Memorandum submitted by the Education
Network, Democratic Health Network and Local Government Information
Unit
1. INTRODUCTION
TO TEN/DHN/LGIU
1.1 The Education Network (TEN) and Democratic
Health Network (DHN) are part of the Local Government Information
Unit (LGIU). Together the three organisations bring a unique span
of expertise and engagement across issues arising from the children's
services agenda—and a range of subscribers and affiliates
which encompass all tiers of local government, health bodies,
trade unions and professional associations. We provide a research
and development service for our subscribers/affiliates, which
includes:
— producing policy briefings for our
subscribers/affiliates, providing them with up-to-date information
and advice on latest government policy developments;
— research and analysis of government
policy disseminated through research publications, good practice
guides and national conferences/events.
2. OUR WORK
TO DATE
2.1 The Unit has responded to the need to
offer support to local authorities by establishing a cross-unit
project team, led by TEN with significant inputs from LGIU and
DHN colleagues. By sharing our collective expertise across education,
health and local government, the project team has had considerable
success in establishing a significant presence in the policy area
of children's services. We have published three pamphlets:
— Children's Services—some
key organisational issues, focuses on different organisational
approaches to integrating services for children, young people
and their families.
— Every School Matters is a
consultation paper (produced in response to the Government's omission
of schools from the consultation on Every Child Matters),
which highlights schools' keystone role in the children's services
agenda.
— An introductory guide to children's
social services for people working with children, the first
in a series which will include similar guides to health, education
and possibly the voluntary sector. These are intended to make
a contribution to breaking down the cultural barriers which exist
between different professional groups working with children, by
promoting an understanding of the way each other operate.
2.2 We are currently hosting two invited
seminars, aiming to identify some of the challenges posed by Every
Child Matters and to find some practical ways forward. The
first seminar discussed issues of governance, accountability and
integration of children's issues; the second will consider workforce
implications of the new agenda on children's services. These are
being attended by key national and local level stakeholders across
all sectors involved in delivering the children's social services
agenda. We are considering how we might disseminate the outcome
of these seminars more widely. We would be happy to discuss the
issues raised at the seminars with the Education and Skills Committee
(the second seminar will take place on 26 November).
2.3 We are also setting up a Children's
Services Learning Network for local authorities who are expected
to bring three people with responsibilities in the three backgrounds.
The Network aims to promote learning amongst participating partners
in each local authority area, build capacity between these partners
as well as to disseminate the learning more widely.
2.4 The challenges in Every Child Matters
present a huge programme of change for practitioners in all services
engaged with children, young people and their families. We therefore
envisage that it will form a central part of our work programme
for some time to come and that we will continue to build on and
develop the work outlined above.
3. TEN/DHN/LGIU COMMENT
3.1 We share the Government's aims and objectives
set out in Every Child Matters of improving the life chances
of all children and young people though achieving the five outcomes
related to being healthy (now including emotional well-being),
staying safe, enjoying and achieving, making a positive contribution
and economic well-being. We therefore welcome the approach which
focuses on the holistic needs of children, young people and their
families by bringing together education, health, children's social
services and other public and voluntary services working with
children and young people in a more integrated way.
3.2 However through our policy briefings
and other publications, we have highlighted a number of issues
of concern and during the passage of the Bill a number of issues
have emerged that we think need further examination. Issues which
the Committee might like to consider are indicated in bold italics
in the text.
CHILDREN'S
TRUSTS—GOVERNANCE
AND ACCOUNTABILITY
3.3 We have concerns over arrangements for
ensuring accountability and transparency for Trust decisions through
its member organisations. The substantial differences between
governance arrangements of democratically accountable local authorities
and Primary Care Trusts, as well as differences in culture and
priorities, will pose considerable challenges for Chairs of Trusts
or partnerships. All this raises the question of how do Trusts
link back to the executive bodies of the local authority and other
partners?
In particular we are concerned by the lack of
formal mechanisms for engaging the co-operation of schools and
GPs—which are not brought into arrangements as statutory
partners with proposals and activities arising from partnerships
(Trusts). In the absence of a statutory duty to co-operate
with local authorities, it will be important to ensure that other
mechanisms which Ministers have suggested should be employed to
influence the conduct of schools (eg inspection and funding) are
actually able to do so. The current proposal to extend the minimum
funding guarantee for the next three years greatly diminishes
any such prospect. Similarly it would be helpful to consider whether
there are adequate incentives to persuade GPs to prioritise the
five outcomes. These are both issues which the Committee could
helpfully look at.
The admirable concept of extended schools could
include a variety of health-related services, but without a duty
on GPs and their staff to co-operate in partnership arrangements,
such developments will depend to a large extent on the individual
goodwill of GPs.
Potentially schools have a substantial impact
on the health and well being of children and young people, not
just while they are attending schools, but on their ability to
make healthy choices throughout their lives. Schools need more
incentives and inducement to enhance the health of children and
prevent ill health, for example through minimum standards for
school meals; developing guidelines on suitable infrastructure
and resources such as cooking facilities for community use so
that parents and children can extend their nutrition and cooking
skills; gardening allotments for community and school use to develop
both skills and community relationships; involvement of parents
and community groups in sports and exercise in schools; and regulation
of the food industry's purveying in school premises of foods containing
unhealthy levels of fat and sugar. The development of extended
schools as healthy and health-promoting environments could be
greatly assisted if there were a requirement to co-operate with
local authorities on both schools themselves and on local health
professionals, such as GPs.
ENGAGING CHILDREN,
YOUNG PEOPLE
AND THEIR
FAMILIES
We also think that it is imperative that the
views of children, young people and their families are fully built
into partnership arrangements, particularly in determining and
monitoring service provision. While this is a central requirement
of the legislation, in practice there is a need for further work
to find and disseminate appropriate mechanisms for achieving this:
an issue for the Committee to keep under review.
LOOKED-AFTER
CHILDREN
3.4 The proposal to amend the Children Act
1989 so that the duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of
looked-after children includes a duty to promote their educational
achievement is a positive development. Without a parallel duty
on schools there can be little confidence that it will bring about
significant change in provision for this most vulnerable group.
Similarly, while we welcomed the recent government
requirement for each looked-after child to have a healthcare plan
and regular medical check-ups, we do not believe that GPs in particular,
and health professionals and NHS bodies in general are sufficiently
incentivised to develop and share plans for looked-after children's
health beyond the bare minimum. In particular, we would have liked
to see a specific duty on relevant individuals and bodies to co-operate
in supporting the emotional well-being and mental health of looked-after
children.
We would therefore recommend that the Committee
considers whether the mechanisms for engaging schools and the
health service in the well-being of looked-after children are
adequate.
INTEGRATING SERVICES—ORGANISATIONAL
ISSUES
3.5 While strongly welcoming the flexibility
provided in the creation of the Director of Children's Services
post, the emphasis in the Next Steps document clearly suggests
some form of merger of education and social services departments;
we are concerned that authorities will be encouraged to focus
on structures rather than improving outcomes. This is an issue
raised in our recent pamphlet, Children's Services—some
key organisational issues (enclosed). It would be valuable
if the committee were to give some consideration to this and emphasise
the value of a bottom-up approach of practical and pragmatic measures
to achieve the outcomes desired.
THE ROLE
OF THE
CHILDREN'S
COMMISSIONER
3.6 We see the role of Children's Commissioner
as a valuable way of improving children's rights. We are therefore
disappointed that during the passage of the Children Bill through
the Commons, the Government succeeded in introducing a number
of amendments that have the effect of modifying the role of the
Commissioner, which had been given a positive children's rights
dimension after debate in the Lords. As a result, the function,
terms of reference and capacity of the Commissioner have been
downgraded from promoting a rights agenda, to promoting awareness
of the interests of children and young people. The powers,
functions and role of the Commissioner are therefore an issue
which the Committee could usefully consider and in particular
how adequately the Commissioner will be able to promote the five
outcomes.
TENSIONS IN
GOVERNMENT POLICY
3.7 There are numerous tensions within the
Government's own policy priorities, not least between the well-established
"standards" agenda, the more recently published Five
Year Strategy for Children and Learners and the emphasis on
inclusion and vulnerable children in Every Child Matters.
The emphasis in the Five Year Strategy
is strongly on the autonomy of schools—including encouragement
to adopt foundation status and acquire foundation bodies with
the power to appoint a majority of governors—with an implied
diminution in the role of local authorities; in Every Child
Matters, it is on an area-wide organisation of a range of
services through partnership arrangements, the success of which
will depend on the role of the local authority and the successful
engagement of schools.
3.8 Engaging schools with the children's
services agenda is central to achieving its objectives. Whenever
Ministers refer to the Children Bill they refer to extended schools
as the way forward. Schools are seen as being at the centre of
the community, delivering a wider range of services than currently
in an integrated way. Yet with schools under pressure to deliver
on targets associated with raising standards many headteachers
argue that it is difficult to give the same priority to inclusion
issues, let alone to embrace a closer relationship with a wider
range of services envisaged by Every Child Matters. A rethink
of the current emphasis on a rather narrow range of attainment,
as currently measured and published, would be welcome.
3.9 Now the Five Year Strategy with
its emphasis on independence for schools and greater financial
autonomy for headteachers seems to render buy-in to the extended
schools concept almost voluntary. In the light of this, the current
refusal by the Government to include schools in the list of bodies
under a duty to co-operate in the partnership arrangements to
improve the well-being of children in the Children Bill seems
increasingly unfortunate—not least for the message it transmits.
It will be essential that this is redressed in the guidance
which will be issued, which should make the Government's expectations
unequivocally clear.
November 2004
| 
