PAPER D

 

POLICY COMMISSION FOR CHILDREN AND SCHOOL RESULTS - 7 JUNE 2006

 

CHILDREN’S SERVICES STRUCTURE          

 

REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR CHILDREN’S SERVICES

 

 

SUMMARY / PURPOSE

 

1.         This report outlines a revised structure for the Children’s Services directorate to make it fitter for purpose.   It proposes that a permanent Director of Children’s Services should be appointed as soon as possible and that the Children’s Services directorate should appoint a new Head of Service for School Improvement and Learning Services.

 

BACKGROUND

 

2.         Over the past year, two heads of service posts, have been lost from the management structure for Children’s Services.  This has left the whole of Children’s Services being managed by just two heads of service.   At the same time, the Director’s post has been vacant and has been covered by an interim director.    

 

STRATEGIC CONTEXT

 

3.         The Children Act 2004 identifies a lead role for a Director of Children’s Services.  The scope of this post is clearly outlined in statutory guidance.  

 

4.         The responsibilities of the Children’s Services directorate are broad and, with schools included, account for more than half of the Council’s overall budget. 

 

REPORT

 

Director of Children’s Services:

 

5.         The credibility of the leadership of Children’s Services is compromised by the ‘interim’ status of the current incumbent.   Given the substantial change management agenda facing Children’s Services, it is important to secure a more sustainable leadership as soon as possible.   The leadership task includes:

 

·         challenging the culture of underperformance and low aspirations;

·         securing long term accountability across the whole of Children’s Services;

·         building the capacity for school improvement;

·         resolving the issues around the management of data and its use to raise standards and to safeguard children and young people;

·         Maintaining tight and consistent procedures around the safeguarding of children and young people;

·         consolidating a Children’s Trust and continuing the implementation of the Children Act 2004;

·         delivering the outcomes of the Joint Area Review;

·         undertaking a major consultation around Building Schools for the Future, extended schools, children’s centres, federation, and trust schools;

·         jointly leading the corporate and Island wide improvement agendas.

 

6.         In the light of the developments of the Public Service Board and in the relationship between the Council and the Health Trusts, the political administration and the new Chief Executive will wish to review the structure and membership of the Council’s senior management team. 

 

7.         There are two distinct core areas of responsibility within children’s services – for safeguarding children and young people and for educational standards.  A case could be made for giving the statutory accountability for safeguarding to a strategic director of social services, thereby overcoming the transition issues which exist when social care is split between children and adults; and allowing a greater focus on educational standards from another strategic director.    However, given the vulnerable position that Children’s Services faces in the eyes of several government departments, particularly the DfES, it might be better to follow more conventional arrangements, at least for the duration, not least because the whole thrust of the government’s Change for Children agenda plays up the advantages of joining up, rather than dividing, the different services for children and young people.

 

8.         Overall, at least until April 2008, when the Children’s Act 2004 must be fully implemented, there are powerful arguments for having a Director of Children’s Services as one of the key posts in the Council’s management structure, just as there is a statutory requirement for there to be a Lead Member for Children’s Services.   Among these arguments are:

 

1.  the statutory accountability for the safeguarding agenda;

2.  the Aim High priority for improving outcomes for children and young people,

particularly for raising standards in schools;

3.  the need to implement the Children Act 2004, which specifies the partners

     to a Children’s Trust and gives lead responsibility to the Director of

     Children’s Services. 

 

Directorate Structure:

 

9.         The Children’s Services Directorate currently has two heads of service, for Learning and Effectiveness and for Children and Family Services.   The current structural organisation is attached to this report as Appendix 1.

 

10.       A year ago, the directorate had four heads of service; the additional two being a Head of Policy and Planning and a Head of Special Educational Needs.  The responsibilities for these two divisions have been brought into the Learning Effectiveness and Children and Families Divisions respectively.

 

11.       It is unrealistic to expect the full scope of Children’s Services responsibilities to be carried out effectively by just two Heads of Service, particularly if they are also to be able to contribute properly to cross-corporate working.

 

12.       It makes sense to organise the directorate into three divisions:

 

·         for schools and services, such as early years and youth services, which are meant to be universally accessed by all children and young people;

·         for safeguarding and inclusion services, which are targeted towards particular children and young people;

·         for commissioning, planning, policy and resources – infrastructural services – which would include the implementation of the Children’s Trust arrangements; any necessary reviews of school organisation; and provide the client function for those services, such as human resources or information technology, which are provided centrally. 

 

13.       A possible distribution of responsibilities within these three divisions is shown in appendix 2.  This is not a firm set of proposals but an illustration of how responsibilities might be allocated.   If the appointment of an additional head of service is approved, there will need to be full consultation on the organisational structure that follows.

 

14.       Close scrutiny of these responsibilities will reveal that, even with an additional head of service post, each of three heads of service would still have posts with a broad scope.  In some other unitary authorities, there is further sub-division, to create five posts:

 

·         school improvement;

·         community learning, such as early years and youth services;

·         safeguarding services;

·         inclusion services, such as learning difficulties and behaviour support;

·         commissioning and infrastructure. 

 

15.       This becomes a matter of debate about the relative advantages of delegating responsibility downwards into lower tiers of the structure, as opposed to creating more expensive posts at the top of the structure.  Provided it is understood that team managers can also represent the directorate in cross-corporate task groups, then a three directorate structure should be more cost-effective. 

 

16.       In some other authorities, particularly the larger counties, there management responsibilities are devolved into area teams.   On the Isle of Wight, we need to consider how local access and local service-delivery will evolve and work.   In the possible structure outlined in appendix 2, a team has been included to provide safeguarding advice across the whole island, organised into East and West teams.  At this point, this is included for illustrative purposes.  Further consideration needs to be given to how any local access should fit with the 5 hubs proposed in the Council’s asset management strategy. 

 

FINANCIAL AND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

 

17.       The cost of the Director of Children’s Services and a third head of service are currently paying for most of the work being carried out by Mouchel Parkman / Outcomes UK, including the cost of the interim Director.   Apart from any decisions to be made about the level at which the Director’s salary should be set in order to recruit a strong candidate, the proposals are cost neutral.

 

18.       The ideas laid out in this paper take full account of the statutory guidance on the roles of the Director of Children’s Services and the Lead Member for Children’s Services.

 

CONCLUDING COMMENT

 

19.       It is important to move quickly to sharpen the effectiveness of the Children’s Services directorate.   The appointment of a permanent Director will ensure that the positive desire and determination to add at least 10 percentage points to the Island’s GCSE higher grade pass rate will be realised sooner rather than later.  The identification of a third head of service who can take the lead on commissioning, Children’s Trust arrangements, workforce development and school organisation will help the Island to make the step changes that are so urgently needed, particularly as it will free up the opportunity to recruit new senior school improvement expertise to the Island.  

 

Appendix 1:   current structure of the Children’s Services Directorate – to be found at:

http://eduwight.iow.gov.uk/the_lea/images/2LearningEffectiveness.pdf

http://eduwight.iow.gov.uk/the_lea/images/2ChildrenandFamilyServices.pdf

 

Appendix 2:   illustrative structure of Children’s Services Directorate into three divisions.