Decisions

The provision of Sexual Health Services.

Local authorities are mandated by the Local Authorities (Public Health Functions and Entry to Premises by Local Healthwatch Representatives) Regulations 2013 to commission comprehensive open access sexual health services, including free STI testing and treatment, notification of sexual partners of infected persons and advice on, and reasonable access to, a broad range of contraception; and advice on preventing unplanned pregnancy. In Surrey, this is integrated alongside HIV services in a partnership with NHS England. This ensures that Surrey residents are able to achieve the best outcomes possible irrespective of need.

Following the conclusion of the tender process, it was agreed that the contracts will be awarded to Central and NW London NHS Foundation Trust (winning bidder) and will commence on 1 October 2022.

Bramley Oak Academy’s expansion by 49 places and change of gender from single sex to co-educational provision is one of the approved projects under Phase 4 of the SEND Capital programme. The school transferred from local authority control to London and Southeast (LSEAT) Academy Trust in late 2020. LSEAT are the leaseholder on standard DfE terms for 125 years.

As part of the transfer to Academy status, LSEAT obtained a commitment from DfE for c£3m grant to address immediate ‘condition and suitability’ issues for the 55 PAN (Pupil Admission Number) pupils at the Academy. Grant conditions from DfE are clear that these monies are not to be used in support of expansion and are specifically to address the condition and suitability issues at the Academy. Given the delays to the planned condition and suitability work because of the pandemic, it would be appropriate to combine works for both ‘condition and suitability’ (funded by DfE) with those for ‘expansion’ (funded by SCC) into one set of coordinated plans. This approach has been agreed in principle between the Academy, DfE Policy and SCC’s SEND Capital Programme.

With both condition and suitability works (funded by DfE) together with expansion (funded by SCC), a set of coordinated design layout proposals have been developed, at risk by the Trust. Works to support condition and suitability (funded by DfE) together with expansion (funded by SCC) are proposed in two distinct projects:

Project 1: Full phased refurbishment and remodelling of the existing layout for both expansion and condition/suitability works: Jointly funded by DfE and SCC, delivered by LSEAT under SCC Self-Delivery Contract

Project 2: New build expansion blocks and refurbishment/ remodelling of existing kitchen, dining, and hall spaces (once new hall and dining/kitchen constructed): Funded and delivered by SCC.

At the conclusion of all works proposals will be the ability to phase in the additional 49 places over a period of 5 years from Sep 2024-Sep 2028 to achieve a 104 PAN (Pupil Admission Number).

The Capital investment required to complete the Bramley Oak expansion is £6.95m. This is based on a £0.14m per pupil place for modernisation as well as new build expansion. The cost per pupil place varies significantly from one project to another. The reason for this is that the programme includes both new build and provision within existing assets (i.e., requiring refurbishment or remodelling) as well as several modular solutions, with a range of costs that reflect different scope of work to deliver the additional specialist school places. This new build project is at the upper end of the cost per pupil place range and includes contingency for inflation risk.

The project will realise £1.47m total cost containment to DSG HNB per year. This is based on an average unit cost of £53k per pupil per annum for independent sector provision, as compared to the average cost for maintained specialist places at £23k per learner per annum. Provision of additional maintained specialist places would generate an approximate saving from 2024-2028 of £30k per place per year.

A sustainable specialist education estate will be developed to provide fit for purpose facilities for Surrey’s children and young people who have SEND and require a specialist school placement, providing cost effective solutions to support revenue savings. The investment will be funded from existing capital programme budgets within Education.

Decision made:

Capital Programme Panel (CPP), 12 April 2022, AGREED that:

1.    Capital Programme Panel (CPP) approves the use of £6.95m of the approved £60m Phase 4 allocation within the SEND Capital Funding for Bramley Oak Academy’s projects. These will deliver 49 permanent additional specialist school places in total to be phased in from September 2024.

There were none.

There were no public questions or Member questions.

The Leader considered a petition from Unison requesting that Surrey Choices be brought back in house.  The full petition text and formal response were published as a supplement to the agenda.

Mr Barney Wakefield presented the petition and stated his case and asked several questions:-

·         Why were terms and conditions not the same as the Council’s?

·         Was it considered that the consultation was adequate for the closure of hubs?

·         Was it fair to expect Surrey Choices to be a first class provider when the council were implementing a £3m budget cut?

·         Should the Council take a more active role in Surrey Choices?

·         What action is the Council taking to lobby central government about social care funding?

The Leader stated that there was a mixed picture over the last five year regarding performance of Surrey Choices.  There had been a change in the business model which had not happened at the speed one would have wanted and this was consulted on at the time.  The reduction in funding was to match the change in the model, which saw a shift to providing care in the community, a large reduction in overheads rather than the money spent on front line delivery services.  There was a broader issue around recruitment and retention for the Council and work was ongoing to look at allowances and this would be discussed with Unions and partners on how this could be collectively progressed.  Surrey Choices as an arm’s length organisation had its own business model and set their own terms and conditions but maybe there needed to be a conversation including the Legal Team about whether an arm’s length organisation was the correct way to go.

The Leader also explained that the council were working very hard explaining to government the impact of changes to social care funding.  With regard to council taking an active role in Surrey Choices he explained that the Cabinet Member was Chair of Surrey Choices until recently and he would routinely meet with Surrey Choices every six months.

The Leader, in listening to officers advice, was encouraged that things were improving.  The focus needed to be on individuals and the team being rewarded for their role. 

Decision

The published response to the petition still stood but the Leader suggested that there be a further review of the current structure within the next few months.

There were none.

The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste considered a petition requesting the council reconsider its decision to move Priory School to Woodhatch Place.  The full petition text and formal response were published as a supplement to the agenda.

Dr Sophia Mitchell presented the petition and highlighted three main concerns:

·         The detrimental impact of travelling on a dangerous A road and the resultant air pollution on both pupils and residents

·         Other detrimental impacts on residents around Woodhatch including parking, congestion, pollution and decreased economic productivity

·         The effect of increased carbon emissions that goes against council policy.

She went on to speak about the current site of the school and stated that she wanted to work constructively with the council to keep the school on its present site.

Catherine Baart spoke as the divisional Member and raised several issues that had not already been raised.  She stated the impact on daily lives of the community around the site that this decision would bring and asked for more transparency on the reasons for moving the school to this site, specifically:-

·         Why were the site appraisals not available to the public now and why did they have to wait until the planning committee?  This gave the impression that the council were withholding information.

·         Although the site appraisal had already been done the council were still collecting data around traffic etcetera and asked how this further information collected would be fed into the site appraisal?

·         The Angel junction did not have a pedestrian crossing and would be some years before it did have one so therefore had the extra funding needed for infrastructure to be put in place for this move been taken into account?

·         Had there been serious discussions with the DfE about extending Holmesdale School and the two feeder schools to turn them into primary schools?  If so, those discussions should be made known to aid transparency.

The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste sympathised with residents that the school could not stay on its present site.  She explained that communications regarding expansion of schools came under the remit of the Education Team and not property.  Site appraisal and traffic assessments would accompany the planning application.  It was confirmed by the Contracts Manager that the site appraisal could not be released early and before statutory consultees for planning purposes.  The information needed to be as up to date as possible for the planning decision and therefore it was likely to change.

The Cabinet Member for Property & Waste confirmed that statutory consultation would take place from 9^th May and that residents would be invited to submit their concerns as part of that consultation.  This would be followed by submission of the planning papers for committee decision in June.

There were very many questions submitted in relation to the Priory School petition and under Standing Order 86 the first six questions submitted were taken at the meeting.  These questions and the responses to them were published as a supplement to the agenda.  Other questions submitted would receive a written response.

There were none.

There were none.

These were agreed as a correct record of the meeting.

There were none.

RESOLVED:

1.    That Cabinet notes the impacts and mitigations set out in the Equality Impact Assessment (Annex B)

2.    That Cabinet notes the outcomes of the engagement with residents and the 28 working day public consultation (Annex C)

3.    That Cabinet approves changes to the Home to School/College Travel Assistance policy having considered the above documents (set out in paragraphs11-51)

4.    That Cabinet approves the revised Home to School/College Travel Assistance policy (Annex D)

5.       That Cabinet agrees the proposal to produce an enhanced Post 16 Policy Statement and agrees that the Cabinet Member has delegated authority to approve the statement.

Reasons for Decisions:

The H2S TA policy sets out the way in which the Council discharges its statutory and discretionary powers and responsibilities in relation to school and college transport assistance available for pupils aged up to 25 years of age, both with and without additional needs.  While Surrey County Council will continue to support those who most need help, the Council must manage increasing costs and demand within the overall resources available.  The recommendations set out in this report will increase the options for children and young people who qualify for H2S TA, encourage people to use environmentally friendly travel and support independent travel as a means of preparing young people for adulthood. 

(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning and Culture Select Committee)

RESOLVED:

1.    That Cabinet notes the Council’s forecast revenue and capital budget positions.

2.    That Cabinet approves that £13m of funding from Surrey Heartlands Clinical Commissioning Group is transferred to reserves as set out in paragraphs 15 to 17.

Reasons for Decisions:

This report is to comply with the agreed policy of providing a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval of any necessary actions.

(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)

RESOLVED:

That the Cabinet Member of the Month report be noted.

RESOLVED:

See Exempt Minute [E-13-22]

Reasons for Decisions:

See Exempt Minute [E-13-22]

(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)

RESOLVED:

1.    That Cabinet approves capital funding of £24m for the design and construction of the SIL Batch 1 accommodation schemes at the former Manor School (Byfleet), the former Horley Library (Horley) and Coveham Hostel (Cobham). The recommended funding of £24m includes £2.1m premium, being a result of achieving Net-Zero Carbon in respect of the specification for Operational Net-Zero Carbon.

2.    That Cabinet approves procurement of an appropriate construction contractor partner for the delivery of all associated services required, in accordance with the Council’s Procurement and Contract Standing Orders.

3.    That Cabinet agrees that in regards to the procurement of the construction contractor, the Executive Director of Resources and the Director of Land and Property are authorised to award such contracts, within the +/- 5% budgetary tolerance level.

Reasons for Decisions:

Approving the recommendations in this report will:

a)    Support the Council to achieve its strategic ambition of reducing the number of people with a learning disability and/or autism requiring support in a traditional residential care home funded by the Council from 1,075 by 40-50%.

b)    Enable residents with learning disabilities and/or autism, who meet the Council’s eligibility criteria for adult social care funding, to have their own accommodation and improve their independence and wellbeing.

c)    Support Surrey residents with more complex needs to remain in county, rather than in specialist placements outside of the county.

d)    Make an essential contribution towards the Council’s strategic objective to tackle health inequality, in line with the 2030 Community Vision.

e)    Provide purpose-built accommodation at a level of cost proportionate to other delivery options such as buying and converting (or commissioning conversion) stock from the market, therefore demonstrating value for money.

f)     Support the Council’s Greener Futures agenda and Net-Zero Carbon ambitions by using innovative technologies and smart build in the schemes design.

g)    Address fuel poverty issues, energy efficient homes will reduce heating costs for vulnerable tenants who pay their own utility bills.

(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)

RESOLVED:

1.    That Cabinet supports the approach set out to develop a Devolution Deal for Surrey, to accelerate and better enable work to tackle inequalities in Surrey.

2.    That Cabinet reaffirms the Council’s commitment to ensuring No One is Left Behind and note the strong alignment to the Government’s Levelling Up agenda.

3.    That Cabinet endorses the approach and plan for further engagement with local partners and key stakeholders to support development of a devolution proposal for Surrey.

4.    That Cabinet supports the intention to engage with the Surrey Delivery Board as a key stakeholder group in developing and shaping a comprehensive devolution deal for the benefit of Surrey’s residents, communities, and businesses.

5.    That Cabinet delegates authority to the Executive Director for Partnerships, Prosperity, and Growth to lead engagement with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities on the devolution proposal following consideration by Cabinet, and to take other necessary steps in consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Deputy Cabinet Member for Levelling Up.

Reasons for Decisions:

The Government’s Levelling Up White Paper presents a rare opportunity for the council to pursue a devolution deal for Surrey that will bring new powers, freedoms and flexibilities, better enabling the council to deliver for residents against its organisational priorities and work towards its ambition of No One Left Behind.

(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee)

RESOLVED:

1.    That Cabinet approves the receipt of funding into the Council’s capital pipeline from Government net zero carbon grant funding programmes, specifically the  Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme (PSDS3) and the Sustainable Warmth Programme (which includes the Green Homes Grant Local Authority Delivery (GHGLAD3) andHome Upgrade Grant (HUG1))   

2.      That Cabinet notes the use of match funding from the approved Corporate Capital Maintenance Programme, subject to the Capital Programme Panel (CPP) approving business cases for individual sites.

3.       That Cabinet approves the request to competitively procure the Sustainable Warmth Programme and PSDS3 services under separate contracts, in accordance with the Council’s Procurement and Contracting Standing Orders.

4.    That Cabinet approves the receipt of future funding schemes for the purposes of delivery of the Greener Futures ambition, including future tranches of the PSDS schemes and Sustainable Warmth programmes as well as, but not limited to, the schemes included in Annex 1. Receipt of funding will be subject to Capital Programme Panel approval.

Reasons for Decisions:

The recommendations in this report will enable the Council to:

• Draw down Government funding of £13.15m. This includes £2.652m from PSDS3 to decarbonise buildings in the SCC estate and schools and £10.5m from the Sustainable Warmth Programme, which includes £8.3m for GHLAD3 and £2.2m for HUG1, which will be used to decarbonise homes of residents on low incomes.

• Be as agile as possible to maximise the attraction of future external grant funding sources.

(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee)

That the decisions taken since the last Cabinet meeting be noted.

RESOLVED:

That the report from the Select Committee regarding the Home to School travel assistance policy be noted. The response from the Cabinet was published as a supplement to the agenda.

There were none.

There were none.

There were three public questions. The questions and responses were published as a supplement to the agenda.

There were eight member questions. The questions and responses were published as a supplement to the agenda.

That the consultation response attached at Annex 1 to the submitted report be approved.

1.    That the draft Enhanced Partnership Plan and draft Enhanced Partnership Scheme be submitted to the Department for Transport for their review, inclusive of delivery priorities was agreed.

2.    That once Department for Transport feedback has been received, a report be taken to Cabinet proposing that the Council enter into an Enhanced Partnership with bus operators, inclusive of governance arrangements was agreed.

Mr Andrew Matthews presented his petition to the Cabinet Member.

Clare Curran spoke as the divisional Member and concluded that she would continue to work with officers and Mr Matthews regarding access at Bookham Station.

The Cabinet Member for Transport & Infrastructure confirmed the response to the petition as published.

There was none.

The Cabinet Member for Transport & Infrastructure accepted the following petition.  The lead petitioner was not present at the meeting to present the petition.  The Cabinet Member response to the petition as set out below was published as a supplement to the agenda.

PETITION: PRESERVE THE FUTURE OF ST PETER AND ST PAUL CofE INFANT SCHOOL IN CHALDON

We the undersigned petition Surrey County Council to fulfil their duty to preserve the future of our school by supporting the expansion to accommodate Primary Education to Key Stage 2 (7-11 year olds).

Justification:

St Peter and St Paul is a Church of England school located at the heart of the village of Chaldon village in the Surrey Hills. Historically, the school has developed a strong reputation of high quality education, care and community spirit that we believe to be unique amongst a wider community hugely dominated by Trust schools.

In 2021 the school co-operated with a request from Surrey County Council to accept. bulge year, which has resulted in more members of the community recognising the strengths of our school.

As a church school we enjoy a special sense of belonging welcoming all cultures and religious denominations into our school and our Christian ethos provides a rich backdrop in which all our children flourish.

As parents and carers we feel very strongly that our school is the best environment for our children to continue their educational journey until their transition into secondary school.

We have learnt to trust in staff team that cares passionately about the school and we are confident that they can offer the best possible opportunity for through Primary Education in the area.

We therefore request that Surrey County Council honour the "Change in Age Range Consultation" that was agreed in October 2021 and needs to now be reflected in the physical expansion of the school.

Submitted by: SARA SHOEBRIDGE

Signatures: 119

Cabinet Member Response:

The change in age range at St Peter and St Paul Church of England School will be implemented for September 2022.  The school are admitting Year 3 pupils from September 2022 and internal alterations to the existing building will provide the additional space for pupils.

Some planning and highway matters were raised as part of the planning application originally submitted in June 2021. Since then, supplementary information to the original planning application has recently been submitted to address the concerns. Subject to planning permission being granted the physical expansion of the school will take place with a target date for completion of September 2023.

The Cabinet Member for Education and Learning determined the statutory notices thereby bringing into effect the formal commencement of the proposal to:

•                     Expand Manor Mead School onto a satellite site at Church Road, Virginia Water, increasing the number of places from 83 to 143.

•                     Change school designation from a single designation of Severe Learning Difficulties (SLD) to a dual designation of Severe Learning Difficulties (SLD) and Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD).

This was approved without modification.

The decision is to approve final hourly funding rates paid in 2022/23 to providers of the funded early entitlement for two, three and four year olds under the early years funding formula. These rates must be notified to providers by 31 March 2022.  These hourly rates could not be agreed at the date of the Cabinet report because at that point insufficient data on take up of the funded early entitlement was available to determine affordability

It was AGREED that the hourly rates for 2022/23 should be for three and four year olds, £4.87 (increase of 9p)  This is just over half of the increase provided by DfE, and the remainder of the increase will be used to increase the early intervention fund for three and four year olds with special educational needs or other additional needs which require additional support.

For two year olds, £6.13/hour, also an increase of 9p.