Showing posts with label looked after children. Show all posts
Showing posts with label looked after children. Show all posts

Sunday, 1 December 2013

Can Brent provide for vulnerable young people amidst the cuts?

Local councils, faced with savage Coalition cuts to their funding, have often promised to make sure that the most vulnerable residents are protected. This is becoming more and more difficult, whatever the political complexion of the council. Alongside this councils are reducing the range of services to the core services required by statute. I have argued before on Wembley Matters that this may mean that services which are very beneficial to residents, and based on the council's recognition of a local need, may end up being cut: non-statutory doesn't mean not valuable or not needed. In addition, out-sourcing of some statutory services, muddies the water in terms of direct democratic accountability.

The December 9th Executive will be making decisions on a number of items that will have repercussion for services to the vulnerable.

They will be making a decision on procuring an Advocacy service for the following safeguarding 'clients'  to ensure they are safe from abuse:
  • older people with physical disabilities
  • young people (14-25 years old) with physical disabilities
  • adults with mental health needs
  • adults with learning disabilities
I am concerned that  'price' makes up 60% of the evaluation strategy for this procurement.

Another item is a change of provider for the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service.  They propose to decommission services currently provided by Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust.  In a key passage they state:
Information has been sought from other boroughs to determine what they commission. This work makes it very clear that while some boroughs do commission elements of training and systemic or early help provision, they do not fund direct therapeutic interventions. The proposed new provision,detailed in section 5 below, is therefore in line with that provided by other Local Authorities.
I hope the Executive will investigate that a little more. Rather than reduce services to match those of other boroughs, shouldn't Brent assess the value of direct therapeutic interventions?  I certainly found those useful for pupils and their families when I wa a headteacher and such interventions may save money in the long run. Officers argue that it is not possible to continue expenditure at current levels without jeopardising other services.

The proposals would reduce expenditure on children with disabilities by £50,000 to £146,000 and Looked After Children by £230,000 to £107,000.

Officers state:
The proposed change in the service could lead to an increase in support required through Care at Home and Direct Payments, and there is also the potential for some of these children/young people to become LAC. However, such pressures will be contained as the current service is supplementing a service already commissioned by the CCG and existing users will be able to access support from the CCG.
Clearly the first statement needs some discussion in terms of its implications for the individuals concerned. There is a possibility that too much responsibility is being shifted to the relatively untested CCG (Clinical Commissioning Group).

The report admits that there may be longer waiting time for Looked After Children requiring appointments but suggests that this will be dealt with by a requirement for the service to prioritise this group of young people. When I was familiar with this service several years ago waiting time was already a problem so I am sceptical that a notional prioritisation will address the problem.

More worrying also is a statement in the Equalities Impact Assessment that consideration had been given to consulting with users but that this was felt 'not to be in their interests to do so as it it would cause unnecessary anxiety'. The Assessment says it is intended to get views on the new service through the Care in Action forum for adolescents but it is not clear whether this will be before or after the changes are implemented.

A report on Higher Needs Student Eligibility is also tabled for November 9th.  This refers to educational provision for young people between 16 and 25 with a learning difficulty and/or disability. Arrangements have changed through new legislation and the local authority has to allocate appropriate provision:

The report states:
Council therefore needs to have processes in place to support this change and ensure that the allocated budget is not exceeded.
Funds allocated are about £18,000 per head for an estimated 140 people  next year.

The council will need to carry out a Learning Disability Assessment on young people who:

 Will be leaving school aged 16-19 and
• Is going on to further education, higher education or training and
• Is likely to need additional learning support to access education or training opportunities
• New children arriving from abroad who do not have a statement and have a learning difficulty or disability
• Children in mainstream schools that are supported by school action and school action plus support

Talks will be take place with further education colleges and other providers about provision whcih will enable 'young people with disabilities to live active, independent and fulfilling lives in the community.'

It will be important  to monitor the progress of young people and the quality of provision to see if fulfils these aims.

Thursday, 25 October 2012

Gladstone Free School proposers answer some key questions

William Gladstone makes a point...
 The proposers of a secondary free school in NW2, the four form entry Gladstone Free School, have supplied the answers to questions I sent them about their plans. They have now met with an officer from Brent Council and think that their proposal ticks all the boxes of the  partnership principles set out by the council LINK
The Questions and Answers

1. How will you ensure that all children have access to the school and what will your admissions criteria be?

Our aim is to create a non-selective community school for the Cricklewood/ Gladstone Park area. The school will be open to all but if we are oversubscribed then distance from the school will be the main criterion. We want this school to reflect the local community and will try to place it where it is accessible, though we can’t select a site until we have been approved for funding.

2. Will your school reflect the socio-economic profile of its neighbourhood as measured by the proportion of children admitted who are entitled to free school meals.

We actively want a community school that reflects the profile of its neighbourhood and are planning for at least 27% (Brent's average) of pupils on free school meals. We have chosen distance as the main criterion with the intention of siting the school in the heart of that community. We hope this will ensure a fully representative pupil intake.

3. Will you give priority to children with statements of special education need and those who are Looked After?

Pupils with Special Education Needs who have the school named on their statement will be guaranteed a place. Looked after children are given priority, as they would be with a local authority school.

4. Will you insist that all teaching staff have Qualified Teacher Status?

We anticipate that the majority of teachers will have qualified teacher status (QTS). However, in order to best support the anticipated range of educational needs we will be using a wide variety of innovative strategies, including bringing in expertise from cultural organisations, industry, universities and so on. We can't therefore guarantee that all those teaching will have QTS. What we won’t be doing is using non-qualified teaching staff to cut costs or to make profits.

5. Will your teachers enjoy the same conditions of service as local authority school teachers?


Recruiting, developing and supporting the very best teachers is a key part of our vision. We will have fair terms of employment and will consult on those terms. Our hours and our term times might be different from the Local Authority and therefore we can’t guarantee at this stage that the terms of employment will be identical. We intend to seek the two ticks for disability rating as an employer.

6. How will you ensure democratic accountability for the school and its expenditure of public money?

Our published annual accounts will be publicly available to ensure accountability. We are forming a company with charitable aims to make the bid and run the school. A partnership with Brent council remains a possibility, and we welcome other proposals to ensure accountability.

7. Have you any premises ear-marked for the school?

We are not able to select or earmark premises until we have been approved for funding and have the buildings grant. If anyone knows of any large derelict sites which might suit our proposed school please get in touch. We want something in the heart of Cricklewood/ Gladstone park with good transport links and access to open space to support our active approaches to learning.

8. How far have you got with the application/approval process?

The DfE application submission window is from December 17th to January 4th. We have been recognised by the New Schools Network as a high potential new school and so are confident that our application is on track. We need to demonstrate demand for the school with 240 signatures of parents with children in years 4 and 5 on our pledge, and welcome assistance from parents and other members of the local community with that process. Please ask your readers to take a look at our website at www.gladstoneschool.org.

9. Would you consider a partnership with Brent Council for the school?


We have invited Brent Council to consider exactly that.

10. How will you consult with neighbouring schools and the community about your proposals?

We have made considerable efforts to communicate the plans about Gladstone School to local primaries, and have invited 40 headteachers to a special information briefing. We have put information on the NorthWestTwo residents association page and we are grateful for the opportunity to seek the views of readers of Wembley Matters. We had a stall at the Brent Golden Summer festival in Gladstone Park, and have an informal information briefing session at 11.00am every Thursday in the reception area of the Crown Moran Hotel on Cricklewood Broadway. We encourage feedback, either at the Crown briefings, or via our website. To date we have had an overwhelmingly positive reception to our proposals from local residents.

Anyone who seeks further answers is very welcome to use the "questions and answers" service on our website.