Agenda item

To consider and comment on the draft Business Plan 2017-18 sections for People and Our Future – Education and Skills, including the draft financial and saving proposals contained therein.

The Cabinet Member for People and Cabinet Member for Education & Skills, led introductions of the draft Corporate Strategy 2017 – 2022.

a.     Cabinet Member for People shared that the finalisation of the Corporate Strategy was a lengthy process with the conversation with the public continuing to the 5^th January 2017.  The strategy covered the financial plan addressing the predicted budget gap of £38 million and the financial situation going forward.

b.     Children and Adult Social Care services equate to the largest council budget with huge pressures resulting from a changing population, increase in the number of children and those aged 85 years old plus.  Additional pressures come from the ambitious challenges from government legislation that are to be met without additional funding.  The service continues to strive to challenge deprivation in communities.  Safeguarding obligations continues to add to the emerging pressures.  The City also has its own ambitions including cementing its position as a City of Sanctuary.  The service must react to the need arising from the current political instability of many countries, and the needs of those displaced.

c.      The service is unable to continue to operate in the same way this is an opportunity to formulate a good strategy, to do it well and adopt a new working model.

d.     The strategy going forward keeps in focus the Mayor’s priorities for the City balancing the budget in light of all that the Council must do.

e.     Cabinet Member for Education & Skills, shared that despite the challenges the vision for the City’s education outcome would not be diminished.  Work continued to support young people in education.  The operation of dedicated school grants supported key needs of students.  Work continues to grow the benefits from trading with schools contracts that contribute to core funding to education services.  The service would continue to look for ways to widen opportunities outside the local authority.  Work continues to source alternative opportunities for funding from such areas as, available EU grants, resources from national government and possible links with businesses that bring young people in education to their attention.  The service continues to cement education development and good partnership working to support outcomes.

f.       Strategic Director, People, shared that the aim was to manage spend as safely as possible during the coming year in anticipation of future budget pressure.  The commissioning approach for the service would be discussed at a future scrutiny meeting.  The budget conversation would be updated to include the impact from the 21^st November Budget. 

The Chair acknowledged that questions had been received on the agenda item but an opportunity was given for additional comment from Scrutiny Members.

g.      Members were concerned that an online consultation process excluded those without the necessary skills to engage and would impact large portion of the elderly and those in care homes. 

Action:  The telephone number to be sourced for a request for paper copy to be requested. (0117 9222842) The information card on how to contribution to the process to be shared with Members. Karen Blong and Communication team.

h.     Question:

·       How would family centres & early help services be impacted and  would they continue as they are?

·       The current reablement service will it remain in house or is being outsourced?

·       The proposed changes to dementia care provision and that offered to carers, the question was, had user led organisation been made aware of the proposed change and the financial impact of change.

i.       Early Years & Family Centres – work isbeing done to support families that are in need of help with children 0-19 and 25 where necessary.  The current children’s centreoffer is to families with children aged 0-5yrs but the intention is to consider whether the servicecould support families with children up to age of 11. A consistent approach to family support would continue through partnership working up to age 19 or 25.  This is not just focused on buildings, while these are an important resource there are also many possibilities to grow the service provision for families on an outreach basis.

j.       Reablement Service – the jointly commissioned service delivered, with CCG and Bristol Community Health, would continue but all options to be considered whether to continue or discontinue, the final decision would be based on the best outcome for the service.

k.      Liaison with user led-groups – Work had been undertaken with Bristol Carers Voice to share the proposals on changes and charges to services outlined in the strategy.  The service would adhere to the Care Act that directs that carers must receive good support.

l.       Wider Liaison – the service would build on the good practice established following former consultations, engaging in discussion with wide range of  service-users and partners.  Crucially to have conversations with all before any changes are agreed and implemented.

m.   Question:

·       Community Meals – when re-organised previously the information shared indicated that there would be no cost impact but the recent report attributes £300,000 cost.  How has this arisen?

n.     A subsidy of £280,000 provided to maintain the service.  There had been a reduction by 100 in uptake of the service.  There are now alternatives in the market.  The service provides a hot meal at lunch at a cost of £4.90 and sandwich tea at £2.71.  Consideration to be given to providing a service to those who require a hot meal delivered and unable to help themselves, heating frozen foods.  Members were assured that resources would be preserved to assist those who require help.

o.     Members were concerned that those no longer receiving a daily delivery of hot food may lose vital interaction with an individual and it may give rise to social isolation.

p.     Question:

·       Welcome the need to be creative on ways to generate income but how would charging the disabled for disabled bays, assist social values and tackle inequalities.

·       Further explanation about the ethics of Commissioning services that are then provided by private companies.

q.     Members were assured that tackling inequalities underpinned all the work and although not mentioned overtly the ethics are not lost.

r.      Question:

·       How are staff to be supported to understand the three tier model and similarly how is the understanding to be shared with older people?  Request made for the language used to be clear and the appropriate mechanism in place to train staff.

·       How does personalised budget fit into ongoing developments?

·       The Coldharbour Lane projected to provide homes for older people and now said that the number of houses available are 40, has this number changed?

s.      The Coldharbour Lane development is not in the Bristol area with no s.106 provision to Bristol.  The developers ECCT, Extra Care Charitable Trust were paid £1.425m on transfer of the land with a further £1.425m required on completion.  The development would provide a number of affordable housing units 40 for Bristol residents, 41 for South Gloucestershire and 200 for sale

t.      The Chair directed the above questions would be noted in a Q&A fact sheet to avoid duplication of questions.  Action: Karen Blong for noting and the compiling of a Q&A fact sheet.

Resolved:

       i.          To note the report

      ii.          For the creation of Q&A fact sheet on the Corporate Strategy, Business Plan and Medium Term Financial Plan