PAPER B

POLICY COMMISSION ENQUIRY SCOPING DOCUMENT

RESPONSIBLE BODY

Policy Commission for Children and School Results

ENQUIRY NAME

Governance of the Children and Young People’s Trust

REFERENCE NUMBER

C5/05

PROPOSED OUTPUT/S

To propose the governance arrangements for the Children and Young People’s Trust

RISK

High

Medium

Low

PROPOSED DATE OF INITIATION

April 2006

PROPOSED DATE OF COMPLETION

May 2006

REASON FOR ENQUIRY

To support the action required under new legislation relating to the delivery of a co-ordinated approach for children’s services.

PROPOSED OUTCOME OF POLICY IMPLEMENTATION

To ensure that the governance of the Children and Young People’s Trust is secured.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

To review information and evidence from stakeholders and experts including but not limited to:

Members of the Strategic Board for the Children and Young People’s Trust

In order to:

Establish the legislative requirements of a Children’s Trust and ensure adequate progress is being made so as to ensure a Children’s Trust is successfully established by October 2006.

What will not be included:

KEY STAKEHOLDERS

Cabinet Member for Children

RELEVANT CORPORATE AND/OR COMMUNITY STRATEGY/IES

Community Strategy

Aim High

Children and Young People’s Plan

Local Area Agreement

RELATED PROJECTS

Partnership arrangements between Adult Social Care and the Health Trust; the proposed Local Public Service Board; the establishment of the Local Safeguarding Children Board

LEAD MEMBER

Cllr M Swan

OFFICER INVOLVEMENT

Lead Link Officer:

Strategic Director for Children’s Services, Mr Ian Sandbrook

Overview and Scrutiny Team:

Paul Thistlewood – Project Lead

April West

OTHER RESOURCES REQUIRED

Specialist Council officer input – Legal Services

1. SUMMARY

1.1 Context

A Children’s Trust is a set of arrangements for partnership working in a local area, led by the local authority, to deliver children’s services across the five outcomes. The arrangements should cover inter-agency governance, integrated strategy, integrated processes and integrated front-line delivery. The Isle of Wight is calling its Children’s Trust the Isle of Wight Children and Young People’s Trust.

It has been agreed to launch the Isle of Wight Children’s Trust at the Big Day Out on Sunday 8^th October at Ventnor Botanic Gardens.

The delivery of integrated frontline services to improve outcomes for children and young people requires robust governance arrangements. Governance arrangements for inter-agency cooperation set the framework of accountability for the improvement and delivery of effective services.

1.2 Responsibility

The Director of Children's Services (DCS) is responsible for establishing and leading the cooperation with partners - including public, private, voluntary and community organisations - in order to create a shared vision and improve outcomes for children and young people. He is accountable to the designated a lead member for children's services.

1.3 Associated considerations

An important and related issue to be considered regarding the governance of the children and young people’s trust is the new duty on local authorities and partners to establish local safeguarding children boards by April 2006, to replace non-statutory area child protection committees.

1.4 Proposal

That a Children’s Trust Board should be established to lead the overall Children and Young People’s Partnership, with a steering group, known as the Children’s Trust Executive, matching the relationship of the Public Service Board to the Isle of Wight Futures Partnership.

These proposals have been shared with the shadow Isle of Wight Children and Young People’s Trust Strategic Board. These proposals are predicated on the guidance issued by the Department for Education and Skills, and cross referenced to the six standards of good governance determined by the Independent Commission for Good Governance in Public Services (Appendix in the Background Report).

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 GOVERNANCE

Governance is the act, process, or power of governing
Governance is the persons (or committees or departments etc.) who make up a body for the purpose of administering something
Governance of an association is responsible to its members
Governance is the act of governing; exercising authority

2.2 The delivery of integrated frontline services to improve outcomes for children and young people requires robust governance arrangements. Governance arrangements for inter-agency cooperation will set the framework of accountability for the improvement and delivery of effective services.

2.3 The Isle of Wight Director of Children's Services is responsible for establishing and leading the cooperation with partners - including public, private, voluntary and community organisations - in order to create a shared vision and improve outcomes for children and young people. The Isle of Wight has also, as required, designated a lead member to take responsibility for children's services, the Cabinet Member for Children and Deputy Leader.

2.4 An important and related issue to be considered regarding the governance of the children and young people’s trust is the new duty on local authorities and partners to establish local safeguarding children boards by April 2006, to replace non-statutory area child protection committees.

3. PURPOSE OF GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY

3.1 Governance and accountability support quality service provision by providing for objective oversight measures and enabling the operation of appropriate modern open local government.

4. GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY SET THE FRAMEWORK

FOR:

Strategic planning,
Resource allocation and joint commissioning
The setting of financial management arrangements
Strategic decisions to be made in response to inspection, Annual Performance Assessments (APA) and Joint Area Review (JAR)
Difficult decisions to be made, for example where a stakeholder doesn’t agree or services may need to be decommissioned
The setting and reviewing performance management
Delegated authority and supervision arrangements for staff, which have particular relevance in the handling of casework

5. PROPOSAL

5.1 It is proposed that the governance of the isle of Wight Children and

Young People’s Trust should be carried out by a Trust Board, comprising:

Lead Member for Children’s Services

Two further members of Isle of Wight Council

Chair of NHS Trust

Chair of Professional Executive Committee

Chair of South Central Connexions

Chair of Voluntary Sector Cabinet

Chair of Learning and Skills Council

Chair of School Governors Forum

Chair of Wessex Youth Offending Team

Police Representative

Young People representatives (to be decided)

5.2 It is further proposed that the three current ‘boards’ of the Trust be

consolidated into one ‘Partnership’, led by a Trust Executive, comprising the members of the current strategic board, ie:

Ian Sandbrook	Acting Director Children’s Services
Simon Dear	IW Children’s Trust Adviser
Tina Harris	Associate Director (Mental Health & Learning Disabilities)
John Metcalfe	Associate Director (Cultural & Leisure Services)
Sue Lightfoot	Interim Director– Safer Communities
Jane Dowdell	Associate Director (Child & Family Healthcare)
Pam Charlwood	Chief Executive – Connexions
Prue Grimshaw	Head of Children & Family Services
Steve Crocker	Head of Wessex Youth Offending
Sue Sylvester	Children’s Services Lead - Hants & IW Strategic Health Authority
Andrew Watson	Medical Director/Consultant Paediatrician IW Healthcare NHS Trust (Vice-Chair)
Rachael Hayes	Primary Care Trust Commissioner & Children’s Lead
Mark Denman-Johnson	Chair of Professional Executive Committee
Paul Bingham	Director of Public Health
Keith Simmonds	Head of Learning Effectiveness (Principal Inspector)
Stephanie Morgan	Chief Superintendent – Hants & IW Police
Robin Goodfellow	Headteacher – Medina House School
David Snashell	Headteacher – Cowes High School
Young People Representatives

5.3 The full Partnership would comprise representatives of all the agencies

who support children and young people on the island, as currently represented by the membership of the implementation and process groups.

5.4 The whole Partnership would include full representation of children and

young people themselves, to reflect the infrastructure of children and young people’s groups and forums across the Isle of Wight.

5.5 Where appropriate, working groups would be formed to carry out

specific time-limited assignments. It is likely that standing groups will also be needed, perhaps aligned to specific age groups, to cover the work of existing groups such as the Early Years and Childcare Partnership or the Connexions Local Management Group.

5.6 The Local Safeguarding Chldren Board will scrutinise the work of the

whole Isle of Wight Children and Young People’s Trust to ensure the safeguarding of children and young people across the Isle of Wight.

6. ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ISLE OF WIGHT CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE’S TRUST

6.1 The lead member and DCS have direct responsibility only for local authority services; but they also have a responsibility to lead partnership working and the key partners have a duty to cooperate. Broader governance and accountability arrangements are necessary where there is partnership working. Partners need to have a voice and there need to be arrangements for cross-agency accountability.

6.2 The accountability framework should include arrangements for:

· Integrated working

· Joint planning and commissioning*

· Integrated processes and integrated front line delivery for improved outcomes for children, young people and families

· Accountabilities for decision making and spending

· Involve children, young people and families in decision making and in assessing outcomes, either by giving them a voice in governance or by means of consultation

*It is important that at the point of commissioning decisions there is appropriate separation of provider and commissioner - transparent guidelines will be required, as part of their accountability arrangements. It is important that membership is not used as an advantage by any providers, and that provider representatives have clear, transparent links with all organisations in their sector.

6.3 There is no national template for governance arrangements. The common elements include; the Lead Member, the Director of Children’s Services (DCS), the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB), and local partners.

6.4 Governance and accountability must be clear and understood by all. These can be defined as:

The DCS having responsibility for the children’s trust decision making process and decisions need to be reasonable and defensible
Boards, groups and committees having clear terms of reference set out in writing, rationale for membership, and clarity of engagement with other strategic boards
Staff knowing their delegated authorities, roles and responsibilities. These may need to be reviewed from time to time as roles develop in the light of experience of new ways of working
Staff knowing who is ultimately responsible for decision making and expenditure

A line of accountability from the lead professional through the children’s trust coordination arrangements to the DCS
Absolute clarity about the supervision and accountability arrangements for work done through children’s trust arrangements

6.5 The accountability arrangements should be enabling rather than controlling, with appropriate delegation and risk management. If the arrangements lead to delays in decision making, or excessive need for intervention in individual cases by strategic decision makers, then it is likely that they are too cumbersome and need to be reviewed.

6.6 Accountability arrangements should be sufficiently robust and clear that if something is going wrong, it is immediately apparent to managers, who are enabled to review processes and procedures and alert the strategic leadership quickly.

6.7 Children’s Trust partners that deliver services will not be required to change their arrangements for dealing with complaints about their own activities. The Trust will need to consider arrangements for dealing with complaints about their shared activities. In particular, to provide independent advocacy, clear and understood separation of the scrutiny function by the LSCB, and to have robust procedures in place to guard against collusion and the perception that collusion could occur.

7. CHAIRING LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS

7.1 It is for us and our local partners to decide who is best placed to chair the Trust boards and partnerships. The guidance suggests that the local authority’s lead member or chief executive may be appropriate to chair a high level partnership board, but other candidates may also be suitable. For example:

High level boards might be chaired by the lead member or the authority’s chief executive
Second tier groups by the DCS
Third tier groups by relevant senior managers
Partnership* could be given appropriate delegated authority to make decisions
Partnerships* could include officers/elected members of the local authority and officers/non-executive directors of our Primary Care Trust (PCT), and representatives of delivery organisations and users
Partnerships could be created as formally constituted boards under Health Act flexibilities

*These partnership groups are not statutory council or Primary Care Trust structures, and should be able to use the decision making powers delegated to them in the most efficient and effective way. That may well entail members, non-executive directors and officers working closely together.

7.2 We will want to keep structures under review, with a view to developing more effective approaches and fewer, more focused meetings. It has already been proposed that the Local Safeguarding Children Board should seek an independent chairperson.

8. GOVERNANCE AND THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LOCAL AUTHORITY

8.1 Children’s trust activities will occur within a framework whose agreement by partners was led by the local authority. Members of the children’s trust who represent the local authority, such as the lead member and the DCS, can influence but must also operate within the framework of decisions of both the local authority and the children’s trust. They are in a position to draw attention to any untenable propositions and seek solutions.

8.2 Officers and external partners can feed analysis and views into the children’s trust process. But each partner also has its own budgetary process and there should be a process of convergence between these and the children’s trust planning and commissioning cycle. The local authority and its partners in the children’s trust are limited to a single joint planning process through the Children and Young People’s Plan (CYPP).

8.3 Elected members have responsibility for local authority decisions but not for those made by the PCT and other partners that are not part of the local authority. Where decisions are made jointly by partners in a children’s trust there are limits to the degree of influence elected members can have on those decisions. It is therefore important from the outset for a clear understanding to be in place between elected members and the wider children’s trust.

9 GOVERNANCE AND THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LOCAL SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN’S BOARD

9.1 The work of LSCBs fits within the wider context of children’s trust arrangements that aim to improve the overall wellbeing across the five children’s outcomes for all children in the local area. The LSCB, as a separate statutory body, needs to have a clear and distinct identity within the children’s trust governance arrangements, and not be an operational sub-committee of a children’s trust board. In the first instance, it is for the local authority leadership to consider the positioning of the LSCB within children’s trust arrangements and to discuss this with partners.

9.2 The LSCB is not accountable for the actions of organisations represented on it, but - in order to enable it to carry out its statutory functions - may hold those organisations to account on safeguarding and child welfare issues.

9.3 The DCS is responsible for the local authority’s functions in setting up the LSCB and generally making sure it works properly. The Chair of the LSCB is appointed by the authority and in that sense is accountable to the authority.

9.4 Organisations represented on the LSCB are also likely to be represented in children’s trust arrangements, and authorities will wish to ensure through appropriate information sharing and cross-membership of LSCBs and children’s trust boards/committees that reporting lines are not duplicated.

9.5 The LSCB will have an independent voice within a children’s trust on issues for which it has statutory functions, but should review its own work against its agreed objectives; and should also be prepared to be scrutinised by the local authority and its partners.

9.6 The LSCB has a right to make input to children’s services planning, and to commissioning decisions, on issues for which it has statutory responsibilities. Authorities will need to establish appropriate lines of communication and cross-membership between LSCBs and children’s trusts to ensure that LSCB views are taken into account.

9.7 Local authorities should ensure that children’s trusts and LSCBs work together effectively, for example in ascertaining the views of children, young people and families about priorities and effectiveness of services.

10. GOVERNANCE AND THE RELATIONSHIPS WITH VOLUNTARY AND COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS, GPS AND SCHOOLS

10.1 Partners such as Voluntary and Community organisations, GPs and Schools also have other accountabilities to their Trustees, Professional Associations and School Governing bodies respectively. The representation of sectors such as these in children’s trust arrangements, and the responsibilities of representatives to their sectors, need to be determined.

10.2 Schools should ensure they are feeding into children’s trust governance arrangements, either directly, or through a representative route. Schools also need to feed into the work of the LSCB.

10.3 The Government wants to encourage all schools to become extended schools. To cater for the needs of the whole child, schools will need to engage with other partner agencies to provide a range of services, either individually or in clusters. This will involve staff from different agencies using the school site to deliver services, possibly being based on the school site. Schools should also work with other children’s service providers to adopt the common information sharing and assessment arrangements the Government is developing.

Appendix:

The Six Standards Of Good Governance Determined By The Independent Commission For Good Governance In Public Services

1. Good governance means focusing on the organisation’s purpose and on outcomes for citizens and service users

1.1 Being clear about the organisation’s purpose and its intended outcomes for citizens and service users

1.2 Making sure that users receive a high quality service

1.3 Making sure that taxpayers receive value for money

2. Good governance means performing effectively in clearly defi ned

functions and roles

2.1 Being clear about the functions of the governing body

2.2 Being clear about the responsibilities of non-executives and the executive, and making sure that those responsibilities are carried out

2.3 Being clear about relationships between governors and the public

3. Good governance means promoting values for the whole

organisation and demonstrating the values of good governance

through behaviour

3.1 Putting organisational values into practice

3.2 Individual governors behaving in ways that uphold and exemplify effective governance

4. Good governance means taking informed, transparent decisions and managing risk

4.1 Being rigorous and transparent about how decisions are taken

4.2 Having and using good quality information, advice and support

4.3 Making sure that an effective risk management system is in operation

5. Good governance means developing the capacity and capability of the governing body to be effective

5.1 Making sure that appointed and elected governors have the skills, knowledge and experience they need to perform well

5.2 Developing the capability of people with governance responsibilities and evaluating their performance, as individuals and as a group

5.3 Striking a balance, in the membership of the governing body, between

continuity and renewal

6. Good governance means engaging stakeholders and making

accountability real

6.1 Understanding formal and informal accountability relationships

6.2 Taking an active and planned approach to dialogue with and accountability to the public

6.3 Taking an active and planned approach to responsibility to staff

6.4 Engaging effectively with institutional stakeholders