PAPER E

 

 

CHILDREN’S SERVICESSCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 7 DECEMBER 2004–18 JULY 2005

 

ANNUAL WORK PROGRAMME OF THE SCHOOLS FORUM

 

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICESREPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND RESOURCES, CHILDREN’S SERVICES

 

 

ACTION REQUIRED BY THE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

  1. To receive the annual report of the Schools Forum
  2. To seek clarification or further detail from the Chair of the Forum

 

To agree:

a. A methodology for determining future work programmes

b. Priorities for the Committee’s first work programme

 

PURPOSE

The Schools Forum’s membership includes representatives of: Headteachers and Governors from each sector of education; Diocesan Authorities and stakeholder groups such as Early Years. The Forum considers all financial matters as they affect the Education budget and advises the Council on the priorities for expenditure within the Schools Block. This advice would be offered normally in the context of the overall settlement for education. Members will be aware that the FSS for the Council as a whole has been delayed until 9 December (approx). The Chair of the Forum may feel able to give general guidance to members but the full impact of the EFSS for 2005-6 will not be discussed by the Schools Forum until its re-arranged meeting of 16 December. The work of the Forum for the past year is the subject of the report which can be found at Appendix 1.

 

 

 

 

1.         To produce a Scrutiny Committee work plan for the next 9 months, using prioritisation criteria to determine each potential enquiry’s level of importance.

 

2.         Below are proposed criteria for prioritising topics of enquiry for scrutiny, which are weighted accorded to importance.  Each enquiry should be considered separately, and the score for each enquiry should be totalled and the enquiries ranked according to score.

 

3.                  This methodology should not be seen as overly prescriptive, nor as a forensic tool – but as a way of publicly debating and ranking priorities for the committee in a consistent and rational way. It builds on tools developed by the Improvement and Development Agency (the IDeA).

 

4.         If the tool, when applied, gives results which do not reflect other assessments of the priorities of the Island, and of the Council, it should be revisited.

Criteria

Weighting

Assessment

Significant contribution to Community Strategy Objective

3

 

Significant contribution to Corporate Plan Objective

3

 

Significant underperformance Identified From QPMR

3

 

Significant/persistent issue from budget monitoring reports

3

 

New, increasing or long term static risk on Corporate Risk Register

3

 

Identified as source of concern from customer feedback

2

 

Identified by Town/Parish Council(s)

2

 

Government priority

2

 

Identified via media attention – local

1

 

Identified via media attention – national

1

 

Highlighted by local members, MP, or other community representative

1

 

Identified by Scrutiny Committee member(s)

1

 

Request of Cabinet Member

1

 

Counter Indicators

 

 

Planned or recent internal/external audit activity

-5

 

Planned or recent related Policy Commission enquiry

-5

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


5.                  POTENTIAL ENQUIRIES

 

5.1               Outstanding items from previous administration

 

Appendix 1 shows all the outstanding items from the previous administration and suggests as to where each item could be directed.  The below items are those which appear to be best suited to attention from the Scrutiny Committee:

 

 

Proposed enquiry

Weighted score

Property transactions

0

GAGS programme

6

Highway and Bridge inspections*

 

Housing benefits

2

Fire Modernisation

5

Local Development Framework

-1

Tourism Development Plan

-5

* Included in proposed Highway Safety enquiry

 

 

5.2               Requests from Cabinet

 

Proposed enquiry

Weighted score

Supporting People budget

11

 

5.3               New items for consideration

 

Proposed enquiry

Weighted score

Formation of a Health Trust

7

School Organisation

8

Highway Safety

11

Budget Process

9

 

Nb. In conducting the prioritisation exercise no scores were added in relation to Community Strategy or Corporate Plan.  The council has yet to adopt new plans reflecting the priorities of the new administration.

 

6.                  RECOMMENDATIONS

 

It is recommended that the Committee adopt the assessment methodology contained

within this report and that the work programme includes enquiries into:

 

·         GAGS programme

·         Fire Modernisation

·         Supporting People budget

·         Formation of a Health Trust

·         School Organisation

·         Highway Safety

·         Budget process

 

 

These lines of enquiry need to be timetabled and resourced.  The next meeting of the Scrutiny Committee will receive a draft work programme.

 

Contact Point: John Lawson, Head of Legal & Democratic Services,  ( 01983 823203 [email protected]

Contact Point : Kim Johnson, Head of Planning and Resources, F telephone number: 823410 and e-mail : Kim. [email protected]

 

 

 

Kim Johnson

John Lawson

Head of Legal & Democratic Services