon the report being submitted to Cabinet on 24 April 2008 on the Code of Practice for the Appointment of LEA Representatives to Schools’ Governing Bodies.
    All
    29
    8*APPOINTMENT OF LEA REPRESENTATIVES TO GOVERNING BODIES OF SCHOOLS IN THE ROYAL BOROUGH

    To comment upon the report being submitted to Cabinet on 24 April 2008 on the Appointment of School Governors
    Various
    41
    9*RESULTS OF THE TELLUS 2 SURVEY FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE 2007

    To consider the results of the Tellus 2 Survey for children and young people 2007 and the proposals for taking the results forward locally.
    All
    62
    10*SERVICE MONITORING REPORT

    To receive the latest service monitoring report in respect of Children’s Services and Leisure services.
    All
    74
    11*WORK PROGRAMME

    The following items are scheduled for discussion at a Special meeting in May – on a date to be confirmed:

    Behaviour In Schools
    Smith’s Lane Community Project
    Primary Strategy for Change
    Expansion of Windsor First Schools
    The Learning for Sustainability (LfS) Strategy and associated LfS Standard for Schools
    First Admission to School
    Draft Work Programme 2008/2009
    -
    12LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 – EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

    To consider passing the following resolution :-

    “That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion takes place on items 13 - 15 on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1-7 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act"
    -


    * Education Related Item




    4. CHILD AND ADOLESCENT MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE (CAMHS) UPDATE – BERKSHIRE EAST PCT
    Children's Services and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Panel: 1 April 2008

    Presented by: Trevor Keable, Assistant Director of Commissioning, Berkshire East PCT


    1. Introduction and Background
    1.1 The delivery of a comprehensive CAMHS Service is the partnership responsibility of the local authority and the Primary Care Trust.
    1.2 The Tier 3 specialist community CAMHS Service is commissioned by the PCT for the residents of East Berkshire including the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead by Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust.
    1.3 Berkshire East PCT is in the process of recommisioning the Tier 3 CAMHS .The PCT has informed the current provider Berkshire Healthcare Foundation Trust that they intend to serve notice on the current service

    2. Development of a Comprehensive CAMHS strategy
    2.1 A CAMHS Commissioning Group has been established which is scheduled to meet monthly and includes representatives of the three Unitary Authorities within East Berkshire, the PCT management and public health. This group supports the effective recommissioning of the service.
    2.2 The CAMHS Commissioning Group had identified a lack of clarity at the interface of Tiers 1 and 2 with Tier 3 services with some variation in provision of Tier 1 and 2 services between each locality.
    2.3 The local authority partners have been asked to map their services in order that the interface between Tier 2 services provided by the local Authority and the Tier 3 specialist community CAMHS service provided by Berkshire Healthcare NHS Trust is understood. The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead have undertaken this task and the mapping is being reviewed by the Children’s Trust Executive Board.
    2.4 In order to understand the interface and support the development of the service specification a wider event was held in late January which explored the level of service that is available across Tiers 1 to 3 in each of the local authority localities.

    3. CAMHS Needs Assessment
    3.1 The PCT Public Health Department has produced a detailed needs assessment for CAMHS in East Berkshire in order to support the recommissioning process.
    3.2 The reports key epidemiological findings are as follows
          A greater number of 5 to 15 year olds were attending Tier 3 specialist appointments than would be expected and the numbers attending from the under 5’s and 16-17 year old age groups was as would be expected
          The majority of referrals were generic in nature and not specialist
          The number of children attending the service from looked after families and with learning difficulties were lower than expected
          Staffing levels for the service overall were in line with Royal College of Psychiatrist guidelines
    3.2.1 The findings of the report will support the ongoing development of the CAMHS services

    4. Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
    4.1 The CAMHS specialist community CAMHS provider appointed a new senior manager in the autumn of 2007 to manage and develop the service.
    4.2 Since being in post improvements to the service have been made to the including reduced waiting times, a review of referral pathways criteria and multi disciplinary management of referrals.
    4.3 There has been acknowledgement within CAMHS via the Commissioning Group of the improvement that have been made to service delivery at Tier 3

    5. Market Testing
    5.1 In order to assess what the benefits and risks of a formal tender process would be, the PCT in conjunction with the CAMHS Commissioning Group is undertaking a market testing exercise.
    5.2 The market testing exercise will receive presentations from potential providers of CAMHS Tier 3 services to a panel consisting of representatives from the PCT and the 3 local authorities in East Berkshire. This is scheduled to take place on April 23rd.
    5.3 An outline specification has been sent to five potential providers of CAMHS services inviting them to outline how they would deliver a Tier 3 specialist CAMHS service and how they would contribute to a comprehensive CAMHS in line with the needs assessment which had been undertaken.
    5.4 Following these presentations the panel and the PCT will consider whether they should enter into a formal tender for Tier 3 services or develop a formal service development and action plan with the current provider which would deliver an appropriate CAMHS Tier 3 service.


    Paul Thomas
    Mental Health Commissioner
    20/3/08




    5. APPROVAL OF THE CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE PLAN 2008-2011

      CHILDREN’S SERVICES AND LEISURE OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY PANEL: 1st APRIL 2008
      CABINET: 22nd MAY 2008
      COUNCIL: 24th JUNE 2008

      MEMBER REPORTING: COUNCILLOR MRS QUICK
    1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

      To present Members with the draft Children and Young People Plan 2008-2011 for their approval.
    2. MEMBER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the attached Children and Young People Plan 2008-2011 be approved by Members and implemented by RBWM’s Children’s Trust from June 2008.
      3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

      3.1 Wards Affected

        All wards may be affected by the contents of this report.
      3.2 Relevant Matters Upon Which Decision is Based & Reasons Supporting Recommendation
        3.2.1 The Children and Young People Plan (CYPP) is an important element of the reforms for integrated children’s services from the Children Act 2004. The Act placed a duty on Local Authorities to produce with partners a single, strategic, overarching plan for all local services for children and young people in order to support more integrated and effective services as set out in the Every Child Matters (ECM): Change for Children agenda. This sits alongside the duty on the Local Authority to make arrangements to co-operate to improve the well-being of children and the duty to safeguard.

        3.2.2 The Children and Young People Plan sets out the key priorities for Children’s Services within both the Council and its partner agencies for the next three years. The priorities are outcome focussed and aim to improve the lives of children and young people so that they are healthy, stay safe, enjoy and achieve, make a positive contribution and achieve economic well being. Integrated planning through the CYPP is an essential part of the continuous improvement cycle for Children’s Services, which involves an assessment of need, an identification of priorities, specification of the services and resources to meet those needs, and monitoring and evaluation of outcomes for children.

        3.2.3 The Royal Borough’s first CYPP (2006-2008) was published in April 2006 following Council approval and taken forward by the former Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership (CYPSP). A formal review of the progress against this plan was undertaken in April 2007 and formed part of the self-assessment submitted to Ofsted for the Council’s Annual Performance Assessment 2007, the yearly inspection of Children’s Services by central government. The review of the CYPP 2006-2008 was reported to Members at the Cabinet meeting in June 2007.

        3.2.4 Significant work has been undertaken to develop the new Children and Young People Plan for 2008-2011. A detailed needs assessment of the needs of children and young people was undertaken and a comprehensive review of the progress from the first CYPP 2006-2008 was conducted in order to establish priorities for development over the coming years. The recommendations and comprehensive dataset and information arising from the APA 2007 were also used to further inform the key priorities for the new CYPP.

        3.2.5 The priorities in the Plan have also been informed by the views of a wide range of professionals and organisations delivering services to children and families in the Royal Borough and the Plan as a whole has been developed in partnership with members of RBWM’s Children’s Trust. Work has also been undertaken to ensure the views of children and young people and their families are central in determining the key priorities within the Plan for 2008-11. See paragraph 4 for further details on the extensive consultation carried to develop the Plan.

        3.2.6 Next Steps
          The Plan is now subject to approval from RBWM Cabinet in May and Council in June. The CYPP will then be adopted by the Council and partners as the key strategic plan for Children’s Services over the next three years. The CYPP will be submitted to central government in June as part of our self-assessment for APA 2008. The CYPP will be underpinned by a detailed action plan, which will be monitored regularly through RBWM’s Children’s Trust and implemented through the Outcome Groups of the Children’s Trust. A formal annual review of the progress of the CYPP will take place in each year of the lifespan of the Plan.
        3.2.7 The priorities in the CYPP 2008-2011 have also been used to develop relevant targets and indicators within the Children and Young People Block of the Local Area Agreement for 2008.

        3.2.8 The key priorities in the CYPP are underpinned by a Joint Commissioning Strategy, which will be finalised in May 2008. The Joint Commissioning Strategy sets out how local partners will work together to direct resources to achieve the objectives laid out in the Children and Young People Plan and the Children and Young People block of the Local Area Agreement. The Joint Commissioning Strategy covers the full cycle of the CYPP and will also be subject to annual review.
          3.3 Options Available and Risk Assessment
            Option
            Comments
            1. To approve the attached draft Children and Young People Plan 2008-2011. The Council has a duty to comply with the requirements of the Children Act 2004 and to produce a Children and Young People Plan. The attached document has been drawn up in consultation with all relevant partners and is recommended for approval.
            2. To make suggested amendments to the attached document.
            Any amendments could delay the publication of the Plan and the capacity of the Local Authority to submit this to Ofsted as part of the APA inspection process.
            3. Do nothing The Council has a statutory duty to comply with the requirements of the Children Act 2004. Therefore to do nothing would not be in line with this duty.
          3.4 Relevant National/Regional Guidance

            The duty on Local Authorities to have a Children and Young People Plan in place is one of the key requirements placed on Local Authorities arising from the Children Act 2004.

            Initial national government guidelines on the development of a CYPP (‘Guidance on the Children and Young People Plan’) was published in 2005 as part of a suite of documents on the requirements from the Children Act 2004 including the development of Children’s Trusts.

            Further guidance on the requirement for Local Authorities to formally review the Children and Young People Plan in all years when it is not required to publish a new plan is set out the government guidance ‘Annual Review of the Children and Young People Plan’ published in January 2007. The guidance also gives a statutory list of those organisations that the Local Authority is expected to consult on the Plan. The stipulation that this review replaces the need for a separate self-assessment for the APA process is also included in this guidance and detailed further in the ‘APA Handbook and Arrangements’ documents published by Ofsted in April 2007.

            The Department for Children, School and Families also published the national Children Plan, ‘Building Brighter Futures’, in December 2007. The document sets out government’s vision and plans for children and young people over the next ten years. We have taken account of the proposals and the government’s direction of travel within this Plan in developing our new local priorities for the Children and Young People Plan 2008-2011. A focus event took place on 6th March 2008 for staff and partners within Children’s Services to specifically consider how our Children and Young People Plan links with the proposals within the national’s Children’s Plan.
          3.5 Relevant Council Policies/Strategies

            As the overarching integrated strategic plan for Children’s Services locally, the Children and Young People Plan (CYPP) 2008-2011 will drive the work of the Children’s Trust.

            As detailed in the report the CYPP 2008-2011 is underpinned by a Joint Commissioning Strategy to ensure the provision of services that are targeted to meet the needs of children and young people locally.

            The children and young people block of the Local Area Agreement 2008 also supports the development of the priorities within the CYPP 2008-2011.

            The recommendations contained in this report also contribute to the Community Strategy in the following ways:

            Relevant?
            Yes / No
            Key Themes:
            Supporting Children & Younger PeopleYes
            Supporting Adults & Older People Cross cutting links
            A Thriving, Cleaner, Greener BoroughCross cutting links
            Safer & Stronger CommunitiesCross cutting links

          4. CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT

          4.1 Government guidance the ‘Annual Review of the Children and Young People Plan’ (supplementary guidance January 2007) stipulates the range of organisations that should be consulted on the development of the Plan. Extensive consultation on the CYPP has been undertaken to ensure all the views of all these groups have been captured in the Plan.

          4.2 There have been three phases of consultation on the Plan. Initial consultation took place during Autumn 2007. This phase involved discussions at a formative stage in the development of the key priorities at a range of meetings including Children’s Services team meetings across the Council, the Parents in Partnership Forum, the Schools’ Forum, the Admissions Forum, Member Forums such as the Children and Young People’s Consultative Forum, Headteachers’ and Governors’ briefings and meetings of the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB).

          4.3 Comments from the phase 1 consultation, together with data analysis from the APA and the needs assessment, helped to inform a draft list of key priorities for the new CYPP. During November and December 2007 these draft key priorities were then subject to public consultation with all relevant partners and stakeholders, who are part of the ‘Duty to Co-operate’, and the wider community. This was in line with national government guidance regarding those organisations that should be consulted on the CYPP. An open forum for staff and partner agencies on the consultation also took place on 29th November 2007, which was attended by approximately 45 people. All the comments received through this second phase of formal consultation and the Open Forum were collated and taken into account to further refine the key priorities.

          4.4 Young people have been consulted through a range of mechanisms to ensure their views are central to our strategic planning. The CYPP has been informed by the results of the ‘Tellus 2’ Survey. As part of the APA 2007, views of children and young people in 34 schools in RBWM were gathered through Ofsted’s ‘Tellus 2’ survey. Pupils from years 6, 8 and 10 were asked about their perceptions about what it is like to live in the Royal Borough in relation to the 5 Every Child Matters outcomes. Members were informed of the results of the survey at the December Cabinet meeting. The results of the young people’s ‘SpeakEasy’ conference, held in November 2007, around the 4 key themes of mental health, staying safe, healthy schools and bullying have also been taken into account. Younger children were encouraged to express their thoughts on these same Speakeasy themes through an Artwork Competition for 3- to 11- year-olds. Children were asked to draw or paint a picture of somewhere they felt safe, or somewhere they felt happy, or of a healthy school. The winning entries appear in this Plan, and the views expressed in all of them have been taken into account in writing it. A young people’s version of the draft CYPP key priorities was also sent to School Councils in all middle and secondary schools for their comments during the second consultation phase. RBWM’s Youth Participation Worker also shared the draft key priorities with the Members of Youth Parliament, the Youth Forum and the Young Carers’ group - approximately 85 responses were collated from these sessions. Youth workers were also provided with copies of the CYPP draft priorities to distribute as appropriate. The consultation on the priorities was also placed on the borough’s managed intranet for schools (WAMIE) for all children and young people in RBWM schools.

          4.5 Parents and carers were invited to participate in developing this Plan at all stages. Four drop-in sessions were held in Autumn 2007 for parents of children with special needs to explore their general concerns. The Parents in Partnership Forum was then formally consulted during the development of the key priorities. Parents were encouraged to respond to the second phase of consultation on the draft key priorities via coverage in the local press and a cross section of schools being asked to raise awareness of the consultation through their newsletters to parents. The consultation was also specifically signposted to foster carers through their monthly newsletter.

          4.6 The third and final consultation phase took place during February and March 2008 and involved a public consultation on the full version of the draft Plan. All organisations that are part of the statutory list of consultees for the CYPP were invited to send in comments. Comments received during the consultation period were taken into account when finalising the Plan.

          5. COMMENTS FROM OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL
            TO BE COMPLETED AFTER THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE HAVE MET.
          6. IMPLICATIONS
            6.1 Financial

              As part of the requirement to develop Children’s Trust arrangements, the Local Authority has a duty to produce a Children and Young People Plan and a Joint Commissioning Strategy. The Joint Commissioning Strategy details how the resources of the Council and Partner Agencies in the Children’s Trust will be working together to target resources towards CYPP priorities to meet the needs of children and young people locally. RBWM’s Joint Commissioning Strategy will be published in May 2008. The resources to be committed by the Council to this strategy will be within the Learning & Care’s Directorate’s budget allocations for this period.

              The development of the Children’s Trust will require some integration of budgets, financial monitoring and reporting. The degree of integration can range from the alignment of budgets, the development of joint posts, pooled budgets for specific services, to a full pooling of funds for the entire range of Children’s Services. Indeed there could be a gradual progression through this range. Currently it is envisaged that budgets will be aligned where practicable and there may well be advantages from a number of joint posts.
            6.2 Legal
              By virtue of Section 10 of the Children Act 2004 each Children’s Services Authority must make arrangements to promote co-operation between itself and each of its relevant partners and such other persons as it considers appropriate. These arrangements are made with a view to improving the well-being of children in their area with regards to education, training and recreation, amongst other things. Section 17 makes provision for the preparation and publishing of the Plan.

            6.3 Human Rights Act
              1. The convention rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 relevant to this report are Article 2 of the first protocol, the right not to be denied an education; article 2, right to life; article 3, prohibition of torture; article 8 respect for private and family life; article 14, prohibition of torture.
              2. None of the convention rights are affected by this decision.
              3. This decision does not affect any victims as defined under the Act.
            6.4 Planning

              There are no planning implications arising from the present report.

            6.5 Sustainable Development

              There are no sustainable development implications arising from the present report.

            6.6 Diversity and Equality

              The Children and Young People Plan for 2008-2011 has been subject to a full Equality Impact Assessment. The recommendations in this report have no significant negative impacts on equality target groups and in addition there are potential benefits to vulnerable groups of children. Any negative impacts have been minimised and opportunities for promoting equality have been maximised.
            28

            6. HOME TO SCHOOL TRANSPORT POLICY:
              GENERAL POLICY AND POLICY FOR POST-16 TRANSPORT

              CABINET: 24 APRIL 2008

              MEMBER REPORTING: COUNCILLOR MRS QUICK

            1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

              This report concerns the council’s Home to School Transport Policy. In particular, there is a requirement to submit a Post-16 Transport Policy to the Department for Children, Schools & Families and to the Learning and Skills Council by 31st May every year.
            2. MEMBER'S RECOMMENDATIONS:

            2.1 That the Post-16 Transport Policy (attached as Annex 1), and the Transport Policy Statement for students aged 16-18 in further education and continuing students aged 19 and over (attached as Annex 2), be approved and submitted to the Department for Children, School & Families and to the Learning and Skills Council by 31 May 2008.

            2.2 That approval be given to setting up a Working Party of member and officers to revise the existing General Home to School Transport Policy, including the Post-16 Transport Policy, and to report its findings to Cabinet in February 2009.
              3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

              3.1 Wards Affected

                The recommendations in this report will affect all wards in the borough.
              3.2 Relevant Matters Upon Which Decision is Based & Reasons Supporting Recommendation

              3.2.1 Context

                a) Post 16 Transport

                Significant developments have taken place in the requirements for provision of transport to pupils aged 16 and over (i.e. beyond Year 11 of the National Curriculum) since 2002. These include the following.

                i) Changes to existing legislation through the Education Act 2002, to clarify the role and responsibilities of Councils and their partners on assessing and providing transport for all students aged 16-19.

                ii) Greater partnership and collaboration between Councils and their Learning Skills Council (LSC), Further Education and Higher Education Institutions, transport authorities, Connexions and other key local organisations in developing and publishing policy statements for local students.

                iii) A requirement that partnerships led by local authorities will each produce transport policy statements to be published via the Connexions website and other Council websites, so that young people can see what transport support and services are available to students.

                iv) A requirement that the policy statements should:

                outline the transport support available to students who are over compulsory school age;
                be published by 31st May each year;
                specify what transport arrangements are available for students with disabilities or learning difficulties or both;
                be accompanied by a simple explanation of what is available to students and parents.

              3.2.2 Reports to Cabinet in May 2006 and May 2007 referred to a consultation in 2006 with various partners including headteachers, chairs of governors of borough schools, and a range of other partners including the LSC, Connexions and local colleges of further education. As a result, the Policy and Guidance attached as Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 respectively were agreed and adopted by Cabinet. With the exception of the matters mentioned in paragraph 3.2.3, it is proposed to retain the current Policy and Guidance for the academic year 2008-9. Consultation will take place for the academic year 2009-2010 as part of the proposal outlined in the next paragraph.

              3.2.3 The amendments to this policy are updating of the travel costs. Members will note that it is proposed to ask for a single payment for the entire year at the start of the year. In the past, it was possible to pay in three instalments.

              3.2.4 b) General Home to School Transport Policy (including Post-16 Transport)
                The General Transport Policy, currently posted on the Council’s web-site, is some years old and is in need of revision to ensure that it complies with current practice and requirements. In addition, as mentioned below, home to school transport represents a heavy item of the Council’s expenditure, and Members may wish to satisfy themselves of the appropriateness of this expenditure. It is therefore proposed that a Working Party be set up to undertake such revision.

                The proposed function of he Working Party will be to review the current Policy and after appropriate consultation, to propose amendments to Cabinet. Such review will consider, but not be restricted to, the appropriateness of the policy with regard to denominational transport, transport for pupils with special educational needs, transport for pupils aged 16 and over, appeals procedures, and provision of transport at the discretion of the Council. It will consider suitable amendments and where necessary propose guidelines to assist the day-to-day operation of the Policy by Officers of the Council.

                The Working Party will include Members and Officers.

                The Working Party will be convened immediately under the general chairmanship of the Lead Member for Children’s Services. It will make any necessary public consultation during the autumn of 2008, and will make its report in time to be considered by Cabinet at its meeting in February 2009. Subject to approval by Cabinet, the new Policy will be implemented from September 2009, or from September 2010 with respect to matters where a September 2009 implementation would be unreasonable.
              3.3 Options Available and Risk Assessment

              3.3.1 a) Post-16 Transport

              Option
              Comments
              1. To retain current policy – recommended.The current policy is robust and working satisfactorily.
              2. To undertake further revision and consultation, which could be made as part of the revision of the General Home to School Transport Policy – recommended.Sch.19 to the Education Act 2002 imposes on local authorities the duty to report to Members, and then to the DCSF and LSC, the arrangements for a Post-16 Transport Policy prior to its publication by 31st May each year.

              Preparation of the consultation and proposals by the same Working Party that is considering the General Home to School Transport Policy would help to ensure consistency and coherence.
              3. To do nothing – not recommended.The Secretary of State has the power, if he considers it expedient, direct a local authority to put relevant arrangements into place. This power exists by virtue of S.509AA(9) and (10) of the Education Act 1996 (inserted following Sch.19 to the Education Act 2002).

              3.3.2 b) General Home to School Transport
                Option
                Comments
                1.
                To revise current policy – recommended.The current policy is has not been revised since about 2003 and may not be in accordance with current principles.

                Members may wish to offer guidance on day-to-day operation of the Policy.
                2. To do nothing – not recommended.

              3.4 Relevant National/Regional Guidance

              3.4.1 The recommendations in this report comply with the requirements imposed on Councils (outlined in Paragraph 3.3.1) when Schedule 19 of the Education Act 2002 took effect in January 2003 and the then Department for Education and Skills circulated guidance to local authorities in relation to transport arrangements.

              3.4.2 The proposal to include information on disability provision in the policy is in line with the principles of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, which requires local authorities amongst other things to take reasonable steps to ensure that those with disabilities are not treated less favourably than those without disabilities.
              3.5 Relevant Council Policies/Strategies

              3.5.1 Relevant policies are
                  the Home to School Transport Guidelines 2005
                  the Local Transport Plan 2006

              3.5.2 The recommendations contained in this report also contribute to the Community Strategy in the following ways:

              Relevant?
              Yes / No
              Key Themes:
              Supporting Children & Younger People
              Yes
              Supporting Adults & Older People
              Yes
              A Thriving, Cleaner, Greener Borough
              Yes
              Safer & Stronger Communities
              Yes

              3.5.3 The Post-16 Transport Policy reflects the principle of an inclusive approach to education as stated in the Strategic Plan for Inclusion, 2005-2007, still in operation.

              3.5.4 This report also support’s the authority’s Accessibility Strategy, developed in partnership with school, and approved by Members in March 2006.

              3.5.5 These recommendations also reflect the Vision and Values Statement for Children’s Services as part of the Learning and Care Directorate.

                4. CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT

                Post-16 Transport Policy

                  Consultation on the current Plan was detailed in reports to Cabinet in 2007 and 2006.

                  Consultation on the attached Annexes took place in the spring of 2008, by way of e-mails to secondary and upper schools and local colleges. The closing date for this was 12th March. By 10th March, no comments whatsoever had been received.

                  The current report proposes a public consultation as part of a wider-ranging transport review.

                5. COMMENTS FROM OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL
                  Overview and Scrutiny takes place on 1st April
                6. IMPLICATIONS

                6.1 Financial

                6.1.1 a) Post-16 Transport
                  The gross spending in 2007-8 on providing this transport is £239k. Students and their families contribute some £62k towards the cost, leaving a net cost to the authority of £177k.

                  The numbers of students receiving grants in 2007/08 are as follows.
                    There are currently 143 mainstream pupils in receipt of Post-16 transport assistance, the net cost of their transport being £31k.
                        o Of these 143 pupils:
                        96 travel by rail
                            41 travel by contracted coach services
                            6 travel by local bus
                    There are a further 22 post-16 pupils with special educational needs who attend Further Education establishments (and who when in school had statements of special educational need). Their transport costs amount to some £85k.
                        o Of these 22 pupils:
                        3 travel by rail
                        6 by local bus
                        6 by taxi
                        4 by contract coach services
                        3 by mileage reimbursement
                    Finally, there are 16 Post-16 SEN pupils who have stayed on at school and have a statement of SEN. Their transport costs amount to some £61k.
                        o Of these 16 pupils:
                        5 travel by taxi
                        5 by coach
                        5 by WCH accessible vehicle
                        1 by mileage reimbursement

                6.1.2 b) General Home to School Transport

                Costs of general home to school transport for 2007-8 are as follows.
                    Mainstream school pupils under 16 £467,000
                    Denominational pupils under 16 £115,000
                    Special Educational Needs under 16 £1,133,000

                6.2 Legal

                6.2.1 Sections 509AA and 509AB of the Education Act 1996 (inserted by Schedule 19 of the Education Act 2002)) deal with the provision of transport for persons of 6th form age. Section 509AA provides that local authorities must prepare for each academic year a transport policy statement complying with the requirements set out in that section.
                6.2.2 Section 509AB(6) provides that in preparing a statement under s509AA of the Act, the local authority must consult any other local authority that it considers it appropriate to consult, the governing bodies referred to in section 509AA(4), the Learning & Skills Council, and any other person specified by the Secretary of State for the purposes of section 509AB.

                6.2.3 The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as amended by the SEN and Disability Act 2001 makes it unlawful for local authorities and governing bodies to discriminate against disabled pupils with regard to the education or associated services provided or offered by schools. Local authorities and governing bodies have a duty not to treat disabled pupils less favourably than pupils who are not disabled, without justification. They must also take reasonable steps to ensure that disabled pupils are not substantially disadvantaged with regards to the education and associated services.

                6.2.4 Further, Schedule 19 to the Education Act 2002 amends the Education Act 1996 to include provisions requiring Councils to publish by 31st May in each year, after consultation, a post-16 transport policy. This statement must include amongst other things details of arrangements for facilitating the attendance of post-16 students with disabilities and/or learning difficulties at appropriate establishments.

                6.2.5 The basis of the requirement to provide transport for pupils living beyond walking distance from their school is in Section 444 of the Education Act 1996.
                  6.3 Human Rights Act

                  6.3.1 The convention rights under the Human Rights Act relevant to this report are Article 2 of the first protocol, the right not to be denied an education and Article 14, the prohibition of discrimination.

                  6.3.2. None of the articles are affected by the decisions proposed in this report.

                  6.3.3 This decision does not affect any victims as defined under the act.
                    6.4 Planning

                      There are no direct planning implications as a result of this report.

                    6.5 Sustainable Development

                      There are no sustainable development implications arising from this report.
                      6.6 Diversity and Equality

                      The recommendations in this report have no negative equality or diversity implications for the Council’s Equality Impact Assessment Policy.
                      [Department fro Education and Skills] Guidance to Local Education Authorities on Transport Arrangement for 2005-2006

                      meetings_080401_cslosp_home_school_transport_appendices.pdf Meetings 080401 Cslosp Home School Transport Appendices





                      7. CODE OF PRACTICE FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF LEA REPRESENTATIVES TO GOVERNING BODIES OF SCHOOLS IN THE ROYAL BOROUGH

                        CABINET: 24 APRIL 2008

                        MEMBER REPORTING: COUNCILLOR MRS QUICK
                      1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

                        To adopt the revised Code of Practice that is based on the School Governance Regulations (2007). The revisions made reflect changes to present a more comprehensive Code of Practice (Appendix A).
                      2. MEMBER'S RECOMMENDATIONS: That the revised Code of Practice is adopted to ensure greater robustness and transparency in the appointment process and to bring the Borough in line with the School Governance Regulations (2007).
                        3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

                        3.1 Wards Affected

                          For all.
                        3.2 Relevant Matters Upon Which Decision is Based & Reasons Supporting Recommendation

                          The recommendation is made to ensure that the process of applying for an LEA governor role is robust in identifying the skills and knowledge required of that role. The code will reflect the most recent guidance and will ensure that the whole process is transparent.
                        3.3 Options Available and Risk Assessment

                          It is recommended that the amended Code of Practice is adopted without modification. Members have the following options:

                          Option
                          Comments
                          1Adopt the Code of Practice as presentedWill ensure that the recruitment process is transparent and is set up to match best the required skills and knowledge of the Governing Board with the applicants.
                          2Adopt with modification(s)The code of practice presented is based on national guidance and best practice. Local audit recommendations have also been introduced into the process to ensure that the brokering of Governor applications is objective, equitable and provides Members with the appropriate information for making the recruitment decisions.
                          3Not to adopt the revised Code of PracticeIncreases risk of not adequately matching skills and knowledge requirements of Governing Body with that of the schools. This could lead to inadequate governance resources for schools. Further, this could also be published in a report following a school inspection.

                          A risk assessment of the introduction of the revised code of practice identified the need for it, if adopted, to be adequately publicised to all stakeholders to avoid any confusion of the process. The risk assessment also identified the role of a focused, continual marketing campaign to attract applications, to ensure a diverse choice of applicants for Members final decision.
                        3.4 Relevant National/Regional Guidance

                          The DCSF has now issued guidance on the governance constitution regulations mentioned in paragraph 6.2 below.
                          The appointment of school governors contributes to the Community Strategy in the following ways: it supports the three guiding principles of working together, leaving no-one behind and involving people. Those appointed as school governors can support schools to address three of the five key themes, namely learning for life, being safe and secure and caring and health.
                        3.5 Relevant Council Policies/Strategies

                          The recommendations contained in this report also contribute to the Community Strategy in the following ways:

                          Relevant?
                          Yes / No
                          Key Themes:
                          Supporting Children & Younger People
                          Yes
                          Supporting Adults & Older People
                          A Thriving, Cleaner, Greener Borough
                          Safer & Stronger Communities
                        4. CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT

                        5. COMMENTS FROM OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL

                        6. IMPLICATIONS

                        6.1 Financial

                          There are no additional financial implications in this report.
                        6.2 Legal

                          The composition of governing bodies is set out in the Education Act 2002, the School Governance (Constitution) (England) Regulations 2007. School Governance (Federation) (England) Regulations 2007 and School Governance (New Schools) (England) Regulations 2007. If a school has concerns with the LEA governor appointment, which are not satisfied by the provision of Cabinet decision notes on the appointment, the school may:
                              1. Make a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman
                              2. Submit an application to judicially review the decision
                              3. Direct their concerns under Part IX Education Act 1996
                        6.3 Human Rights Act

                          1. There are no Convention Rights under the Human Rights Act relevant to this Report.
                          2. None of the Convention Rights will be affected by this decision.
                          3. This decision does not affect any victims as defined under Human Rights Act.
                        6.4 Planning

                          There are no planning implications in this report.
                        6.5 Sustainable Development

                          LEA governors could seek to promote the Council’s sustainable development policies within their governing bodies.
                          6.6 Diversity and Equality

                            In terms of the Council’s Equality Impact Assessment Policy, the recommendations in this Report have no negative equality and diversity implications.
                          46
                          8. APPOINTMENT OF LEA REPRESENTATIVES TO GOVERNING BODIES OF SCHOOLS IN THE ROYAL BOROUGH

                            CABINET : 24 APRIL 2008

                            MEMBER REPORTING: COUNCILLOR MRS QUICK
                          1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

                            To consider the vacancies that have arisen or will shortly arise for Local Education Authority (LEA) representatives on school governing bodies within the Royal Borough, and of nominations that have been received, so that appointments may be made.
                          2. MEMBER’S RECOMMENDATIONS:
                            That the following appointments be made in accordance with the Borough’s Code of Practice from the names of those persons listed in the table below and Appendix A of this report.
                            That members take note of future re-appointments dates as set out in Appendix C (showing all re-appointments for 2008-2009).

                          3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

                          3.1 Applications were received for the following vacancies:
                          School
                          Ward
                          Name
                          Trevelyan Middle School
                          Park
                          Lucy Parker
                          St Edmund’s House
                          Furze Platt
                          Lesley Galloway
                          St Edmund’s House
                          Furze Platt
                          John Kernaghan

                          The final approval of which applicant becomes an LEA governor lies with Cabinet.

                          3.2 Wards Affected

                          All

                          3.3 Relevant Matters Upon Which Decision is Based and Reasons Supporting Recommendation

                          Details of vacancies that have arisen within the borough are given below. Details of candidates seeking appointment are given in the attached Appendix A. All appointments should be made in accordance with the authority’s Code of Practice on the Appointment of LEA Governors, given as Appendix B.

                          3.3.2 Existing vacancies
                            On 18th March 2008 there were 9 vacancies for LEA governors at schools within the Royal Borough at the following schools:
                              SchoolWard
                              No. Vacancies
                              Braywood C of E First Bray
                              1
                              Clewer Green C of EClewer East
                              1
                              Datchet St Mary’sDatchet
                              1
                              Dedworth Green FirstClewer North
                              1
                              Oakfield First Clewer East
                              1
                              St Edmund’s HouseFurze Platt
                              2
                              Trevelyan MiddlePark
                              1
                              Windsor Boys’ Castle Without
                              1
                            This represents a vacancy rate of 0.9% of the total number of governors or 6.2% of LEA governors. Ward Councillors for these vacancies have been notified via an e-mail.
                          3.3.3 Governors Seeking Re-Appointment
                            The following education LEA governors are about to reach the end of their current term of office and have submitted nomination forms seeking re-appointment for a further term of office.
                            SchoolWardRepresentative seeking Reappointment
                          3.3.4 Future vacancies

                            LEA governors at the following schools will reach the end of their current term of office before April 2008. Letters are sent to each governor inviting them to apply for re-appointment. Applications are invited from Members and other interested individuals for consideration for these positions at the time of the next report.
                            Current representatives

                          School WardTerm of office ends Re-submitting
                          Windsor Boys’Castle Without01/03/2008No

                          3.4 Options Available and Risk Assessment

                            Under the Authority’s Code of Practice, nominations will only be considered if submitted on the appropriate application form prior to a published closing date. Appointments to fill any of the vacancies in this report can only be made from the nominations listed in the schedule at Appendix A.


                            OptionComments
                            1.To select an appropriate applicant from those included to be recruited to the corresponding vacancy.If it is deemed that the skills and knowledge of the applicant meet the needs of the schools it will be an advantage to the governance resource of that school to endorse the application immediately.
                            2.To defer some/all appointments to a future meeting. Members select applications for recruitment at alternate Cabinet meetings. This means that a delay could add a further two months to the application process. The DCSF recommend that appointments should normally be made to fill vacancies within three months.
                            3.To reject some/all applications.Members have the right to reject applications. This would be on the basis that the applicant’s skills and knowledge will not support the school and does not fit with the current required need.

                            The risk assessment identified the role of a focused, continual marketing campaign to attract applications, to ensure a diverse choice of applicants for Members final decision.

                          3.5 Reasons Supporting Recommendation

                            Under the Authority’s Code of Practice, schools have the right to advise the authority of their governing body’s needs in terms of balance of skills, gender or any other consideration for the good of the school, and to submit names for consideration.

                            If the person appointed does not match the specified needs of the governing body and/or the governing body’s preferred candidate is rejected, the governing body may request the authority to give its reasons.

                            Candidates have the right to decline an appointment if it does not meet their preferences.

                          3.6 Relevant National/Regional Guidance

                          The DCSF has now issued guidance on the governance constitution regulations as mentioned in paragraph 5.2 below.

                          The appointment of school governors contributes to the Community Strategy in the following ways: it supports the three guiding principles of working together, leaving no-one behind and involving people. Those appointed as school governors can support schools to address three of the five key themes, namely learning for life, being safe and secure and caring and health.

                          4. CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT

                          4.1 Governing bodies are invited to comment on candidates’ suitability for re-appointment and to submit nominations to fill these and any casual vacancies that arise. Where a school has expressed a view, this is noted in the candidate’s details, as listed in Appendix A.
                          4.2 Following the closing date for receipt of applications, those applicants who have not requested one particular school are matched to current vacancies, taking account of a variety of factors including any expressed requirements or preferences of both schools and candidates, and the proximity of a school to a candidate’s home or business address. As far as possible, schools and applicants are then contacted to discuss the options available and to ascertain that they have no objection to the recommendation proposed.

                          5 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL COMMENTS.


                          6. IMPLICATIONS

                          6.1 Financial

                          There are no additional financial implications in this report.

                          6.2 Legal

                          The composition of governing bodies is set out in the Education Act 2002, the School Governance (Constitution) (England) Regulations 2007. School Governance (Federation) (England) Regulations 2007 and School Governance (New Schools) (England) Regulations 2007. If a school has concerns with the LEA governor appointment, which are not satisfied by the provision of Cabinet decision notes on the appointment, the school may:
                            1. Make a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman
                            2. Submit an application to judicially review the decision
                            3. Direct their concerns to the Secretary of State under Part IX Education Act 1996
                          6.3 Human Rights Act
                            1. There are no Convention Right under the Human Rights Act relevant to this Report.
                            2. None of the Convention Rights will be affected by this decision.
                            3. This decision does not affect any victims as defined under the Human Rights Act.

                          6.4 Planning

                          There are no planning implications in this report.

                          6.5 Sustainable Development

                          LEA governors could seek to promote the Council’s sustainable development policies within their governing bodies.

                          Diversity and Equality
                            In terms of the Council’s Equality Impact Assessment Policy, the recommendations in this Report have no negative equality and diversity implications.

                          APPENDIX A

                          DETAILS OF CANDIDATES LISTED IN ORDER OF SCHOOLS

                          Criteria for Appointment

                          LEA governors will be chosen on the basis of the contribution they can bring to a school in terms of their skills and experience as specified in their nomination form, taking account of any supporting information provided by the candidate or by the school.

                          LUCY PARKER

                          ONE APPOINTMENT

                          TREVELYAN MIDDLE SCHOOL
                          Previous ExperienceMs Parker has experience of team management, project management and devising campaign strategies and implementing them.
                          Reason for ApplicationMs Parker is committed to helping children achieve the same educational opportunities which she was able to enjoy in this country, Europe and Russia whilst studying to Postgraduate level.
                          Ms Parker is also keen to give something back to the local community.
                          Other relevant
                          information
                          Ms Parker is a linguist with work experience gained in Europe and Russia and is keen to see the increasing importance of foreign languages in British schools. Ms Parker has also completed work related research in to the problems facing employers due to the IT skills gap.
                          LESLEY GALLOWAY

                          ONE APPOINTMENT

                          ST EDMUNDS HOUSE
                          Previous
                          Experience
                          Mrs Galloway currently works as a governor with Moat School (an independent school in London).
                          Reasons for ApplicationMrs Galloway is a Senior Manager in the RBWM Children’s Services Department and would like to use her experience with St Edmund’s House on the management committee.
                          Other relevant
                          information
                          Despite Mrs Galloway being a Senior Manager within RBWM, this does not present a conflict of interest.


                          JOHN KERNAGHAN

                          ONE APPOINTMENT

                          ST EDMUNDS HOUSE
                          Previous
                          Experience
                          Mr Kernaghan has served as a parent and community governor with Cox Green School for the past fourteen years.
                          Reasons for ApplicationMr Kernaghan would like to use his experiences gained at Cox Green and through his career as a Chartered Engineer to help make a positive contribution.
                          Other relevant
                          information
                          Mr Kernaghan strongly believes in providing people with equal opportunities so they can all lead a relatively good life.
                              APPENDIX B –
                              CURRENT CODE OF PRACTICE

                              Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
                              Code of Practice for the Appointment of Education Authority Governors


                              This Code of Practice is drawn up in response to the DfES Code of Practice on Local Education Authority-School Relations.

                              Introduction and Background
                              Education Authority governors are the appointed representatives of the Education Authority on a school’s governing body.

                              Education Authority appointed governors are representatives, and not delegates. As such, they may present the Authority’s view, in the same way as other categories of governor represent the views of their constituency, but they cannot be mandated by the Authority to take a particular line.

                              Relationships
                              An Education Authority governor’s first loyalty should be to their school and to the community it serves.

                              The Authority may establish such links with its appointees as it and they see fit, but these will not take the place of formal consultation with governing bodies, or with the local association of governing bodies.

                              Appointment Process
                              Appointment decisions rest with cabinet. The Director of Education will be present at these meetings to advise Members.

                              Appointments will be considered by the Cabinet as necessary, but at least once every two months in order to ensure that appointments are made promptly when vacancies arise.

                              Applications will only be considered from individuals who have submitted a completed nomination form to the Governor Services section to arrive by the specified closing date, which will be not less than 7 working days prior to the Cabinet meeting at which the appointments will be considered.

                              Schools have the right to advise the Authority of their governing body’s needs in terms of balance of skills, gender or any other consideration for the good of the school, and to submit names for consideration by Cabinet.

                              If the Authority fails to fill an Education Authority vacancy for three months after it has been presented at Cabinet, the governing body can make an appointment.

                              Criteria for Appointment
                              Education Authority governors will be chosen on the basis of the contribution they can bring to a school in terms of their skills and experience as specified in their nomination form, taking account of any supporting information provided by the candidate or by the school.

                              If the Education Authority appointee does not match the needs of the governing body and/or the governing body’s nominee is rejected, the governing body may request the Education Authority to give its reasons.

                              Removal from Office
                              The Education Authority may remove an appointed governor from office at any time, providing there is good reason to do so. Governors failing to attend meetings for a period of six months or more without valid reason will be disqualified under the school government regulations.
                          Appendix C- Re-appointment dates of current Governor posts for 2008-2009, listed by end date.
                          SchoolDate Due for Re-appointment
                          South Ascot Village School01/02/2008
                          Furze Platt Senior School26/05/2008
                          Furze Platt Senior School22/08/2008
                          Cox Green School31/08/2008
                          Cox Green School31/08/2008
                          Trevelyan Middle School31/08/2008
                          Wessex Primary School31/08/2008
                          Trevelyan Middle School31/08/2008
                          Cookham Rise Primary School22/09/2008
                          Furze Platt Senior School22/09/2008
                          Homer First School25/09/2008
                          Homer First School13/11/2008
                          Holyport Manor School31/12/2008
                          Larchfield Primary and Nursery School26/01/2009
                          Woodlands Park Primary School31/01/2009
                          Cheapside Primary School23/03/2009
                          Charters School31/03/2009
                          Knowl Hill School10/04/2009
                          Braywood First School17/04/2009
                          Desborough School25/05/2009
                          Dedworth Middle School31/05/2009
                          Dedworth Middle School31/05/2009
                          Courthouse Junior School28/06/2009
                          Datchet St Mary’s CE Primary School27/07/2009
                          Desborough School27/07/2009
                          Dedworth Green First School31/08/2009
                          Oldfield Primary School31/08/2009
                          Oldfield Primary School31/08/2009
                          White Waltham School31/08/2009
                          White Waltham School31/08/2009
                          Windsor Boys’31/08/2009
                          Windsor Boys’31/08/2009
                          Eton Wick First School31/08/2009
                          Newlands Girls’ School31/08/2009
                          Charters School04/09/2009
                          Ellington Primary School21/09/2009
                          St Edmund Campion Primary School25/09/2009
                          Trevelyan Middle School06/11/2009
                          Holyport Manor School08/11/2009
                          Cookham Rise Primary School23/11/2009
                          Lawns Nursery School23/11/2009
                          Desborough School23/11/2009
                          Newlands Girls’ School23/11/2009
                          Trinity St Stephen23/11/2009
                          Wraysbury Primary School23/11/2009
                          Wraysbury Primary School23/11/2009





                          9. RESULTS OF THE TELLUS 2 SURVEY FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE 2007

                            CHILDREN’S SERVICES AND LEISURE OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY PANEL: 1st APRIL 2008

                            MEMBER REPORTING: COUNCILLOR MRS QUICK
                          1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

                            To present Members with the results of the Tellus 2 Survey for children and young people 2007 and to outline the proposals for taking the results forward locally.
                          2. MEMBER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the attached results and recommendations for future action be noted.
                            3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

                            3.1 Wards Affected

                              All wards may be affected by the contents of this report.
                            3.2 Relevant Matters Upon Which Decision is Based & Reasons Supporting Recommendation
                              3.2.1 Formerly part of the Joint Area Review (JAR) of Children’s Services, Ofsted’s Tellus survey is now one of the data requirements of the Annual Performance Assessment (APA), which is the yearly inspection by central government of Children’s Services within the Council and Partner Agencies.

                              3.2.2. The Tellus survey is a confidential, online survey for pupils of mixed ability in years 6, 8 and 10. The survey asks them about their perceptions about the local area and their views around the five Every Child Matters (ECM) outcomes. Ofsted used the collated results from the Tellus 2 survey (Annex 1), alongside other data, analysis and fieldwork, to inform the overall grades awarded to the Council for the APA in November 2007. The survey is seen as a valuable tool for Local Authorities to inform their decision making at a local level and also provides national and statistical neighbour benchmarks of the views of children and young people.

                              3.2.3. A sample of schools in RBWM, 42 in total, were invited to participate in the Tellus 2 survey during April and May 2007, 34 actually took part. This was one of the highest response rates nationally. In terms of number of pupils taking part, RBWM had 1, 574 pupils/ 67% out of requested cohort (5th highest nationally) and in terms of the number of schools taking part out of requested number, RBWM had 81% (2nd highest nationally).

                              3.2.4. Ofsted’s collated results of the Tellus 2 survey for the Local Authority were published in November 2007 and have been shared with the participating schools and members of the Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership (CYPSP). Proposals about how best to take forward the results locally were discussed at the CYPSP Co-ordination and Implementation Group (CIG) meeting on 10th December 2007 and RBWM Directors’ Group on 16th January 2008. Ofsted’s headline summary of the Tellus 2 results was also reported to Members as part of the report on the APA results to Cabinet in December 2007.

                              3.2.5. An overview of the salient points from the Tellus 2 Survey results is detailed below under the five Every Child Matters outcome headings, together with proposals about how to take forward any emerging issues highlighted by young people:

                              Be Healthy
                                45% of young people eat three-four portions of fruit and vegetables a day (against 40% nationally) and 26% eat five portions or more (against 23% nationally).
                                The percentage of young people in the borough who had ever smoked (23%) or had an alcoholic drink (49%) is in line with the national average.
                                Information on drugs is seen as good by young people. 73% said it was ‘good enough’ against 69% nationally.
                                36% of young people said that they need more or better advice on sex and relationships.
                                Top 5 things that pupils worry the most about
                                    1. Exams 56% (against 51% nationally)
                                    2. Friendships 41% (against 39% nationally)
                                    3. School work 37% (against 35% nationally)
                                    4. Money 33% (against 29% nationally)
                                    5. My future 32% (against 30% nationally),
                                      Being Healthy 32% (against 32% nationally)
                                      Girlfriends/boyfriends/sex
                                      (Years 8 and 10 only)- 32% (against 28% nationally)
                              Areas for development
                                Young people in years 8 and 10 have highlighted that they need more or better information on Sex and Relationship Education (SRE). This is an area, which will be drawn to the attention of schools and taken forward by the Be Healthy Outcome Group of RBWM’s emerging Children’s Trust. Schools will be encouraged to recruit more teachers to undertake the nationally accredited Personal Social and Health Education (PSHE) Continued Professional Development (CPD) Programme in Sex and Relationships Education and to identify teachers with training needs to attend the SRE training days.

                                Stay Safe
                                The percentage of young people who said they had been bullied was in line with the national average. 70% said they have never been bullied and 18% said they had been bullied a couple of times in the last four weeks.
                                In terms of how well their school deals with bullying, only 51% said very or quite well (against 57% nationally), 36% said not very well or not at all well (against 30% nationally).
                                Only 64% responded that they feel very or quite safe on public transport (compared to 68% nationally).
                              Areas for development
                                Anti-bullying will be taken forward as part of the Borough’s Anti-Bullying Strategy and in conjunction with schools. The Local Authority supports schools currently by providing annual pupil questionnaires, which are completed and analysed. Schools are also encouraged to participate in activities during anti-bullying week in November and throughout the year through Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL) and Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) lessons. Schools that have achieved National Healthy Schools Status have anti-bullying policies and strategies to prevent bullying such as peer mediation and playground buddies. As friends were highlighted as a group that young people would talk to about bullying (76%) the Co-ordination and Implementation Group of the former Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership agreed that that peer support for mental health issues might be an area that could be developed further.

                                Issues about the safety on public transport will be considered by the Stay Safe Outcome Group of RBWM’s Children’s Trust/Local Safeguarding Children’s Board Prevention sub-committee in liaison with the Council Transport Policy Implementation Group. A more detailed survey of pupils’ views regarding public transport will be commissioned in order to ascertain specific issues for action planning. Transport operators will be requested to review reporting procedures to ensure that issues are appropriately reported/assessed.

                                Enjoy and Achieve
                                There is evidence that a high percentage of young people feel there is enough to do in the area. When asked why they don’t do things they would like to do such as going to a Youth Club or Music Group only 23% responded that there aren’t any near them (lower than national average of 30% and highlighted as significant difference between LA and national figure)).
                                Pupils were positive about the activities and things to do in the area. 34% said they were good enough (against 26% nationally -this was highlighted as a positive outcome from the significant difference between LA and national figure).
                                  Only 21% said they need a lot more or better things to do against 29% nationally (again this was highlighted as a positive outcome from the significant difference).
                                Information on activities is also good. Only 17% responded that they need a lot more information about activities in the local area (against 22% nationally –highlighted as a positive outcome from the significant difference)
                                The percentage of young people said they enjoyed school was in line with the national average (59%).
                                When asked what would help them do better at school:
                                  More fun and interesting lessons was the top answer with 82% (against 79% nationally).
                                  43% responded that smaller classes/groups would help them to do better at school (against 36% nationally – this has been highlighted as significantly different from the national average).
                              Area for development
                                There was a discussion at the CYPSP CIG meeting about the smaller classes issue and it was suggested that this might be a perception possibly arising from young people having friends in the borough who attend private schools with smaller classes, as large class sizes are not perceived as a particular issue for RBWM.

                                Advisers and consultants working within the Learning and Achievement Team, who support curriculum development in our schools, are aware that the need to increase the interest and fun in lessons has been highlighted by young people. The team is actively promoting the use of ICT across the curriculum and of media within English, both approaches known to engage and enthuse learners. Mainstream training linked to the national strategies also promotes the concept of personalised learning, which tailors educational experiences to the needs, interests and aspirations of each individual.


                                Making a Positive Contribution:
                                58% of pupils (Years 8 and 10) think that their views are listened to in the running of the school a great deal or fair amount (against 52% nationally- this is highlighted as a positive outcome from the significance different with the national figure).
                                47% said they had voted in an election at school (against 43% nationally).
                                When asked how much the views of children and young people were listened to in decisions about the local area, 59% stated not much or not at all (in line with national average of 58%).

                              Areas for development
                                Much work has been done to consult with young people about the work of the Council, such as the PSHE lessons to consult on the Children and Young People Plan 2006-2008. However because this was carried out within a school environment, there may have been a perception that this wasn’t part of the decisions of the Council for the local area. It was agreed that the Participation Strategy Group of RBWM’s Children’s Trust would continue to develop opportunities for participation and to also make sure that young people are aware when they are being consulted about Council decisions. Increased opportunities for participation is also part of one of the recommendations from the final APA report and is part of the APA action plan.

                                Achieve Economic Well-Being
                                There is evidence that pupils have high aspirations. Only 11% said they hoped to get a job at 16 (against 16% nationally - this is highlighted as significantly different to national figure). 62% said they hoped to study and go to University (against 50% nationally - this is highlighted as significantly different to national figure).
                                In terms of what they think of the local area as a place to live, 79% rated it very or fairly good (against 74% nationally).
                                Of the things that could make the area a better place:
                                  Only 38% said responded more or better sport clubs (against 44% nationally),
                                  43% said more or better activities for children and young people (against 50% nationally)
                                  And only 41% said more better parks and green spaces (against 48% nationally) – these are all highlighted as significantly different to national figure.
                                54% felt that the public transport system was very or fairly good against 57% nationally.
                                However only 31% of young people in years 8 and 10 (against 36% nationally) felt that the information they get to plan their future is good enough.
                                When asked what they would do if anything to make their life better:
                                  30% said more places I can go to hang out with my friends (30% nationally)
                                  21% said more help to plan my future (17% nationally)

                                Areas for development
                                With regard to the issues raised about career information, all young people in RBWM schools have access to a range of group interventions with Connexions Berkshire throughout their time at school (from Year 8 onwards). This includes information in assemblies, class sessions to introduce on-line support such as the Connexions website, Fast Tomato (an interactive careers guidance and education for teenagers) and the Berkshire Opportunities Prospectus (BOPs) and group discussions regarding decision making, options choices at Years 9, 11, 12 and 13 and occupational areas. In addition, some young people will access more in-depth support as a result of identification by Connexions staff in partnership with schools and other agency staff as well as through self-referral. Currently schools focus a greater proportion of their Connexions resource in Year 11, which is also the point at which many young people begin to make their first significant decisions. Year 11s are asked by Connexions Berkshire to complete self-assessment surveys, the results of which are consistently are at a 90% and ‘above satisfaction’ rate. Connexions Berkshire have indicated that the discussion about increased support for younger year groups (Years 8 and 9) could be taken forward via the 14-19 Strategic Partnership and as part of the Partnership Agreements that take place every summer term in each school to agree the Connexions service for the following academic year.

                              3.2.7 Next steps
                                As indicated the results for the 2007 Tellus survey are being taken forward locally through the Outcome Groups of RBWM’s new Children’s Trust (which replaced the Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership). The results will be considered alongside other consultation results, such as those from the young people’s ‘Speakeasy’ Conference held in November 2007, to inform the development of the borough’s new Children and Young People Plan (CYPP) 2008-2011 and its underpinning strategies and plans. The CYPP 2008-2011 will be submitted for final approval to Cabinet in May and full Council in June 2008.

                                The Tellus survey is now part of the annual APA process and is taking place again in our schools from March – June 2008. The survey is being extended this year to include special schools. Members will be informed of the results of the Tellus survey 2008 following publication of the final APA letter in November.
                              3.3 Options Available and Risk Assessment
                                Option
                                Comments
                                1. To note the attached results of the Tellus 2 Survey 2007 and recommendations for future action.The proposed actions have been put forward by the Lead Officers of the Outcome Groups of RBWM’s Children’s Trust and are recommended for approval.
                                2. To make any further recommendations for future action to RBWM’s Children’s Trust.Members may wish to make additional recommendations to RBWM’s Children’s Trust to take account of the issues arising from the survey.
                                3. Do nothing There is an expectation on the Local Authority to act on information and recommendations that arise from government inspections such as the APA. To do nothing would not be in line with this expectation. Listening to the voice of children and young people and ensuring this informs our strategic planning is a fundamental principle of RBWM’s Children’s Trust.
                              3.4 Relevant National/Regional Guidance

                                The Tellus survey is part of the Annual Performance Assessment of Children’s Services. The integrated inspection framework of Children’s Services, which currently consists of the Joint Area Reviews (JARs) and Annual Performance Assessment (APA) of Children’s Services was part of the Children Act 2004 and commenced in 2005.

                                Information on the APA process for 2007 is detailed in the government guidance ‘Annual Review of the Children and Young People Plan’ published in January 2007 and in the ‘APA Handbook and Arrangements’ documents published by Ofsted in April 2007.
                              3.5 Relevant Council Policies/Strategies
                                The results of the APA 2007 have been used to inform the strategic priorities to be included in RBWM’s new Children and Young People Plan 2008-2011:

                                Relevant?
                                Yes / No
                                Key Themes:
                                Supporting Children & Younger PeopleYes
                                Supporting Adults & Older People Cross cutting links
                                A Thriving, Cleaner, Greener BoroughCross cutting links
                                Safer & Stronger CommunitiesCross cutting links
                              4. CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT
                                4.1 As detailed in paragraph 3.2.3, the Tellus 2 results have been shared with the participating schools and members of the Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership (CYPSP). Proposals about how best to take forward the results locally were discussed at the CYPSP Co-ordination and Implementation Group (CIG) meeting on 10th December 2007 and RBWM Directors’ Group on 16th January 2008. Ofsted’s headline summary of the Tellus 2 results was also reported to Members as part of the report on the APA recommendations to Cabinet in December 2007.

                                  The results have informed the development of the Borough’s Children and Young People Plan 2008-2011, which has been subject to broad consultation with all relevant staff and partners and the wider community through public consultations on the RBWM website during November and December 2007 and again during February and March 2008.
                                5. COMMENTS FROM OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL

                                6. IMPLICATIONS
                                  6.1 Financial
                                    There are no financial implications arising from this report.
                                  6.2 Legal
                                    Section 13 of the Education Act 1996 places a general duty on LEAs to contribute towards the “spiritual, moral, mental and physical development of the community by securing that efficient primary and secondary education are available to meet the needs of the population of their area.” Section 13A provides a duty on LEAs to promote high standards in education and the fulfilment of potential. Further, under Section 175(1) Education 2002, the LEA must make arrangements to ensure that their functions as LEAs are exercised with a view to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children.
                                    The Tellus survey is part of the Annual Performance Assessment of Children’s Services. The integrated inspection framework of Children’s Services, which currently consists of the Joint Area Review (JAR) and Annual Performance Assessment (APA) of Children’s Services, was part of the Children Act 2004 and commenced in 2005.
                                  6.3 Human Rights Act
                                    1. The convention right under the Human Rights Act 1998 relevant to this report is Article 2 of the first protocol, the right not to be denied an education.
                                    2. The convention right is not affected by this report.
                                    3. This decision does not affect any victims as defined under the Act.
                                  6.4 Planning
                                    There are no planning implications arising from this report.

                                  6.5 Sustainable Development
                                    There are no sustainable development implications arising from this report.

                                  6.6 Diversity and Equality
                                    In terms of the Council’s Equality Impact Assessment Policy, the recommendations in this report will be considered as part of the full EQIA carried out on the Children and Young People Plan for 2008-2011, as the key strategic document for RBWM’s Children’s Trust.
                                  10. SERVICE MONITORING REPORT

                                  CABINET: 21 February 2008

                                  MEMBER REPORTING: COUNCILLOR HILTON

                                  1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

                                  To seek approval for budget changes outlined in members recommendations.

                                  To enable members to monitor current Council performance.
                                    2. MEMBER'S RECOMMENDATION:

                                    2.1 That the current revenue and capital outturn projection be noted;
                                    2.2 Approve the revenue and capital movements identified in paragraph 3.2.11;
                                    2.3 That Directors be required to work with Lead Members to develop proposals to contain expenditure within current budget limits;

                                    3. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

                                    3.1 Wards Affected
                                    None specifically, this internal report considers performance across the whole borough.
                                      3.2 Relevant Matters Upon Which Decision is Based & Reasons Supporting Recommendation

                                      3.2.1 Summaries of the Council’s Revenue and Capital financial reports are attached as Appendices A and B respectively. The revenue report includes income and expenditure statements together with a short Directorate commentary drawing members’ attention to key areas affecting the current and future years. The commentary also highlights items that may affect the Council’s performance in future years, such as new legislation or government guidance.

                                      3.2.2 The detailed financial information is available on the Council’s intranet.

                                      REVENUE

                                      3.2.3 Overall expected service expenditure after budget movements is lower by £130k than last month. The Learning and Care directorate anticipates spending £40,419k for the year (£121k lower than last month) and Community Services directorate £21,545 (£45k lower). Corporate Services costs are likely to be £36k higher than reported last month. Appendix A summarises the projected outturn position and shows projected year end reserves to be £5.822m, an increase of £94k from last month.
                                        3.2.4 The Director of Learning & Care reports costs are expected to be lower by £349k in Adult Social Care, mainly relating to Elderly and Physical Disability and Learning Disability Services. There has been an increase in Children’s Services costs of £228k, in three main areas: home to school transport (£54k), LA funded school costs (£80k) and Safeguarding (£94k)

                                        3.2.5 The Director of Community Services reports a reduction in expected expenditure of £45k. Higher planning services costs have been offset by improved rental income from commercial estates.

                                        3.2.6 The Chief Executive reports that expenditure is likely to be £36k higher than expected last month. This is mainly because of recruitment costs for the new Chief Executive (£37k that cannot be contained within budget) and a greater shortfall in the local land charges income (£25k), offset by savings in agency staff costs (£34k).

                                        CORPORATE INITIATIVES

                                        3.2.7 The Corporate Initiative estimate has reduced by £34k as a result of further agency staff savings from the Pertemps contract within Corporate Services. As a result of the release of two floors of Berkshire House, savings of approximately £31k in 2007-8 will be incorporated in next month’s report.

                                        FORMER BCC LIABILITIES

                                        3.2.8 Over the last few weeks the constituent authorities managing ex-BCC properties have identified a number of additional costs that will be shared across all 6 authorities (on the basis of population). The full value has yet to be confirmed, however it is the intention that all the authorities will deal with the liabilities in a similar manner.

                                        It is intended, once the value of the required provision has been measured, an earmarked reserve will be created on the Council’s balance sheet.


                                        CAPITAL

                                        3.2.9 Overall Gross Expenditure Budget

                                        Since last month, there has been a £8,845k movement in the 2007/08 gross expenditure budgets, from £30,054k to £21,209k mainly as a result of slippage. The 2008/9 budget report recommends that 2007/8 slippage is formally added to the 2008/9 Capital Programme. This report reflects that recommendation. Details of slippage can be found in Appendix C.

                                        January 2008 Capital Budget Changes
                                        Expenditure
                                        £000
                                        Income
                                        £000
                                        Capital Budget As At 31 December 2007
                                        30,054
                                        (21,833)
                                        Transfer of slippage identified from 2007-8 programme into 2008-9 *
                                        (8,951)
                                        6,404
                                        Adjustment to funding of school schemes
                                        106
                                        (106)
                                        Maidenhead Nursery Higher Tender Costs
                                        36
                                        (36)
                                        Extended Schools Contingency Budget
                                        (36)
                                        36
                                        Total Movement In The Month
                                        (8,845)
                                        6,298
                                        Capital Budget As At 31 January 2008
                                        21,209
                                        (15,535)

                                        * The details of the budget slippage to 31 January 2008 by directorate are as follows:

                                        Directorate
                                        Expenditure
                                        £000
                                        Income
                                        £000
                                        Corporate Services slippage
                                        (857)
                                        0
                                        Community Services slippage
                                        (4,022)
                                        2,398
                                        Learning & Care slippage
                                        (4,072)
                                        4,006
                                        Total Movement
                                        (8,951)
                                        6,404








                                        Two further adjustments not yet reflected in the gross expenditure budget were approved at Cabinet on 24 January 2008:
                                          A supplementary estimate of £35k to cover the projected additional expenditure on the Woodlands Park scheme
                                          A supplementary estimate of £85k to cover additional expenditure on the HR information system, following completion of negotiations with the supplier.

                                        Prioritisation Sub Committee on 17 December gave approval for an amendment of the Braywick Park Pavilion scheme to reflect additional costs to be funded from external contributions. The budget for the scheme was originally £778k and the new approved budget is £896k of which £400k has already been reported as slippage into 2008-9. The adjustment for the additional £118k is not shown in the current monitoring report.

                                        3.2.10 Overall Projected Expenditure and Slippage Overall, with projected slippage to 2008/09 taken into account, the 2007/08 capital programme is currently expected to have a net overspend of £109 k identified against the 2007/08 gross expenditure budget. This £109k is the net total of a projected £205k of overspends and £96k of underspends on schemes in the programme.

                                        Taking into account the additional funding of £85k which has been approved for the HR Information System and £35k for the Woodlands Park Scheme, the net additional expenditure is £85k.

                                        The most significant projected overspend is on the Local Transport Schemes (£52k), which it is anticipated will be covered from s106 contributions.

                                        3.2.11 Request For Capital Approvals

                                        Approval is requested for the following changes to the 2007-8 programme:
                                          Supplementary estimates to cover the addition of £65k to the Highways Surfacing Contract budget funded by S106 contributions, and £40k to the Highfield Lane Bridge Scheme funded by a Network Rail contribution.
                                            A virement to transfer £36k from the Learning and Care budget for Home Adaptations to the Community Services Improvement Grants budget. The existing budget provides for £434k expenditure on Disabled Facilities grants funded by £270k grant income. A further supplementary estimate is required to increase the Improvement Grant budget by £30K as a result of additional grant allocation. The total budget for Disabled Facilities Grants would be £500k after these adjustments.
                                              A supplementary estimate to cover the funding of a capital grant of £15k to the Maidenhead Waterways Restoration Group , funded by S106 contributions. The group will be contributing £3k towards the total £18k cost of the scheme which will clear and replant the York Stream between Green Lane and Town Moor.



                                              3.2.12 Overall Programme StatusThe project statistics show the following position:

                                              January MonitoringDecember Monitoring
                                              Number of Schemes in Programme
                                              386
                                              398
                                              Yet to Start
                                              3%
                                              7%
                                              In Progress
                                              42%
                                              43%
                                              Completed
                                              37%
                                              32%
                                              Ongoing Programmes i.e. Disabled Facilities Grant
                                              5%
                                              5%
                                              Devolved Formula Capital Grant schemes budgets devolved to schools
                                              14%
                                              14%
                                              There has been a reduction in the number of schemes in the programme due to the slippage of the total budget for 15 schemes into the 2008-9 programme. This is offset by an increase in the number of schemes within the Local Transport Plan and Operations programmes.


                                              3.3 Options Available and Risk Assessment
                                                Option
                                                Comments
                                                1. Accept the reportDirectors have a responsibility for managing their Services within the Budget approved by Council. Cabinet has limited power to vary those budgets within the overall budget and policy framework or to re-define the priorities agreed when the budget was approved. Cabinet does however have responsibility for considering the impact on future years budgets of the decisions taken.
                                                2. Reject the reportThis is not an option as The Local Government Act 2003 requires the Royal Borough to monitor its financial position
                                              3.4 Relevant National/Regional Guidance
                                              The Local Government Act 2003 Section 28 specifically requires an authority to monitor its financial position during the year and take such action to ensure its financial position is not worse than that budgeted
                                                3.5 Relevant Council Policies/Strategies The Councils budget is fundamental to the delivery of all the Council’s Strategies. The recommendations in this report do not directly contribute to the Community Strategy
                                                  4. CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT

                                                  4.1 Consultation was carried out as part of the budgeting process. Unbudgeted significant variations are the subject of separate consultation and report.

                                                  4.2 Scrutiny panels have noted the previously reported monitoring statements. At its meeting on the 9th October the Corporate Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel asked to see, on a regular basis, the whole service monitoring report, rather than just the Corporate Services elements, in order to fulfil its overall responsibility for ensuring that reporting standards are maintained.

                                                  5. IMPLICATIONS

                                                  5.1. Financial
                                                  The Councils Medium Term Financial Plan will be changed to reflect the revenue and capital out-turn positions and improvements identified during the closure of Accounts process.
                                                    5.2. Legal
                                                    The Council’s external auditor has powers to qualify its annual accounts if there were regular and significant annual budget variations. Such qualification would affect the authority’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment standing.
                                                      5.3. Human Right Act
                                                      None
                                                        5.4. Planning
                                                        None

                                                        5.5. Sustainable Development
                                                        None

                                                        5.6. Diversity and Equality
                                                        None

                                                        Background Papers: Cabinet 24 January 2008 – Monitoring report.

                                                        $meetings_080401_cslosp_service_monitoring_appendixA.xls.pdf Meetings 080401 Cslosp Service Monitoring Appendixa

                                                        $meetings_080401_cslosp_service_monitoring_appendixB.xls.pdf Meetings 080401 Cslosp Service Monitoring Appendixb

                                                        $meetings_080401_cslosp_service_monitoring_appendixC.xls.pdf Meetings 080401 Cslosp Service Monitoring Appendixc