Witnesses:
Mark Barratt,
Director of Quality Assurance
Clare Curran, Cabinet Member for Children
Key
points raised in the discussion:
-
Officers explained that the report outlined
performance in Children’s Services in Surrey. It was
highlighted that there was now a robust usage of performance data,
and that this was as a result of a modified system which enabled
clear data entry and recollection. It was also noted that usage of
this had changed and that it was used to challenge behaviour on
both a strategic level to an operational level.
-
Officers recognised that there had been significant
challenges regarding data quality. It was stressed that the service
was looking to address key areas of vulnerability and ensure that
data is inputted in a single and streamlined way, explaining that
systems were changing to make this possible.
Robert Evans entered the meeting at
10.10am
-
Members questioned what work was being undertaken to
reduce indicators rated as high risk, highlighting those high risk
indicators that were on a downwards trajectory, and questioned
whether the service was taking priority action to address these.
Officers stressed that there was a plan of activity to rectify
indicators which were on a downwards trend, and noted that with an
understanding of the data, there was an opportunity to understand
the underlying root cause of key issues were.
-
The Cabinet Member for Children stressed that there
was rapid improvement work underway and that the implementation of
the Transformation Business Cases that were approved by Council
were critical to the improvement of the service. The Cabinet Member
noted that the acceptance of the high risk indicators demonstrated
that the service was aware of its deficiencies and need to improve.
It was explained that improvement was underway, but that there was
significant work needed to ensure that this improvement was
embedded within the service.
-
Officers noted that the remodel the management tier
of services had provided organisational clarity and that this was
improving accountability and ownership of performance within the
service. It was noted that this was part of the change of culture
in performance management within the service.
-
Members noted that they appreciated the improved
evidence of performance monitoring and noted that they would like
to see evidence of continued and regular performance monitoring
presented to the Committee and that any indicators that had a
consistent downward trend should be highlighted to the
Committee.
-
Members questioned whether there would be any
projected impact on reductions in spend in the service,
particularly the proposals to reduce the number of Children’s
Centres in the County, and how the service planned to mitigate
this. The Cabinet Member stressed that this should be viewed as
part of the wider transformation programme and there would be more
resource put into early intervention, which should improve
performance measures in the long term, due to the targeted nature
of earlier intervention and concentration of resource. The Cabinet
Member emphasised that it was not the intent to remove services
that residents depended on, but that it would re-evaluate how the
service utilises assests. Members noted their concerns and noted
that they would like to see the results of the Family Resilience
Consultation to understand the impact the residents feel that this
will have in future.
-
Members questioned how the service rated their
performance measures and whether these were internal guidelines or
national guides. Officers noted that there were comparisons
published by the Department for Education which detailed
Children’s Services performance which the service would be
using to benchmark with good and outstanding authorities.
-
Members questioned staffing numbers and stressed
that there was a need to retain staff, ensure that they understand
the need to change to improve performance and that this can be done
in the programme of change. It was noted by officers that change
was needed on a cultural level to ensure practice improvement,
rather than looking solely at staffing levels.
-
The Cabinet Member noted that the performance
compendium was a relatively new process and that this had helped
significantly to analyse the performance and underlying issues in
the service. It was stressed that this was a good mechanism for the
Cabinet Member to challenge and analyse performance information and
that they were provided to the Cabinet Member for regular analysis.
Members questioned whether this regular analysis could be
undertaken by the Committee as a means of improving scrutiny of
practice improvement.
Recommendations:
-
That the key indicators are supplied by the Cabinet
Member for Children and continue to be regularly reviewed each
month and assessed against national performance and quarterly
regional benchmarking to assess Surrey in the national and regional
context, and:
-
That the Chairman and
Vice-Chairman of the Committee receive this monthly update, with
the Cabinet Member for Children, to consider the detailed
performance indictors used.
b.
That the Committee receive a quarterly update of key
performance measures, and also highlights areas of sustained
downwards trend with a narrative of the service’s response to
this.