Agenda item

(Indicative timing: 10.05-10.45am)

The discussion of the Report was held jointly with Members of the Adult Care and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Panel who had been invited to attend and participate in this part of the meeting.

The Panel received a report which provided an update on the transformation and proposed restructure to create a new All Age Disability (0-25) Service, to provide a more coherent and co-ordinated response to need and deliver better outcomes in the short term and into adulthood.

The Service was being developed jointly between Worcestershire County Council’s People Directorate (the Council) and Worcestershire Children First (WCF) and was sponsored jointly by the Strategic Director of People and the Chief Executive of WCF/Director of Children’s Services.

The Chief Executive of WCF thanked the parents attending the meeting to share their views and stressed the importance of listening and understanding parents’ views.

The aim of the proposal was to provide a co-ordinated, positive experience taking children and young people (CYP) through the key transition points in their lives. The proposal joined together teams working in Children services, Adult Services and SEND and brought together the strengths of each service for the benefit of all the CYP. It was recognised that although there were some current challenges within SEND, by working together as one team with the same culture and practice, a better service would be able to be provided. The Panel was informed that better outcome focused plans would be needed for children to prepare them for transition, but that all the specialisms previously offered with the YAT, such as housing and employment support would continue to be maintained going forward.

The Panel was informed that the Human Resources Consultation process with staff would commence in February and be completed in March. During this time, further feedback would be sought from parents regarding any issues and concerns. Following on from this, the final proposal would be drawn together.

The Interim Head of Service, All Age Disability (0-25) Design and Change provided some further detail about the journey which had been undertaken to reach this stage, which had commenced with consultation and engagement with parents and families in 2019.  The strong message that had been received from that feedback was that there was room for improvement with regard to preparing CYP for adulthood.

Members of the Panels were invited to ask questions and the following points were raised:

·         It was suggested that the language used in the proposal was jargonistic and that accessibility was an issue.  The Chief Executive acknowledged that that this was a complex area but would endeavour to simplify future reports and include a glossary of terms and acronyms.

·         In response to the question about the target audience for the proposal, it was explained that the proposal had several target audiences.

·         In terms of transparency of the proposal and the perception that a decision had already been made, the Panel was advised that things had not been working well for a while but there had been some delays in progress due to the SEND Inspection and Covid.  Members were however, assured that discussions on this service area had been taking place for a few years and had involved sessions with parents and staff.         

·         The Interim Head of Service had been appointed to take this process forward, but the pandemic had delayed that progress. It was confirmed this was a formal consultation process, but that some level of detail was required in order for people to get an idea of what was proposed.

·         In support of the proposal, a Member asked whether KPI’s had been set. The Chief Executive advised that some of the current KPI’s for this area were statutory, whilst others were business management ones. The Leadership Team would review all the KPI’s and bring together a single dashboard.

·         The Chief Executive highlighted that the SEND Improvement Board would transform into an All-Age Disability 0-25 Partnership Board (AAD Board) with representation from all sides.

·         It was suggested that future Scrutiny discussions about this service should take place by alternating between the Children and Families and Adult Care and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Panels. It was noted that other forums such as the Health and Well-being Board would also have oversight of this area.

·         In light of the outcome of the Ofsted SEND Inspection, it was questioned whether this was the right time to proceed with this proposal. The Chief Executive gave assurance that it was but recognised the importance of the 4 areas of the inspection which still required improvement, one of which was engagement with parents and carers. It was highlighted the AAD Board would have oversight of the 3 strategies for SEND, Carers and Autism and thereby provide a link between them. 

·         The Chief Executive explained that the locality model would split service areas into local teams, leading to a reduction in travelling for many staff in AAD teams and the development of a close working relationship with professionals such as early years providers, GP’s etc in a specific locality. It was also noted that some specialist staff would continue to cover all areas.

·         A Member challenged the lack of balance in the report with a list of benefits set out and one only risk. The Chief Executive advised that this was not the first time of talking to parents/carers, young people and staff, and feedback was being obtained all the time. This report, however, was part of the formal process and fundamentally a business case for staff consultation so the benefits related to risks for staff.

·         It was agreed that the Panel would be provided with an overview of all the feedback received to date as well as any future feedback.

·         The Chairman sought assurance that the public sector equality impact assessment had been carried out. The Interim Head of Service confirmed that this had been completed and that no further action was required. It was requested that this be made publicly available.

·         A Member asked what happened when a young person (YP) reached the age of 25 and the Assistant Director for Adult Social Care explained that 25 was not seen as a ‘cliff edge’ but that early conversations took place with YP to ensure that their needs were being met and that a smooth transition could take place at the right age. Transition to adult services varied on a case-by-case basis and would follow conversations with families and professionals but would, essentially be at the right time for the YP.

·         It was questioned why vulnerable learners, the Virtual School and the Young Adult’s team Housing Officer were not being included in the scope for the new service.  Officers explained that not all vulnerable learners had  SEND and the Virtual School was about education for looked after children and therefore were not included in the new service proposal.  The Young Adult’s Housing Officer also provided support for the mental health and learning disability teams and the role would therefore be re-located into the Adult Commissioning team to enable scope for services to be provided across the whole spectrum of need.

·         Members were reassured that Young Adults Housing Officer would continue to provide support to young people in a wider context

·         It was confirmed that the Director of AAD was a new post. Currently, the responsibilitieswhich would be combined in the new post were split out within the existing structure. To aid Members understanding, it was agreed that current staffing structure charts would be provided to the Panel to compare to the proposed new structure.

·         A Member highlighted to Officers an error in one of the symbols of the proposed structure chart (page 7 of the Agenda).

·         In response to a Member question, it was agreed that the Panel would be provided with a timeline detailing the transformation process of the Service to date.

·         A Member referred to the key issues and risks section of the report (page 13) which explained that public consultation was not required because the proposed changes wouldn’t alter the service offer, only the way services were arranged.  He suggested that whilst public consultation was not legally required, there would be an advantage of doing so. The Chief Executive confirmed there would be further engagement as the process evolved.

·         A Member expressed concern from hearing the parents’ views expressed during public participation earlier in the meeting. The Chief Executive commented that she had picked up parental concerns and anxiety about losing the YAT Service and also about a poor experience of the SEND service. The Chief Executive understood the concerns and stressed that the new structure would maintain the special service of YAT, and the SEND Action Plan (following the recent SEND Inspection) would address the concerns about the SEND Service.

·         The lack of financial detail on the budget implications table was highlighted. The Director of Resources confirmed that the detail of the staffing budget for this Service would be included in the regular quarterly Budget Monitoring Report received by the Panel.

The issues raised and actions requested as detailed above would be followed up by the Chief Executive and her team in advance of the proposal being considered by Cabinet.