education and skills equality &vcs analysis of medium term...
TRANSCRIPT
Page 1 of 124
Education and Skills – Equality &VCS Analysis of Medium Term Planning Proposals
For budget proposals made as part of the medium term planning process, services are required to undertake an initial equalities
screening to assess actual or potential impact relating to equalities and / or the voluntary and community sector. A full impact analysis is
then completed in cases where the screening identifies that this is necessary.
This document contains:
Part 1: Full impact analysis documents
The following full impact analyses were completed because the initial screening identified the proposal had a high relevance to equalities
and / or the voluntary and community sector.
Home to school transport Reconfiguration of Youth Centres
Review of Educational Psychology Service Early Years Services
Review of Family Information Service Connexions Re-commissioning
Review of Children’s Partnership Team Review use of Children’s Voluntary Grant
Further reduce Family Information Service Childminding Support Services
Part 2: Summary of initial screenings
The table included in this document lists the budget proposals that have been made and shows the outcomes of the initial equalities
screening for each proposal.
Summary of initial screenings
Page 2 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
In February 2012, the Council made a significant policy change decision to one
which provides home to school transport for children of compulsory school age only
in accordance with the statutory entitlement but with some additional provisions to
deal with particular Buckinghamshire issues. This decision was made to support
the achievement of a £1.4m saving target. There is a separate EIA regarding this
decision (Feb 2012):
MTP Ref: ES14BS07 - BS11; BP04
Line title and
description of
change:
Client Transport – Home to School Transport Savings
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Sue Butt (Operations Manager) x7394
Brian Miller (Commissioning Officer) x2881
Date assessment completed: 6th December 2013
Who else involved in the assessment: Ben Thomas (Head of Prevention and Commissioning)
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio: Education & Skills
Page 3 of 124
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
http://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/documents/s23098/Equalities%20Impact%20Ass
essment.pdf
The Council has now identified further savings that need to be made from the
provision of home to school transport and this Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)
addresses the broad themes of these proposals. A detailed business case to
appraise these proposals will then take place followed by a full public consultation
regarding the specific changes proposed.
This EIA considers the following proposed projects:
1. Increasing Fares i) under 16s discretionary & ii) over 16s/out of
county/Milton Keynes discretionary (paid for) seats
Increased drop out where fare rises unaffordable
Parent/carer dissatisfaction
2. Volunteer Driver Scheme
New pilot project
Associated risks of: drivers not turning up, running late, limited back up to
cover illness, vehicle breakdown or no show, or choosing to leave volunteer
role at short notice.
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination1 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
1 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Page 4 of 124
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
Increased risk of children not arriving at school on time
Safeguarding assurances required
3. Multi pick up points for SEN
New pilot project
Assumes 20% non-take up per school but this could be higher for certain
Special Schools with pupils with significant behaviour issues where shared
vehicle transport is not a safe option.
4. Efficiency of route optimization
Reducing costs through more efficient procurement practices.
5. Increased use of public transport network
Currently 7.5% of home to school transport is delivered through
public transport however other local authorities have a higher
percentage which supports sustainable modes of transport
strategies.
Those unaffected by the proposals:
Those with a statutory entitlement as set out in the home to school
transport policy agreed in February 2012
Those retaining an entitlement under a previous edition of the policy
which is phased out over 2012-16, though this group will continue to be
charged a small administrative fee that may increase in line with
inflation.
16-19 travel bursary scheme run through education and training
Page 5 of 124
providers.
Those affected by the proposals:
Those pupils who make a choice to attend a school that is not their nearest
appropriate school.
Fare increases for non-statutory home to school transport provision for
under 16s and over 16s/out of county/Milton Keynes travelling pupils.
Alternative transport options for pupils attending mainstream school
provision through volunteer driver run transport rather than current taxi
operations.
A change in pick up points for some children who attend Special Schools in
Bucks.
Impact on Different Groups
For under 16s not choosing to attend their nearest appropriate school, the proposal
is to increase fares where this provision is non-statutory.
There is a strong likelihood of increased dissatisfaction from current users of the
Home to School transport service through these proposals of increased fares.
However, fare increases are only to those who are not entitled to free home to
school transport and in accordance with statutory guidelines it is parental
responsibility to take their child to and from school.
There are also implications in regards to pupils having to get to pick up points for
the SEN multi-pick project and potential reliability issues of volunteer driver
schemes, though equally these may be more reliable. The multi pick up points and
volunteer driver scheme are both untested and are proposed as pilots to determine
their success and potential to realise savings.
Page 6 of 124
Home to school transport policy is separate to school admissions policy and this is
already communicated in the current home to school transport policy and guidance.
The change in home to school transport policy in February 2012 has already seen a
shift in who the Council transports for free to school. Following full implementation
will see the number reduced from 10,000 to 4,000 and this was widely consulted
on. Equally, increased fares for discretionary (paid-for) spare seat paying pupils
were widely consulted on last year.
School travel arrangements are detailed in both printed school admissions
materials, and on the Council’s web-site. All schools will be written to via to
Council’s Schools Bulletin and pupils affected by any changes will be notified in
writing.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
The Council’s managing agent contractor for home to school transport, Amey Client
Transport’s, will be required to manage the pilot projects of the volunteer drivers
scheme and SEN Multipick up points.
The operational delivery of the pilot schemes will be through Amey Client Transport
existing contractual envelope with the Council.
Statutorily entitled pupils will remain entitled to free home to school transport
through all these proposals. School transport law makes no general provision for
the Council to provide transport to particular types of school other than by age or
mainstream/special. These proposals do not impact statutory entitlement to home
Page 7 of 124
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
to school transport.
The Client Transport contract is subject to robust monitoring alongside detailed
statistics regarding types and needs of pupils travelling on home to school
transport. The Contractor is required to work to all equalities legislation.
Exceptional criteria for consideration of specific cases for home to school transport
will not change and the panel and Appeals Process for consideration of these cases
will remain the same.
Complaints/appeals will continue to be monitored by protected characteristics.
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
This is a contracted out service to Amey Client Transport who manage their own
staff. Proposals for the pilot schemes have derived from shared plans drawn up by
Amey and the Council. No additional resource is necessary to deliver these
projects. Amey are responsible for managing their staffing arrangements to ensure
sufficient resources in place to implement proposed schemes.
Management of the supply chain is the responsibility of Amey. Contract monitoring
of Amey is in place through BCC Contract Management processes and will continue.
Amey are contracted to monitor the supply chain with BCC contract management
oversight of this delegated process.
The Council’s complaints handling procedures are in place and will continue, with
dissatisfaction and issues raised directly with Amey in the first instance, and then
stage 2 and 3 complaints handled by BCC.
Page 8 of 124
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
Amey undertake Customer Surveys each year to assess parent / pupil satisfaction
with services. These are currently being reviewed to update questions to ensure all
service users have the opportunity to share their views with alternative formats of
survey delivery techniques for certain user groups e.g. focus groups for those with
disabilities.
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved?
Not applicable to this proposal
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
% reduction in BCC contribution
% reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 9 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• The organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• The future of the service*
• Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• Volunteers currently providing the service?
• Any assets used to provide the service*?
• The wider local community*?
• The supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Page 10 of 124
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
Multi pick up points and volunteer driver scheme are both pilot projects and a
targeted communication plan will be put in place to ensure all affected are properly
consulted and informed.
Monitoring of the pilots will be ongoing throughout the pilot year and form part of
contract monitoring practices by Amey and BCC Commissioners.
Detailed consultation with families regarding any potential fare increases will also
be undertaken using a variety of communication channels including webbased and
face to face.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
N/A
Page 11 of 124
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
The proposals will be monitored as part of contract monitoring and performance
monitoring processes. Where changes are required these will be assessed and
implemented where necessary to improve services and ensure those travelling with
protected characteristics are not disproportionately impacted.
Complaints and appeals will be monitored according to council policy and guidance
with equalities categories identified where possible to ascertain whether there are
any disproportionate impacts.
Service user surveys with families and schools using multi-pick up points transport
scheme.
Service user surveys with pupils, families and schools experiences of volunteer
driver transport scheme.
Service user surveys with pupils and families regarding potential migration to public
transport network.
Page 12 of 124
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
Establishment of termly meetings between BCC service teams (CYP and Place) and providers (Amey
and Ringway Jacobs) to review and discuss policy and operational impacts across the home to
school and public bus transport network. Meetings will take place on a termly basis in line with
parent’s renewal of passes and checking of paid-for (discretionary) applications.
Sue Butt December 2013
Review Amey contract (signed 2008, extended in 2013) around equality to determine what is
contained within the contract around monitoring of equality, in particular in light of changes post
the Equality Act 2010.
Brian Miller December 2013
Ensure monitoring of pilot schemes is in place as part of contract monitoring and plans in place by
Amey for their own monitoring of these.
Brian Miller April 2014
Public consultation on details of the proposals. Sue Butt / Ben Thomas Completed by end April 2014
Service user surveys for volunteer driver and multi-pick up points to be established to baseline at
start of scheme and then regular measurement through pilot phase
Amey Client Transport April 2014
Review impact of volunteer driver pilot on potential reduction in SME taxi contracts Amey Client Transport April 2014
.
Page 13 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
This proposal is based on the EPS reducing services or by getting further income of
100K for services (this equates to 200k or income as 100k is already in the Medium
Term Financial Plan). If this is possible then no impact on service delivery will occur.
Therefore no impact should occur.
However currently no profit making EP services exist. A traded service delivers at
cost with a turn-over of 120K per year. Therefore if it is not possible to generate
100K profit and service delivery reductions are necessary then the following
MTP Ref: ES14BS18 PBR - EPS
Line title and
description of
change:
Review of Educational Psychology services (EPS)
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Chris Munday
Date assessment completed: 6.12.13
Who else involved in the assessment: No-one at present. Data used from various sources.
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio: Education and Skilsl
Page 14 of 124
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
impacts may occur:
Reduction in EP service delivery will directly impact on families of children with
Special Educational Needs and disabilities by reducing the level of service provided
to them.
Families from lower SES categories tend to have children with more SEN and
disabilities. Therefore they could be disproportionately affected ( national data)
Families of Pakistani pupils may be disproportionately affected as Pakistani pupils
are currently over represented in the number of children with statements of SEN
(SEN Review 2011).
SEN Review 2011 states that the data over the previous five years show an
increasing tendency for Black Caribbean and Mixed Black/White Caribbean pupils to
be over-represented in the percentage of pupils receiving a statement for
Behavioural, Emotional and Social Difficulties and for White pupils to be
consistently over-represented in the percentage of pupils with a statement for
Specific Learning Difficulties. Therefore again these groups may be
disproportionately affected by the proposed cut.
National statistics (2009/2010) show that Black Caribbean pupils are 4 times more
likely to be permanently excluded than the school population as a whole.
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination2 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
2 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Page 15 of 124
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
(Exclusions Data 10/11-EWO service). Excluded pupils are targeted for support by
the EPS and therefore may be disproportionately affected by these cuts.
Pupils with SEN are also more likely to be permanently excluded from school
(Exclusions Data 10/11-Education Welfare Officers service). Therefore again this
group may be particularly affected if EP service delivery is reduced.
Increased levels of dissatisfaction with the service and the county council are a risk,
but appropriate action to address this is possible to take.
Actions to reduce/avoid the impact of these cuts will be developed by the EPS.
Adverse publicity is likely if cuts are unavoidable, as cuts to the EP service generally
creates a level of publicity.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
If the proposal is implemented and leads to a reduction in overall service provision
then there may be an impact on:
Other budgets such as:
SEN Budgets overall.
Residential Out county budget-increased demand
Children in Care-increased demand
Page 16 of 124
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
Mitigating action to be taken would include a focused effort to create a profit
making traded service.
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
If redundancy is required this will be followed according to normal Cc procedures.
If the proposal is accepted then mitigating action to try to avoid redundancies will
be taken as noted above.
Page 17 of 124
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved?
Not applicable to this proposal
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
% reduction in BCC contribution
% reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 18 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Page 19 of 124
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
Full consultation with the EPS will be required in order to gain agreement and
commitment to building up a profit making service.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
Not applicable to this proposal
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Page 20 of 124
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
The EPS already has a comprehensive monitoring system with reviews built in to
monitor and take action where necessary.
Page 21 of 124
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
Scoping of a possible profit making business will take place EPS MLT April-13-August 13
Action’s agreed to create a profit making business capable of making 100K profit each year.
Products/courses developed capable of making profit
EPS MLT August-13/14
Profit making business advertised/publicised/launched EPS MLT Autumn 14-Spring 15
Delivery of profit making business to start EPS MLT Sep 15
Redundancy process to be considered EPS January 14
Page 22 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
The work undertaken by the Family Information Service (FIS) is to meet the Local
Authority’s duty to provide Information Advice and Assistance (IAA) to parents and
prospective parents with children from 0-19 or up to 25 with a disability. The
information available through FIS provides a front-facing platform supporting the
following strategies:
Families First – professionals database support for professionals
Early Intervention & Prevention – universal parenting offer for Bucks available
MTP Ref: CS14BS27
Line title and
description of
change:
Reduce Family Information Service
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Liz Smith
Date assessment completed: 3rd December 2013
Who else involved in the assessment:
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio:
Page 23 of 124
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
through FIS & professionals support
Child & Family Poverty – promotion of all money & finance support
Armed Forces Covenant – promotion of all Service families support
SEN reforms; Local Offer – promotion of all Special Educational Needs and
Disability (SEND) provision families support
FIS is delivered by telephone, email, social media, website and outreach. The
service supports families in the following ways (average per month)
Telephone, email, text: approx 300
Outreach: approx 250 adults, 50-60 young people
Website: approx 15 000 individual people
Social media: 1 500 Facebook followers, 600 Twitter followers
The service prioritises work for target groups which include:
BME adults (approx 50 people per month)
Absent parents (1-2 per month)
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination3 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
3 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Page 24 of 124
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
Carers working with Looked After Children (LAC); Adoptive, Foster & Residential
Care (1-2 per month)
Adults with English as an Additional Language (EAL) (approx. 20 per month)
Families in the Armed Forces (approx. 3-4 events = 30 people)
Families with a parent in prison (1-2 per month)
Gypsy, Roma Travellers & of Irish Heritage parents (working with Children’s
centres when appropriate)
Grandparent (1-2 per month)
New arrivals, refugees and asylum seekers (1 – 2 per month)
Parents eligible for short breaks (approx. 7-8 per month)
Parents of children with a disability or a special educational need (SEN) (approx.
25-30 per month)
Parents unemployed or on low income (approx. 40 per month)
Parents who have a disability (approx. 2-3 per month)
Young carers (1-2 per month)
Young parents (approx. 10 per month)
The figures above reflect direct contacts to staff in FIS through telephone, email,
text, social media or outreach. Figures for unique visitors to respective pages on the
FIS websites to support these target groups is also available if required.
A reduction in resource for FIS would have a direct impact on the number of target
families listed above receiving support and being signposted to further support
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
Page 25 of 124
services. This support covers topics including money & finance, SEN and/or
disability, childcare, Children’s Centres, staying safe and being healthy, activities,
voluntary & community groups and Youth Zone for young people.
As the main barriers to accessing information have been 1) not having information
all in one place and 2) making information available via a channel preferred by
families, FIS has developed the service to:
1) Manage 6000 records of information and 500 managed content pages via their
website
2) Develop new channels for communication on social media e.g. Facebook, Twitter,
Google+.
This has had a direct impact on the number of target families we have been able to
support particularly parents with SEND children, parents on low income or
unemployed and BME families. The website offers a Google translator and voice-
enabled software to ensure it is accessible for as wide a range of needs as possible.
The development of new information channels responsive to families need would
be unachievable with the proposed reduction.
A reduction in FIS would result in families having to source information themselves
through Google, where quality of data cannot be managed. Face to face and social
media support would also no longer be available to families with greatest need
which has the potential for them to be placed at an even greater disadvantage than
other families in the county.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Page 26 of 124
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
The likely model for delivery if FIS were reduced and then removed is that the
telephone and email facility could be delivered by the Buckinghamshire County
Council (BCC) contact centre (currently the first point of contact). This would
require greater training and knowledge base for staff to be able to respond to all
enquiries as the current model is that the Contact Centre respond to simple
enquiries (60% of telephone enquiries, 0% of email enquiries) using FAQs and the
website. Without FIS managing the website as a source of information the quality of
the information would drop and the quality of the responses to enquires would
drop. There would also be a cost in terms of expertise in the Contact Centre Agents
(currently paid on range 3) to deliver a higher level of specialist knowledge as a
Contact Centre specialist, equitable with the FIS staff (current pay range 5). There
would also be a cost in terms of training for the Contact Centre staff to perform and
deliver bespoke searches for families which is currently undertaken by the FIS staff
through the backend system.
The website could be managed by the BCC corporate web team but they do not
manage content (current model is that the responsibility for the content is
delegated to each service). As content of the FIS website covers a much wider
partnership than just BCC services e.g.: Jobcentre plus, health services etc. it is
unlikely the 500 content pages would continue to be managed. There would also be
a requirement to increase their resource (staff and costs of the database system) to
manage the 6000+ records.
Outreach provision could be satisfied to a degree by Children’s Centre Family
Support Workers but would be limited to families with children under 5. The Youth
service also operate a limited service of outreach but this is a targeted resource and
only available for young people 13+. There would be a significant gap of face to face
support for families who have children of primary school age which could not be
delivered by services in the current BCC structure.
Page 27 of 124
Social Media could be delivered by the corporate communications team but again
this relies on the quality of the data in the database and the website content which
potentially would not be continued.
All these solutions would require greater resource to ensure messages, data and
content were consistent to ensure families received the support necessary, if all the
channels were being delivered by different services rather than centrally within FIS.
This would have a direct impact on all families in Bucks (listed above) in terms of
the quality and consistency of advice and information available to them. There
would also be a greater demand and resource on voluntary sector organisations to
deliver a level of signposting and information which would not necessarily be
consistent across other organisations in Bucks. Ultimately this could mean that
families no longer receive early intervention and prevention advice and support and
therefore increase the numbers accessing costly statutory services.
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
One member of staff is on a 1 year secondment in Bucks and will be included in all
future correspondence and processes. All other staff are in post.
Page 28 of 124
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector (VCS) organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of,
grant funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? VCS organisations are not funded through FIS.
There may be an impact on the VCS to deliver information, advice and support to
families in Bucks if the FIS provision is decreased.
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
% reduction in BCC contribution
% reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 29 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Page 30 of 124
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
Communication about the proposed change in delivery will not be required until
later through the Medium Term Plan due to a year on year reduced resource to
deliver FIS. This will impact on the working agreement to manage data that we
currently have with providers and key stakeholders i.e. currently 5 working days
which will need to be extended to 10 working days due to reduced resource. At the
point when FIS is removed (2017-18), extensive communication would be required
with all providers registered with the service to set an expectation about how FIS
will be delivered in the future. Further extensive communication would be required
with all families in Bucks, particularly the target groups listed in A, to signpost to
equivocal information and support services. The target groups listed in A are likely
to require greater support to manage this change in the form of face to face
communication and support from other existing organisation e.g.: voluntary groups.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
Communication can be managed via email with all VCS organisations that are
registered with FIS.
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Page 31 of 124
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
We will analyse the number of unique visitors to the BFIS website for
sections of website to support the target groups listed in A
We will compare against the current baseline to understand the impact of
the change.
We will report on the number of telephone, email, text and social media
enquiries received by email and telephone to see if there has been an
increase. This reporting contains equality group data which will be used as a
comparison.
We will obtain anecdotal evidence from key stakeholders who support the
delivery of our outreach programme about the number of parents who
have accessed sessions.
Page 32 of 124
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
We will analyse the number of unique visitors to the BFIS website for sections of website to
support the target groups listed in section A of this assessment.
Linda Slim/Liz Connick Ongoing monthly
We will compare against the current baseline to understand the impact of the change. Linda Slim/Liz Connick Ongoing monthly
We will report on the number of telephone, email, text and social media enquiries received
by email and telephone to see if there has been an increase. This reporting contains
equality group data which will be used as a comparison.
Liz Connick/Della Holmes Ongoing monthly
We will obtain anecdotal evidence from key stakeholders who support the delivery of our
outreach programme about the number of parents who have accessed sessions.
Liz Connick/Della Holmes December 2013 onwards
We will communicate any changes in resource to the whole team in a timely and
transparent manner.
Liz Smith December 2013 onwards
We will consider a future delivery model of FIS through a partnership of Contact Centre,
Children’s Centre, Youth Service, Corporate Communications web service, Corporate
Communications social media team.
Liz Smith March 2014 onwards
We will communicate the changes to the delivery of FIS to families and key stakeholders in
Bucks in a timely and transparent way. Methods of communication will be determined by
the needs of the families.
Liz Smith March 2016 onwards
.
Page 33 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
The proposal is the removal of all staff working in the team and the reallocation of
the functions elsewhere as they cannot be stopped.
The proposal will have a significant impact on children living in poverty as work in
this area will cease or need to be allocated to other staff to deliver. It links to the
impact assessment that has been undertaken for the Family Information Service
(FIS) which is part of the Children’s Partnerships Team but a separate Business Case
has been requested. Much of the work is done in partnership with FIS so the impact
MTP Ref: ES14BS17
Line title and
description of
change:
PBR – review of Children’s Partnerships Team
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Ed Mallam 01296 382253
Date assessment completed: 5th December 2013
Who else involved in the assessment: Yvette Thomas
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio: Education and Skills
Page 34 of 124
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
of this joint cut will be significant.
Child poverty in Buckinghamshire stands at 12,115, (10.6%) of those aged 0-18
years living in poverty.
Research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies indicated that child poverty is projected
to rise from 2012/13 with an expected 300,000 more children living in poverty by
2015/16. This upward trend is expected to continue with a projection of 4.2 million
children living in poverty by 2020. (M Brewer, J Browne and R Joyce, Child and
working age poverty from 2010 – 2020, Institute for Fiscal Studies, October 2011)
The requirement of the Child Poverty Act 2010 is to have a local Child Poverty
Needs Assessment (CPNA) and a Strategy with an Action Plan linked to the Needs
Assessment. The Act does not state how the actions should be delivered but does
require the Local Authority to make arrangements for partners to work
cooperatively.
A broad range of additional projects delivering directly to over 3,000 children,
young people, parents and carers a year will have to end. Demand for these
projects is evidenced on the JSNA, the CYP’s Residents Survey 2013 and
development work undertaken with over 800 children, young people, parents and
carers for the new Children and Young People’s Plan 2014/18.
These are often delivered to the more vulnerable groups or those with particular
needs including children and young people who are:
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination4 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
4 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Page 35 of 124
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
Disabled
Looked after/care leavers
Victims of bullying
BME
Living in rural areas.
LGB and T.
Young parents.
Lone parents.
Young Carers
NEET
Receiving free school meals.
Service children.
No consultation has yet been done so it is not possible to say what the impact will
be, and, therefore not possible to confirm that this is the least discriminatory way
of achieving the business aim.
Work on European funded projects will cease as no capacity to deliver this work.
Currently 45k Euros per project with future funding not applied for this could be a
significant loss to the Portfolio. Schools who participate in these EU projects will
not have that experience or professional development of staff. Innovative work
currently undertaken will cease.
The team has attracted income of over £150,000 this year. Potential to earn future
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
Page 36 of 124
income will be lost.
A broad range of projects that deliver directly to children, young people, parents
and carers, will end. These projects include:
UNICEF Rights Respecting Schools Award which delivers to 40 schools
and early years settings,,
Employability Events.
Loan sharks work.
Fuel Poverty projects.
Pupil Premium – take up and the effective use of this for those on free
school meals, looked after and Service children
Family budgeting.
Job Clubs.
Foodbanks.
Children’s Commissioner for England’s Takeover Day,
Progress Project which is working with 100 families many of whom are
in considerable need,,
Welfare Reform projects,
Service families work.
Apprenticeships and work experience programme.
School Linking Network with over 1800 children involved
Page 37 of 124
Model United Nations annually 100 Secondary students involved
This will result in work ending with over 3,000 children and young people and
families each year. These are primarily from areas of deprivation and face multiple
issues and therefore , benefit considerably from additional opportunities and
support which have proved particularly successful in equipping the more vulnerable
and non-academically achieving with key life skills including developing economic
skills and work readiness
School and Early Years Closures on the web site – there will be no one to support
this key method of informing parents and carers regarding closures. Schools and
Early Years settings will have to put in place individual systems and parents /carers
will no longer have the information in one easy to access place. This will lead to
increased dissatisfaction with the Council from all of these groups.
The loss of this support is also likely to impact on the Admissions web site as there
will be no staff to support this area either – this is the most accessed section of the
Council web site and disruption to this will course significant dissatisfaction.
The Equality Act 2010 specifically identifies 3 general duties on public authorities.
Through the work done with schools these duties are carefully monitored and
evidenced. If the service were not available there is a greater risk for issues related
to the protected characteristics being missed which could lead to discrimination
occurring unwittingly. Legal challenge and judicial reviews occurring at high legal
costs to the Council
All schools in Buckinghamshire have access to support and guidance on equalities
issues and this has contributed to Schools being identified in Buckinghamshire for
their positive work in relation to anti-discrimination practice. In eleven years only
one school has had racism highlighted in their Ofsted report all other schools
inspected have had no negative comments about children’s experiences in schools
related to their protected characteristic. Buckinghamshire schools have
Page 38 of 124
approximately 25% of children from BME backgrounds and issues of community
cohesion are managed within the team
Preventing Violent extremism work has recently been announced will be a statutory
duty on local authorities. The expertise and knowledge from within the team will be
lost and outside providers will have to be sought to deliver this work with schools
creating more financial strains on budgets. Support for vulnerable young people at
risk of extremism is given within this team and the National trainer sits within this
team thus support offered when appropriate to schools to support young people at
risk. Training to School leaders including Governors on meeting their Equalities duty
will require commissioning in as the expertise will be lost.. Training has consistently
had over 98% good or very good over the past 11 years. In an effort to show due
regard the Local Authority has offered training to schools which they purchase if
this work ceased increase pressure on schools to get outside County training
providers to deliver this work at a higher cost. Loss of potential earning s for the
Council will be lost.
Monitoring of discriminatory incidents in Buckinghamshire schools will no longer
take place and the good practice developed over many years will lead to greater
risk of discriminatory incidents increasing as the support to ensure understanding
and compliance with statutory duties will be lost. . Racist incidents have decreased
over time but other discriminatory incidents are now being monitored and
reporting will cease if schools no longer have access to The work to establish a
Community Consultative group which works in collaboration with the Local
Authority to support Raising Achievement of BME groups will fold as no support will
be available to work with this community group who have been able with support
with increasing the numbers of BME Governors where there was huge under
representation 2% 10 years ago to approximately 6 % in 2012
Yes work is targeted at those most in need if they no longer receive this it could
well be seen as the Council withdrawing essential support for them to achieve their
Page 39 of 124
potential and achieve in life.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies?
If yes, what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those
services/organisations for the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
As the team will not exist the majority of its work as detailed below will need to be
allocated elsewhere or no longer be delivered to children, young people, parents
and carers.
Substantial range of innovative partnership work delivered via the CYP’s Plan
and Child and Family Poverty Strategy. This will lead to ineffective use of
resources and duplication of services.
Large number of direct delivery of projects with children, young people, parents
and carers will end e.g. UNICEF Rights Respecting Schools Award, Employability
Events, and Children’s Commissioner for England’s Takeover Day and Progress
Project. Model United Nations and Schools Linking Network
Communications and links with Schools and Early Years settings would suffer –
there would be no resource to support Schoolsweb provision. Schoolsweb is
very popular with schools and is a trusted source of information to
Headteachers and Governors. This would result in the end of key
communications tools i.e. School Bulletin and Governor Times as well as
maintaining the Council’s web presence for Children’s Services and developing
Page 40 of 124
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
new web sites such as the one done for the Bucks Learning Trust.
School and Early Years Closures on the web site – there will be no one to
implement and maintain this.
Inability of Children and Young People’s Portfolios to contribute too many
corporate initiatives e.g. Welfare Reform Armed Forces Community Covenant,
Chesham wellbeing project.
Range of projects delivered with all the 35 Children’s Centres will end.
The Team provide project support on a needs basis to other parts of the
Service. Current projects include supporting Children’s Services to be Inspection
Ready and on Munro Strand 3 (4 days time per week), supporting
Commissioning by reviewing Children’s Centres Annual Conversation and
project managing Children’s Centre Tender. (2 days per week). There will be a
similar need going forward and other staff will need to undertake these roles
which will significantly reduce their delivery.
Workforce Development for Children and Young People’s Services and partner
organisations not in place.
Income generation, including European funding will cease.
The ability to update on regular basis the Information and Policy Bank will result
in staff not having the latest information on Government changes, legislations
and statutory duties.
Successful work projects on Equality Duties and reducing the gap such as the
Model United Nations and the Schools Linking Network will stop.
Anti-bullying, including cyberbullying, work will stop.
The Equality Act puts statutory duties on Local Authorities and schools to show
Page 41 of 124
due regard. There is a high risk that if these are not met, children & Young
People Services and schools in Buckinghamshire could see themselves with
Legal Challenges resulting in high payments in compensation and loss of
reputation.
Termination of Community Consultative group potentially leading to a decrease
in recruitment of BME Governors and loss of Parent Conferences for BME
parents identified as ‘hard to reach or seldom heard members of the
community.
At this point it is not known what the impact will be as no work has been done to
assess this. What is known is that a lot of the work is statutory and will therefore
have to be delivered by other Council services. This will need to form part of the
consultation considering impact.
Current contract with Show Racism the Red Card and Stonewall will stop and
schools will have to incur more costs to receive training for staff and pupils on anti-
discrimination issues again one of the three duties they are bound to show due
regard for. Show Racism the Red Card and Stonewall rely on funding for their staff
costs so the implication is that staffing will be cut as a result of loss of contract with
BCC.
All of the statutory responsibilities will need to be allocated to other teams. It is
extremely questionable if there is any capacity for them to deliver this and certainly
not to the same level – no consultation has yet been done to establish the impact
on other services to deliver.
It is possible that some of the services we provide regarding equalities work with
school could be commissioned but the cost would significantly increase as trainer
rates for outside providers can potentially be double what schools currently pay for
Children & Young People’s staff . Difficult to say currently how compliance will be
monitored in the future as Transformation Phase 2 is underway and not yet
Page 42 of 124
completed. Schools would have to take full responsibility to monitor themselves
and Ofsted will make judgements during inspections
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
At this stage we can only say that we would be complying with BCC Policies &
Procedures.
Page 43 of 124
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? Contracts with Charitable organisations, most notably Show Racism The Red Card
and Stonewall will need to cease. Currently offer free support to all schools and
employees across CYP via one contract. This will need to be devolved and costs will
be higher for schools should they wish to continue to receive the support in order
to meet their equality duties
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
• % reduction in BCC contribution
• % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year
income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 44 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Page 45 of 124
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
The proposal will require engagement with a broad range of partners, including
children, young people, parents, carers, schools, early year’s settings, community
groups and other Council service areas that will be directly affected by the end of
the services provided.
Further work is required to develop the detail of this consultation as no
consideration has been possible to date due to the timescales of this process.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
Not applicable to this proposal
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Page 46 of 124
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
A method will need to be put in place from 2015/16 to monitor this – as the team
reduced significantly from this time there will be no capacity to undertake this.
Page 47 of 124
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
Once a decision has been taken a consultation will need to be undertaken in 2014/15 with children,
young people, families, schools, early year’s settings, community groups and other Council service
areas that will be directly affected by the end of the services provided.
Ed Mallam 2014
If the proposal is confirmed an action plan will need to be developed in 2014/15 to minimise the
impact and disruption. The change is too significant i.e. the end of the team and its work to
undertake in this format.
Ed Mallam 2015
Page 48 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
There are 2 Statutory duties delivered by the Family Information Service (FIS) on
behalf of the Local Authorities:
1. To provide Information, Advice and Assistance (IAA) to parents and
prospective parents with children from 0-19 or up to 25 with a
disability (section 12, Childcare Act 2006)
2. To keep a database of disabled children to help with planning and
MTP Ref: CS14BS27
Line title and
description of
change:
PBR – Further reduce Family Information Service.
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Liz Smith 01296 387473
Date assessment completed: 3rd December 2014
Who else involved in the assessment:
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio: Education and Skills
Page 49 of 124
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
monitoring services (Schedule 2, Children Act 1989)
In addition the legislation within the Children & Families Bill, which is due for Royal
Assent in April 2014, will place a statutory duty on Local Authorities to deliver a new
system of support for children and young people with Special Educational Needs
and/or Disability (SEND). Local Authorities will be required to publish in one place
the education, health, social care and voluntary & community sector provision for
children and young people with SEND. This is the Local offer. The SEND reforms
Local offer provision is being developed and will be delivered through the FIS,
primarily through the website. This will result in a third Statutory Duty delivered by
FIS.
If the proposals in PBR are adopted these 3 statutory duties would no longer be
able to be delivered by FIS and either alternative provision would need to be
established or the Local Authority would be held to account for not meeting their
statutory duties. This is a significant risk to the PBR proposals.
The information available through FIS provides the only front-facing platform
supporting the following strategies:
Families First Programme– professionals database support for professionals
Early Intervention & Prevention strategy – universal parenting offer for Bucks
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination5 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
5 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Page 50 of 124
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
available through FIS & professionals support
Child & Family Poverty strategy – promotion of all money & finance support
Short Breaks provision – promotion of all short breaks and respite care support
Childcare Sufficiency strategy – universal Ofsted registered childcare provision and
identification of sufficiency trends across the county
Armed Forces Covenant – promotion of all Service families support
SEN reforms; Local Offer provision – promotion of all SEND provision families
support.
FIS is delivered by telephone, email, social media, website and outreach. The
service supports families in the following ways (average per month)
Telephone, email, text: approx 300
Outreach: approx 250 adults, 50-60 young people
Website: approx 15 000 individual people
Social media: 1 500 Facebook followers, 600 Twitter followers
The website offer a Google translator and voice-enables software to ensure it is
accessible for as wide a range of needs as possible. The development of new
information channels responsive to families need would be unachievable with the
proposed reduction.
The service prioritises work for target groups which include contacts from:
BME adults (approx 50 people per month)
Absent parents (1-2 per month)
Page 51 of 124
Carers working with Looked After Children (LAC); Adoptive, Foster &
Residential Care (1-2 per month)
EAL adults (approx 20 per month)
Families in the Armed Forces (approx 3-4 events = 30 people)
Families with a parent in prison (1-2 per month)
Gypsy, Roma Travellers & of Irish Heritage parents (working with Children’s
centres when appropriate)
Grandparent (1-2 per month)
New arrivals, Refugees and Asylum Seekers (1 – 2 per month)
Parents eligible for short breaks (approx 7-8 per month)
Parents of children with a disability or an SEN (approx 25-30 per month)
Parents unemployed or on low income (approx 40 per month)
Parents who have a disability (approx 2-3 per month)
Young carers (1-2 per month)
Young parents (approx 10 per month)
The figures above reflect direct contacts to staff in FIS through telephone, email,
text, social media or outreach. Figures for unique visitors to respective website
pages (eg: Adoption & fostering support, BME families support, lone parents
support) on the FIS websites to support these target groups is also available but
cannot evidence that those target groups are the ones that access the respective
website pages.
Page 52 of 124
The information available through FIS supports families with Money & finance,
Special Educational Needs and/or Disability, Childcare, Children’s Centres, Staying
Safe and Being Healthy, Activities, Voluntary & Community groups, Youth Zone for
young people. The PBR proposal for FIS would have a direct negative impact on the
number of target family groups listed to receive the support above and being
signposted to further support services.
As the main barriers to receiving support are:
1) not having information all in one place
2) making information available via a channel preferred by families
FIS has developed the service to 1) manage 6000 records of information and 500
managed content pages via their website 2) developed new channel for
communication on social media eg; Facebook, Twitter, Google+. The target family
groups listed above would potentially become indirectly discriminated against if FIS
was reduced and removed as the information would become disaggregated across
many services, therefore decreasing the quality and consistency, and would not
address the primary barrier the receiving support as mentioned above.
The direct impact of the PBR proposals cannot be calculated at this stage as
proposals have only recently been received. An extensive period of consultation
and monitoring would need to be conducted to evidence the impact of the
reduction and removal of FIS and this is included in the Action Plan page 12.
The proposals will have a significant impact on future service users as current
projections for Buckinghamshire identify unavoidable growth for:
1. The numbers of Looked After Children
2. Support services to support the protection of Children in Need
3. The Impact of SEN legislative changes (investment to meet the
Page 53 of 124
requirements of SEN legislative changes)
As FIS delivers the countywide universal information service to support families and
professionals in the 3 areas of growth identified above it is logical to predict the
demand on the service will be greater over the 4 year term of the PBR proposals. As
such a reduction and removal of the service will therefore accelerate the potential
indirect discrimination of target family groups as resources and accessibility
becomes less and demands becomes more.
In addition the recent Budget Consultation Report identifies that resident’s
expectations for how the Local Authority attributes its funding:
four in ten people (38%) didn’t want to see cuts made to services to
support children with disabilities, rising to half the population (53%) for the
‘Moderate Means’ ACORN group, and those in the 40% most deprived areas
of the county
just under half of the county said that they didn’t want to see savings made
to services for vulnerable children (47%)
30% of respondents were not willing for funding for activities for children &
young people to be cut
34% of respondents were not willing for funding for childcare support,
children’s centres & other support for parents and families with young
children to be cut.
Current data from current service users reflects a high level of satisfaction with the
service and of the parent carers who complete feedback 93% report FIS support
made a positive difference to them and their child.
The proposal will have a significant impact on children living in poverty as work in
this area will cease or need to be allocated to other staff to deliver. It links to the
Page 54 of 124
PBR proposals and EIA been undertaken for the Children’s Partnerships Team but a
separate Business Case has been requested. Much of the work to reduce the
number of children and young people in the county is done in partnership with
Children’s Partnership Team (proposal to reduce then remove) so the impact of this
joint cut will be significant.
There would also be an impact on the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) families as
FIS work closely with the Community Consultative Group to support BME families in
Bucks. FIS sponsor the BME annual conference which offers a unique and positive
platform to engage with BME families and signpost them to additional services that
can benefit their family.
The Priority Based Resourcing proposals would result in families having to source
information themselves through Google, where quality of data cannot be managed.
Face to face and social media support would also no longer be available to families
with greatest need which has the potential for them to be placed at an even greater
disadvantage than other families in the county. This would be perceived as
disadvantaging some target family groups as the additional support they would
need to access the information would not be available and only families who were
proactive and resourceful would be able to source the information for themselves.
This would also have a direct impact on the families that were then accessing
services and potentially those in greatest need would not be included due to their
lack of knowledge of the service, understanding of what the service offered and
capacity for the delivery of the service.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Page 55 of 124
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
There is no data at this stage to quality the cost impact of the PBR proposal but
extensive consultation will need to be undertaken to quantify the level of risk. Once
this has been completed a process to identify how the degree of risk could be
mitigated will be undertaken.
At this time the general risks of the proposals are identified below:
The likely model for delivery if FIS were reduced then removed is that the
telephone & email facility could be delivered by the Contact Centre (currently the
first point of contact) This would require greater training and knowledge base to be
able to respond to all enquiries as the current model is that the Contact centre
respond to simple enquiries (60% of telephone enquiries, 0% of email enquiries)
using FAQs and the website. Without FIS managing the website as a source of
information the quality of the information would drop and the quality of the
responses to enquires would drop. There would also be a cost in terms of expertise
in the Contact Centre Agents (currently paid on range 3) to deliver a higher level of
specialist knowledge as a Contact Centre specialist, equitable with the FIS staff
(current pay range 5). There would also be a cost in terms of training for the
Contact Centre staff to perform and deliver bespoke searches for families which is
currently undertaken by the FIS staff through the backend system.
The website could be managed by the BCC corporate web team but they do not
manage content (current model is for the responsibility of the content is delegated
to each service). As content of the FIS website covers a much wider partnership
than just BCC services eg: Jobcentre plus, health services etc it is unlikely the 500
content pages would continue to be managed. There would also be a requirement
to increase their resource (staff and costs of the database system) to manage the
6000+ records.
Outreach provision could be satisfied to a degree by Children’s Centre Family
Support Workers but would be limited to families with children under 5. The Youth
service also operate a limited service of outreach but this is a targeted resource and
Page 56 of 124
only available for young people 13+. There would be a significant gap of face to face
support for families who have children of primary school age which could not be
delivered by services in the current BCC structure.
Social Media could be delivered by the corporate communications team but again
this relies on the quality of the data in the database and the website content which
potentially would not be continued.
All these solutions would require greater resource to ensure messages, data and
content were consistent to ensure families received the support necessary, if all the
channels were being delivered by different services rather than centrally within FIS.
This would have a direct impact on all families in Bucks (listed above) in terms of
the quality and consistency of advice and information available to them. There
would also be a greater demand and resource on voluntary sector organisations to
deliver a level of signposting and information which would not necessarily be
consistent across other organisations in Bucks. Ultimately this could mean that
family no longer receive early intervention and prevention advice and support and
therefore increase the numbers accessing costly statutory services.
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
One member of staff on a 1 year secondment in Bucks and will be included in all
future correspondence and processes. All other staff are in post. No consultation
has been undertaken to date as this proposal has only recently been identified
through PBR.
Page 57 of 124
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
Page 58 of 124
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? This is not applicable except to note that other than the impact on VCS to deliver
information, advice and support to families in Bucks. VCS organisations are not
funded through FIS.
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
% reduction in BCC contribution
% reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
Page 59 of 124
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Page 60 of 124
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
Communication about the PBR proposal has not yet been conducted but will need
to be done so with the following groups:
Service users/ target family groups
Schools
Early Years providers
Post 16 education providers
Health providers
Social care providers
Activity and short breaks providers
FIS staff
Voluntary and Community sector
The proposals to reduce FIS are likely to impact on the working agreement to
manage data that we currently have with providers and key stakeholders ie;
currently 5 working days which will need to be extended to 10 working days due to
reduced resource. At the point when FIS is removed (2017-18) extensive
communication would be required with all providers registered with the service to
set an expectation about how FIS will be delivered in the future. Further extensive
communication would be required with all families in Bucks, particularly the target
groups listed in A, to signpost to equivocal information and support services. The
target groups listed in A are likely to require greater support to manage this change
in the form of face to face communication and support from other existing
organisation eg: voluntary groups.
Page 61 of 124
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
Communication can be managed via email with all VCS organisations that are
registered with FIS.
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
We will analyse the number of unique visitors to the BFIS website for
sections of website to support the target groups listed in A
We will compare against the current baseline to understand the impact of
the change.
We will report on the number of telephone, email, text and social media
enquiries received by email and telephone to see if there has been an
increase. This reporting contains equality group data which will be used as a
comparison.
We will obtain anecdotal evidence from key stakeholders who support the
delivery of our outreach programme about the number of parents who
have accessed sessions.
Page 62 of 124
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
Impact assessment on the reduction of FIS to be conducted over 6 month period to better
understand the potential indirect discrimination to target family groups as a result of the
proposals. This will be done through the following:
Liz Smith December – May/June 2014
o Analysis on the number of unique visitors to the BFIS website for sections of
website to support the target groups listed in A
o Comparison against the current baseline to understand the impact of the change.
o Analysis on the number of telephone, email, text and social media enquiries
received by email and telephone to see if there has been an increase. This reporting
contains equality group data which will be used as a comparison.
o Anecdotal evidence from key stakeholders who support the delivery of our
outreach programme about the number of parents who have accessed sessions.
Della Holmes/Liz Connick Ongoing monthly
Consultation with target families groups, all education providers, health providers, social
care providers, voluntary & community sector providers, Activity and short breaks
providers.
Liz Smith December 2013 onwards
Communication of any changes in resource to the whole team in a timely and transparent
manner
Liz Smith December 2013 onwards
Page 63 of 124
Action Officer responsible By when
Consideration of a future delivery model of FIS through a partnership of Contact Centre,
Children’s Centre, Youth Service, Corporate Communications web service, Corporate
Communications social media team
Liz Smith March 2014 onwards
Communication of the changes to the delivery of FIS to families and key stakeholders in
Bucks in a timely and transparent way. Methods of communication will be determined by
the needs of the families
Liz Smith March 2016 onwards
.
Page 64 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
Delivery at the 2 youth centres would be integrated with wider service delivery
using existing qualified youth workers that have a countywide remit and deliver
targeted work.
It is anticipated that reconfiguring the youth centres will provide more
opportunities for those young people most in need to access targeted youth work
activities, and partnerships with the VCS would enable young people in the local
community to continue to access universal provision at the centres.
MTP Ref: ES14BS02
Line title and
description of
change:
Reconfiguration of Youth Centres - 2 remaining Council retained Youth Centres to
be reconfigured to be run on the community model
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Lucy Pike
Date assessment completed: 1 October 2013
Who else involved in the assessment:
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio: Education and Skills
Page 65 of 124
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination6 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
6 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Page 66 of 124
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
Not applicable to this proposal.
Page 67 of 124
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
The reconfiguration of the centres would be implemented as part of a wider Youth
Service restructure, and therefore all BCC policies relating to this would be
complied with. This would include a thorough consultation with all affected
employees, regardless of their personal characteristics; whether they were absent
because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break, being on
maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave.
Selection processes will also comply with BCC policies and all staff will be able to
participate in any selection activity used, with reasonable adjustments made as
appropriate according to individual needs. Training and support is already provided
to all staff, and further training would be provided to ensure employees were
properly equipped to deliver as required.
Numbers of staff at risk and subsequently made redundant would be collated. This
would include gender, ethnicity and disability data to enable any issues to be
identified. Selection processes would be clearly evidenced to demonstrate how
appointment decisions were made.
Page 68 of 124
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved?
By freeing up some of the sessions at the Youth Centres the voluntary, community
and private sector will have increased access to the facility to provide open access
activities. This will not result in any reduction in, or cessation of, grant funding, or
non-renewal of contracts nor does it relate to a new contracts are at a reduced
level of funding. Specific providers will be identified once the proposal becomes
public although we are confident we can achieve this as we have already been
approached by providers requesting increased access.
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
o % reduction in BCC contribution
o % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 69 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Page 70 of 124
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
Affected employees will be consulted as part of the process to ensure any adverse
impact is identified at an early stage and considered as part of the way forward. A
consultation document will be produced and meetings will be held to discuss its
content. Opportunities for one to one discussion will also be offered to ensure
communication needs are met.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
VCS providers would be included in the consultation process to ascertain their
views on delivering open access provision at the centres. This would be achieved
through discussions with existing VCS partner organisations.
Page 71 of 124
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
Management information will continue to be collected on the delivery at the
centres, including any input by VCS providers. This data would be analysed to
ensure equity in the provision offered and a complimentary offer by BCC and VCS is
delivered.
Page 72 of 124
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
Ensure the centres reconfiguration is included in a wider Youth Service restructure, and BCC
processes are followed to enable this change to be implemented effectively and fairly.
Lucy Pike September 2014
Page 73 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
At this stage it is not anticipated that there will be any impact on service users.
Membership of our Directory of Providers who can provide free funded childcare
places for 3 and 4 year olds is now automatic if there is at least a satisfactory
judgement. This means that the Local Authority has a reduced role as it is no longer
required to have a panel process for ensuring the quality of providers before they
are admitted to the Directory. This changed in Sept 2013. This restructure reflects
that change.
MTP Ref: ES14BS04
Line title and
description of
change:
Early Years Services - Review and implement changes in response to legislative
changes
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Ben Thomas
Date assessment completed: 7th October
Who else involved in the assessment:
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio: Education and Skills
Page 74 of 124
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination7 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
7 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Page 75 of 124
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
At this stage it is not anticipated that this will impact on the demand for other
services. Membership of our Directory of Providers who can provide free funded
childcare places for 3 and 4 year olds is now automatic if there is at least a
satisfactory judgement. This means that the Local Authority has a reduced role as it
is no longer required to have a panel process for ensuring the quality of providers
before they are admitted to the Directory. This changed in Sept 13. This restructure
reflects that change.
Page 76 of 124
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
The saving represents 11% of the Early Years staffing budget and will therefore have
some impact on existing posts which may be mitigated for example, through
vacancy management and redeployment.
However, proposals for a new structure have yet to be developed and, therefore,
the usual staff engagement mechanisms have not yet commenced. The Council
processes for change management will be followed to ensure that the employee
selection processes do not directly or indirectly discriminate against employees
because of a protected characteristic.
Page 77 of 124
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? At this stage it is not anticipated that there will be any impact on the VCS, other
than that VCS childcare providers will be entitled to be on the Directory if they get
at least a Satisfactory judgment. Membership of our Directory of Providers who can
provide free funded childcare places for 3 and 4 year olds is now automatic if there
is at least a satisfactory judgement. This means that the Local Authority has a
reduced role as it is no longer required to have a panel process for ensuring the
quality of providers before they are admitted to the Directory. This changed in Sept
13. This restructure reflects that change.
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
• % reduction in BCC contribution
• % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year
income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 78 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Page 79 of 124
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
There will be written communications and also meetings with all staff that could be
affected by the proposed restructure which will follow all of the Council policies.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
Page 80 of 124
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
Equality Data will be collected for staff before and after the reduction in staffing, to
ensure that no groups of employees have been affected on the grounds of
particular characteristics
Page 81 of 124
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
Ensure that Consultation process and re-structuring process follow the Council’s Policies, including
the Council’s Equality Policy.
Ben Thomas August 14
Equality Data to be collected for staff before and after the reduction in staffing, to ensure that no
groups of employees have been affected on the grounds of particular characteristics
Ben Thomas / HR August 14
Page 82 of 124
Page 83 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
The Connexions Service is targeted at young people who are Not in Education,
Employment or Training (NEET) and therefore vulnerable. All resources are used for
the purpose of either preventing young people becoming NEET, supporting young
people who are NEET or fulfilling Buckinghamshire County Council statutory duties.
Whilst all of the NEET group may not have protected characteristics the group can
MTP Ref: ES13BS06/CS13BS28
Line title and
description of
change:
The Connexions Service - Recommissioning
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
John Everson
Date assessment completed: 7th October 2013
Who else involved in the assessment:
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio: Education and Skills
Page 84 of 124
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
be broken down into the following groups:
Black and Minority Ethnic Group
Teenage Mother/Pregnant
Child in Care or Leaving Care
Young Offender
Young Carer
Learning Difficulty or Disability
Population data and projections from the 2011 census suggest that numbers of
BME, children in care/leaving care and young people with learning difficulties or
disabilities will all increase over the next 5-10 years. All of these groups are over
represented in the NEET group. For example Pakistani young people are
approximately twice as likely to be NEET as opposed to the population as a whole.
NEET for whole cohort = 3.6%
NEET Pakistani = 6.0%
NEET Caribbean = 6.0%
NEET White and Black Caribbean = 6.7%
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination8 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
8 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Page 85 of 124
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
(CCIS – July 2013)
Mitigation of potential impacts on the specific groups of young people will be
achieved through the re-commissioning of Connexions services. Competitive
tendering of the service will reduce costs whilst maintaining and or improving
outcomes for young people.
The Connexions service specification will clearly set out that outcomes for over
represented groups will need to be improved over the course of the contract.
Freedom and flexibility within the specification will allow providers to innovate and
target resources to achieve outcomes and deliver statutory duties associated with
the contract.
Monitoring of the contract and analysis of the data produced will allow BCC to
clearly demonstrate the impact of the service and the MTP saving. Further targeting
of resource may be necessary on an on-going basis to ensure that protected groups
of young people are not adversely effected by budget cuts.
If a young person is NEET for a prolonged period between the ages of 16-18 then
there is likely to be a significant reduction in life chances and increases in costs to
the country.
A York University Study (Coles et al 2010) suggested that the life cost of NEET aged
between 16-18 was £104,320 with a total cost to the country of between £12bn
and £32bn.
Reductions in services and support for NEET young people risks increased costs for
vulnerable learners in adult services particularly those who have learning difficulties
and disabilities who risk entry into adult service when at crisis point.
Young people who are NEET have an increased risk of entering the criminal justice
system, misusing controlled substances and have an increased chance of suffering
from mental health conditions. (The Cost of Exclusion – Counting the cost of youth
Page 86 of 124
disadvantage in the UK – Prince’s Trust) The study estimates the cost of youth
disadvantage to the UK as a whole is £22bn.
Savings will be achieved through the re-commissioning of services. This will allow
the market to innovate to deliver more cost effective services and mitigate the risks
associated with budget reductions. The success of this approach will be monitored
by robust contract management and the possible implementation of a Payment by
Results approach for some elements of the current service.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Research indicates that increased NEET will bring increased youth crime, increased
substance misuse, longer term unemployment with associated housing, social and
mental health issues.
It is possible that reduced funding of Connexions Services will increase NEET and
therefore effect other BCC services or commissioned services including:
Substance Misuse services
YOS
Adult Family Wellbeing
CAMHS
Adult mental health services
The impact of any services will be monitored through the Client Caseload
Page 87 of 124
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
Information System (CCIS) which Connexions are required to complete on behalf of
BCC. This database includes the details of all 16-19 year old Buckinghamshire
residents and is used to track participation in learning. This data can be analysed by
a variety of different characteristics including ethnicity, gender, age, vulnerability
and geographical location.
Using the BCC Contract Management Framework CCIS data will be used to ensure
that the Equality Act 2010 Public Sector Equality Duty is met.
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
Not Applicable.
Page 88 of 124
proposal?
Page 89 of 124
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? Connexions Buckinghamshire are a charity and deliver the Connexions contract.
They sub-contract to 3 small VCS organisations; Action4Youth, Youth Concern and
Wycombe Youth Action.
The reduction of £100,000 in 2015/16 is equivalent to a 4% reduction in annual
spend.
The reduction of £100,000 in 2015/16 is equivalent to a 3.6% reduction in
Connexions Buckinghamshire total income.
The organisation does not receive funding from other Buckinghamshire bodies but
does delivery a number of other contracts from Department for Work and Pensions,
Department of Education and ESF.
The impact of the change with be achieved through competitive tendering however
it is likely that the premises strategy will change and staffing capacity will be
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
• % reduction in BCC contribution
• % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year
income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 90 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
reduced.
The impact on service users will be a reduction in services levels and accessibility of
Connexions services.
There is no other organisation which will deliver alternative services.
It is possible that voluntary youth settings may see an increase in attendance but
they are unlikely to be able to meet the needs of young people looking to move in
education, employment or training.
It is unlikely that there will be a geographical impact.
The Connexions service supports young people to become more self-reliant and
make decisions on their futures which empower them and improve their lives. A
reduction will have a negative impact.
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Page 91 of 124
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
Young people and partners are being consulted on the future shape of Connexions
services. These views will shape the service specification for the commissioning
process which will take place in 2014.
Focus groups, questionnaires and interviews will be used to collect data with all
information received from young people to be collected via representative focus
groups. Please ensure that Consultation targets specifically those groups most
affected, as listed in Section A
Providers are being consulted through a soft market testing process which will take
place in October 2013.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
BCC are in regular communication with Connexions Buckinghamshire about the
future shape of services. They themselves are negotiating with local VCS
organisations in their supply chain about the shape of their tender response in
2014.
Page 92 of 124
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
The impact of the commissioning process and associated savings will be measured
via contract management processes. Performance indicators for the new service
will include measures which will demonstrate equality of service delivery and aim to
“Close the Gap” between different populations in Buckinghamshire.
Key Performance Indicators are likely to be:
NEET
NEET by LDD, BME, Care Leaver, Teenage Parent and Young offender.
Unknowns
Interventions by population
RPA compliant Destinations
Page 93 of 124
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
Consultation with Young People on future shape of Connexions services John Everson November 2013
Development of Connexions services specification John Everson January 2014
Re-commissioning of Connexions Services John Everson July 2014
Monitoring of the re-commissioned service to ensure that there are not adverse effects on
protected groups of young people
John Everson October 2014 onwards
.
Page 94 of 124
MTP Ref: CS14BS25
Line title and
description of
change:
Children’s Voluntary Grants
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Claire Knott- Commissioning Officer / Collette McCarthy- Operations Manager
Date assessment completed: 6th December 2013
Who else involved in the assessment: Ben Thomas (Head of Prevention and Commissioning)
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Page 95 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by the
proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
The current budget funds £163k to ten small voluntary organisations
Two of these contracts came to an end between October 2013 and December 2013
and have already been written to confirming further grant funding until 31/03/15.
Two further contracts have already been subject to budget cuts for the next
financial year and as such will not be included in this proposal.
The remaining six contracts are all due to end between February 2014 and March
14.
To achieve the £50,000 saving, funding to each of the six remaining contracts will
need to be stopped or reduced.
One of the contracts has informed us that they do not require funding for the year
2014/15 as they have sufficient funds for this period already. This will form £16,000
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination9 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
9 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service user’s
protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected characteristic and
the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate
business aim
Portfolio: Education and Skills
Page 96 of 124
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
of the savings.
Those affected by the proposals
Data provided by the contracts indicate that the groups affected would be:
Children age 4-11 with Autism Spectrum Disorders, parents & siblings
Children of school age in the Wycombe/Chesham area predominantly
from Muslim and African Caribbean families
Young Carers age 11-18
Hearing impaired children, young people and their families.
Children and young people with disabilities.
Evidence collected through contract monitoring shows that children and young
people report an increase in self esteem, gained in confidence and feel supported.
By implementing the proposal it is likely that these services would either be unable
to continue, or would need to start charging service users, or where there is already
a charge, implement an increase.
Due to the nature of the client group it is unlikely they would be able to travel to
access similar services in another area.
The implications would be access to fewer services for this client group.
There is a possibility of groups perceiving preferential treatment of another group,
due to funding to similar services continuing for one further year. These groups will
be assisted with signposting to try and secure other sources of funding, and service
users signposted to alternative provision where applicable.
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
Page 97 of 124
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
See section D for VCS organisations
Page 98 of 124
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
This will not impact on Council employees.
Page 99 of 124
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? There are six VCS organisations involved.
The budget is BCC Budget.
For each of these organisations the BCC funding forms the majority of their income,
and it is likely they will be unable to continue to operate if funding is reduced or
ceased.
Other sources of funding for these organisations would be minimal and might be
donations from local businesses, charity fundraising and small local grants &
legacies.
If the services were to end as a result of reduced/ceased funding then all staffing
and volunteers would be impacted significantly. All of the contracts affected
employ paid staff and volunteers.
There is another larger contract for Young Carers.
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
• % reduction in BCC contribution
• % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year
income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 100 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
It is likely that the proposal could lead to an increased demand on other VCS.
The reduction will have a negative impact on our efforts to encourage people and
communities to become more self-reliant, as the providers will have insufficient
timing to prepare for becoming self-reliant.
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Page 101 of 124
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
Contracts with these organisations come to an end between Feb-Mar 2014 and so
they will need to be aware of potential reductions/cessation of funding immediately
in order for consultation with families accessing the services to be undertaken.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
The VCS organisations involved will need to be informed immediately to establish
the full extent of potential implications. This will be carried out by meeting each of
the contracts & their trustees where applicable.
Page 102 of 124
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
The proposals will be monitored as part of contract monitoring and performance
monitoring processes. Where changes are required these will be assessed and
implemented where necessary to improve services and ensure those with protected
characteristics are not disproportionately impacted.
Complaints and appeals will be monitored according to council policy and guidance
with equalities categories identified where possible to ascertain whether there are
any disproportionate impacts.
Page 103 of 124
Assessment - Actions Arising
Action Officer responsible By when
Meetings with each of the organisations affected to be arranged to inform them of cessation of
funding / reduction on funding where applicable
Claire Knott End Dec 13
Relevant Members notified of proposal Ben Thomas End Dec 13
Parents/Carer communication Claire Knott End Dec 13
Organisations signposted to alternative funding sources Claire Knott Jan-Mar 14
Parents/Carers signposted to alternative services. Claire Knott Jan-Mar 14
Review impact on alternative provisions Claire Knott May 2014
Page 104 of 124
Section A: Our residents and service users (relates to screening questions 1 and 2)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on the public or services directly and/or that groups of people will or may be affected differently by
the proposal, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings and your evidence base for these
What do you know about the proposal will impact on different groups of people in
Buckinghamshire, particularly, those with protected characteristics? How do you
know this? For example, disaggregated data from any relevant consultations/focus
groups, national or local published research reports, satisfaction surveys, service
monitoring data, benchmarking with other providers, demographic data or other
information. Please refer to the county council’s “Research” information on the
website and the information provided by partners on the BSP website.
What new research might you need to undertake to understand the impact of
Background
Buckinghamshire County Council (BCC) has contracted with Professional
Association for Childcare and Early Years (PACEY) (previously known as National
Childminding Association - NCMA) for over 12 years to provide support to
childminders and nannies across Buckinghamshire.
There are currently 929 childminders and 380 nannies in the county.
MTP Ref: ES14BS05
Line title and
description of
change:
Childminding Support Services
Reduction to contract delivery to reflect changes to LA duties and Early Years
regulation
Officer contact name and telephone number for further
information:
Jane Nicholls, ex 3179
Date assessment completed: 1st October 2013
Who else involved in the assessment:
Signature and name of Cabinet Member signing off this
impact assessment and any resulting actions.
Name: Mike Appleyard
Signature:
Portfolio: Education & Skills
Page 105 of 124
implementing this proposal on different groups of people (in particular those with
protected characteristics)?
The contract includes:
12 Local Authority (LA) approved “CYPOP5” courses per year for
prospective childminders – courses run for 8 x 2 hours for prospective
childminders which is the regulatory requirement for registration with
Ofsted
Development to 30 volunteer ‘Buddies’ to support new childminders
through to registration, annual fee paid to Buddies to cover tel. costs etc.
Management support and quality kite mark accreditation to childminders
(currently 107 achieved)
Support and development of childminders to gain approval for provision
of funded early education (currently 86)
Management of Buckinghamshire Community Childminding Network
(BCCN) providing childcare to vulnerable children and families (currently
32, aim to extend to 45 by March 2014 and 60 by March 2015). BCCN
provides childcare which is funded by LA (outside of this budget) to
families identified through early intervention streams i.e. Social Care,
Family Resilience Service, health visitors as part of the LA early help offer.
If your findings indicate actual or potential indirect discrimination10 you must
demonstrate how the proposal is the least discriminatory way of achieving a stated
legitimate business aim.
How will implementing the proposal impact on future service users? For example,
what does data tell you about who is and who should be benefitting from the
existing service? What do you know about the needs and barriers of people who
should be accessing the service but aren’t? What action, if any, should you take to
address these issues? Will implementing the proposal prevent these issues from
being addressed?
Where the proposal is about removing/reducing a service, changing delivery
methods or increasing charges, what are the implications for people with
protected characteristics, our priority groups in the Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment, geographical communities and different socio economic groups?
Consider also any implications for people in terms of how this may change their
mode of travel/travel time, as well as any other increases in time spent accessing
the service, increased inconvenience and personal cost. How likely is increased
dissatisfaction with the service or the county council?
10 Indirect discrimination can occur when a provision, criterion or practice is applied equally to everyone and as a result, people who share the service
user’s protected characteristic are put, or would be put, at a particular disadvantage when compared with people who don’t share that protected
characteristic and the service user is put, or would be put at that disadvantage and the service provider cannot justify this as a proportionate means of
achieving a legitimate business aim
Page 106 of 124
Could implementation of the proposal lead to groups of people perceiving
preferential treatment of another group, or that the needs of their own group
have been ignored in favour of another group? If yes, how will you address these
fears/concerns? Consider the role, or potential role, of the media, advocacy
groups and extremist groups to misrepresent the county council’s actions or
intent.
Universal information, support and advice to sector
The proposed cost saving will be achieved through:
Reduction from 12 to 8 “CYPOP5” course - £17,100 saving
Reduce buddies from 30 to 20 - £5,000
Increase “CYPOP5” fee from £20 to £100 per course = £13,440
Saving of annual quality accreditation fee - £806
Reduction of 50% to core service delivery excluding Buckinghamshire
Community Childminding Network (BCCN) - £92,817. Any staff savings
should not be at the detriment of support to BCCN
Reduction to core Management Fee by 50% - £20,836 – PACEY has
included a management fee within their overall price based on a % of
total costs, this fee should therefore reduce in line with other costs.
Total projected savings - £149,999 per year from Oct 2014
PACEY engages 9 staff to deliver the contract, working a variety of full and part
time hours. All staff are female, white, British without any disclosed disability.
The proposed cost saving is likely to require the deletion of 3 posts.
Current and future service users are Buckinghamshire’s childminders and
nannies. Government has recently amended regulation through the Children &
Families Bill so that the LA is not the sole provider of services and training to
childminders. In the future childminders will be able to access support and
training through a range of providers including new agencies – of which there is a
pilot provider in Oxford (Trio Childcare Connections) who could expand and offer
Page 107 of 124
services in Buckinghamshire.
If Trio did offer services into Buckinghamshire this would be an additional offer
and would not replace/reduce what is planned to be available through the LA.
Bucks Learning Trust (BLT) is commissioned to provide a comprehensive training
programme for all early years providers including childminders.
The main training programme provided through this contract is “CPOP5” which
every prospective childminder is currently required to complete prior to
registration. Every year approximately 150 childminders resign and new minders
are trained. Not all individuals trained progress to registration.
The LA currently provides support for free and training at a significantly
subsidised price. The proposal is to continue to provide support services for free
but support will be prioritised to those who need it most to improve quality
and/or are supporting vulnerable children. Increasing the “CPOP5” fee may
reduce the number of non-registrations and drop outs.
Comparison of training charges for “CPOP5”:
LA Fee for “CYPOP5”
Buckinghamshire £20
PACEY direct £189.60
Oxford £141
Hertfordshire £200
RB of Windsor & Maidenhead £223
Page 108 of 124
Individuals on low incomes may find the proposed fee increase prevents them
from registering as a childminder. However, £100 is a small fee to pay to
establish and train to enter into a new profession and potential career.
Universal support and advice now is more widely available through web media
thus reducing the need for face to face support. Childminders are required to
access information from DfE and Ofsted through the web and therefore have to
be media savvy and connected to run a professional business. Childminders who
are judged by Ofsted to ‘require improvement’ will be prioritised for face to face
support from PACEY.
Accredited childminders may feel that the time and effort put into qualifications
and accreditation is no longer valued. It will be key to stress that Ofsted has
stated that those providers who don’t have a full and relevant qualification, or
equivalent experience, are unlikely to be able to attain a good or better
judgement. It is proposed to introduce a tiered support package which allows
childminders to self- select CPD, utilising our most experienced childminders to
provide voluntary peer to peer support. Childminders have responded positively
to this proposal and feel valued.
In comparison to many other LAs, Buckinghamshire currently provides a ‘gold’
level package of support which is no longer affordable in the current climate. The
market place is rapidly changing with new companies providing services directly
to childminders so a reduction in BCC provision is required to ensure it remains
efficient and value for money.
Groups with protected characteristics will not be affected differently to other
groups in Bucks by this proposal. The reduction in universal support will be
applied to all 900 childminders. There are currently 107 ‘Accredited’ childminders
Page 109 of 124
who receive additional support and mentoring to achieve a quality benchmark.
The proposal is to withdraw this accreditation as it is no longer a sector
regulatory requirement for Directory providers, nor are they a priority group for
quality improvement. This change removes a benefit received by a few, who are
predominantly higher achievers and enables childminders without sector
qualifications to access early education funding for the families to whom they
supply services.
BCC doesn’t currently record the demographic profile of childminders although it
is known that the majority are female. By the nature of the work and through
regulatory requirements, childminders have to demonstrate that they are
physically able to meet the needs of young children and demonstrate
competency in English language.
Section B: Our internal and external partners (relates to screening question 3)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on how other services are delivered by the county council, external suppliers or other statutory
agencies, you should answer the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal. (Please note that VCS organisations are dealt with
separately in Section D.)
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increased service demands or costs
for other county council services, external providers or statutory agencies? If yes,
what is being done mitigate the impact or prepare those services/organisations for
the increased demand/costs?
Where the proposal relates to an external contractor, what is the impact on:
The contractor e.g. staffing, capacity, business continuity management
capability?
A reduction may impact as increased take up of training provided by The
Buckinghamshire Learning Trust (BLT). As training courses are currently
subsidised, this may have a financial impact unless prices are increased to cover
cost. Courses currently cost between £25- 35 depending on length.
Current course programme:
https://schoolsweb.buckscc.gov.uk/schools/documents/early_years/training/Wa
llchart_Spring_2014.pdf
Page 110 of 124
the future of the service (especially if several other authorities are also
contracting services from this provider i.e. domino effect)
Beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
The wider local community?
Further down the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
What steps have you taken to reduce the council’s potential liability for breaches
under the Equality Act where services are being delivered on our behalf? How will
compliance monitored?
Training is provided by BLT through a Service Level Agreement (SLA) managed by
Early Years (EY). Through the SLA, EY will be able to monitor any impact and
respond to increases in demand and subsequent budget pressures.
The reduction to the contract will provide opportunities for other external
agencies, including BLT, to develop local services, which is in line with
Government preferences - i.e. childminding agencies.
PACEY has recently rebranded itself moving from solely childminding to
marketing itself to the whole early years sector. This move is in recognition of the
changing market and evaluating its future market position. Childminding is a
specialist market area; tendering the contract last year resulted in three
acceptable responses.
The proposed changes to the contract delivery are significant but still ensure that
the LA delivers its statutory duties. The early years duties were changed in
September 2013:
Guarantee an offer of funding for all providers of a quality assessed by
Ofsted, or an inspection body approved by the Secretary of State, as
‘satisfactory’, ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ where there is an eligible child wanting
to take up an early education place;1
Guarantee an offer of funding for new early education providers, which have
been registered with Ofsted, prior to their first full Ofsted inspection;
Limit the extra conditions that local authorities can place on private,
voluntary and independent (PVI) early education providers in order for them
to qualify for funding to deliver places
Refocus the LA’s Information, Advice and Training (IAT) duty. LA’s are
required to secure information, advice and training for childcare providers,
Page 111 of 124
ensuring that it is voluntary for provider judged good or outstanding to take
up. LA’s have the power to offer IAT.
Reform the early education funding system, by encouraging local authorities
to simplify their funding formulae (EYSFF) and to limit the amount of centrally
retained spend.
In addition to the IAT change, the removal of processes from providers seeking to
provide early education funding will create capacity within the contract to
redirect towards targeted quality improvement.
Section C: Our employees (relates to screening question 4)
You have identified that the proposal will or may have an impact on our employees, therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate
and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
How have you ensured that employees affected by the proposal but who are
absent because of long term sickness, being on secondment or a career break,
being on maternity/paternity, adoption or carer’s leave are not disadvantaged by
their absence?
How have you ensured that any employee selection processes do not directly or
indirectly discriminate against employees because of a protected characteristic?
Have you ensured that, where relevant, reasonable adjustments have been made
to ensure that a person who is disabled is able to fully participate in the process?
If the proposal is about delivering a service differently, how have you ensured that
employees are properly equipped with the relevant tools, skills and knowledge to
do so?
How will you be able to demonstrate that you have implemented the council’s
Currently there are no staff on long term sick, maternity, secondment or career
break.
All staff will be placed at risk and invited to apply for the remaining posts. PACEY
will apply their usual recruitment procedures to ensure that staff are selected
following best practice and complying with HR & Equality of Opportunity
regulation.
PACEY provide services in other LAs following the proposed priorities and focus
set out in this proposal for Bucks. Staff will receive training and guidance from
their Service Manager to redirect their focus and will also work with the Early
Years Team to ensure approaches are consistent across all providers. Early Years
provides support to pre-schools and nurseries and has been prioritising support
following a data driven approach so will share their learning with PACEY.
Page 112 of 124
policies and procedures fairly? For example, what employee monitoring data do
you need to gather, analyse and compare pre and post implementation of the
proposal?
Section D: The Voluntary and Community Sector (relates to screening question 5)
You have identified that the proposal has a direct impact on voluntary and community sector organisations either as a result of a reduction in, or cessation of, grant
funding, or where contracts are coming to an end and will not be renewed, or where new contracts are at a reduced level of funding than was previously the case.
Therefore, you should address the questions below insofar as they are appropriate and relevant to the proposal.
Questions to consider The Findings
Which VCS organisation(s) is / are involved? PACEY (Professional Association for Childcare and Early Years)
PACEY is a registered charity and not for profit organisation. Registered charity
number: 295981.
Accounts registered with charities commission:
Income £000
2012 £11,241
2011 £16,104
2010 £15,971
2009 £15,648
What is the source of the current funding (i.e. BCC budget, national funding
stream)?
What will the financial impact of the proposal be on the organisation(s) involved?
o % reduction in BCC contribution
o % reduction in the organisation’s total income (based on current year income)
What funding does the organisation receive from other Buckinghamshire bodies or
organisations (e.g. District Councils, Bucks Community Foundation)? Please provide
a breakdown.
What are the reasons for reducing or ending the funding?
Page 113 of 124
How will the proposal impact on:
• the organisation(s) e.g. staffing, capacity)?
• the future of the service*
• beneficiaries, service users and carers (if not answered in Section A above)?
• volunteers currently providing the service?
• any assets used to provide the service*?
• the wider local community*?
• the supply chain, especially where locally sourced?
2008 £16,765
BCC current contract is funded from LA base Grant which was £416,262 for 2013/14
% reduction from Bucks = 36% from October 2014.
% reduction in PACEY total income based on 2012 = 1.33%
PACEY doesn’t receive any other income from Bucks organisations.
PACEY recently lost their contract with Birmingham City Council. A request has been
made to PACEY regarding business turnover and reductions for this year but they
have not responded. PACEY recently rebranded their organisation as a support
service for the whole of the childcare sector rather than just childminders as part of
their business strategy recognising a potential reducing market place.
See above for funding impact on delivery.
Childminding agencies may benefit from the reduced contract. This is a new
delivery concept which is currently in the pilot stage with the Department for
Education (DfE).
No geographical impact.
Is alternative provision of the services available to existing clients? If yes, from
which organisations?
Could implementation of the proposal lead to increase demand on other voluntary
sector organisations? If yes, what is being done to prepare for this increased
demand?
Is there a particular geographical impact?
Will this reduction have a positive, negative or neutral impact on our efforts to
encourage people and communities to become more self-reliant?
Section E: Consultation and Engagement (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Page 114 of 124
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Equalities Perspective:
Does the proposal require targeted engagement to ensure that people directly
affected are aware of the proposal and/or consulted with about how to mitigate
an adverse impact or to eliminate any identified discrimination? If yes, how will
this be achieved? How will you ensure that communication is appropriate to meet
the different communication needs of different groups of people? For which
groups will face to face communication be preferable/the most effective method?
PACEY and BCC has been discussing the proposed changes with childminders over
the last six months as part of an informal consultation process. Discussions have
taken place regarding proposed changes at network events which are open to all
childminders.
PACEY staff will receive face to face discussions and be offered 1-1 meetings to raise
any concerns/questions.
VCS Perspective:
How will you discuss the potential implications of your proposal with the VCS
organisation(s) involved?*
*The Bucks Compact states “Where there are restrictions or changes to future
resources, discuss with VCOs the potential implications as early as possible, give
organisations the opportunity to respond, and consider the response fully,
respecting sector expertise, before making a final decision.”
Early discussions are already underway as the contract key priorities need to change
in response to changes in regulation from Sept & Nov 2013. The planned changes
are due for implementation from October 2014 which will allow sufficient time for
discussion and consultation.
Section F: Monitoring implementation and impact (relates to any screening question where the answer was “yes” or “maybe”)
Please answer the questions below insofar as they are relevant to the proposal. If they are not relevant, please indicate this in “The Findings” box below.
Questions to consider/prompt your thinking The Findings
Page 115 of 124
How will you monitor the implementation of the proposal to assess its impact on
the county council’s Equality Duty and its commitment to a strong and vibrant
voluntary and community sector?
You will need to consider what information you already have that will enable you
to analyse and interpret information in relation to:
Show the numbers of particular groups using the services and what
outcomes they experience
Show under-use of a service by an equalities group
Show over-use by an equalities group
Reveal discrimination
Demonstrate that services are not discriminatory
Measure the effectiveness of service changes
Identify the need for new or changed services
The contract changes will be monitored through Key Performance Indicators(KPIs0
and outcomes matrix. This will require the contractor to gather feedback from
service users and families about the impact and quality of the service.
Page 116 of 124
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
ES14BS07/14 BP04
Client Transport
Home to School Transport
Home To School Transport Efficiencies - Strategic Review and explore opportunities for savings (income generation including increased charging, more efficient routing, alternative methods i.e. public transport and volunteer drivers, contract efficiencies, exploration of reducing
-1,191
-2,607
-3,552
-3,828
Y
E
Y
There may be some impact on different groups but the full extent will not be known until pilot schemes are fully evaluated. Removal of post 16 transport for low income and SEN may impact on Not in Education or Employment (NEET) targets if young people are unable to attend learning opportunities due to the removal of this provision.
Page 117 of 124
demand)
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
ES14BS19
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
Use of new funding streams for skills agenda
0 -50 -50 -50 NA NA NA Review undertaken over the next year to determine impact as no savings to be made in the first year
ES14BS18
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
Review of Educational Psychologists Team
-100 -100 -100 -100 Y E Y EP service will require to increase traded services or there will have to be a cut in serivce
Page 118 of 124
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
CS14BS27
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Children's Partner-ships
Review of FIS - (Family Information Service)
-30
-30
-30
-30
Y
E&V
Y
A reduction in FIS would result in families having to source information themselves through Google, where quality of data cannot be managed. Face to face and social media support would also no longer be available to families with greatest need which has the potential for them to be placed at an even greater disadvantage than other families in the county. Outreach provision could be satisfied to a degree by Children’s Centre Family Support Workers but would be limited to families with children under 5. The Youth service also operate a limited service of outreach but this is a targeted resource and only available for young people 13+. There would be a significant gap of face to face support for families who have children of primary school age which could not be delivered by services in the current BCC structure
Page 119 of 124
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
ES14BS01
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Children's Partner-ships
Review of Children's Partnership Team
-34 -34 -34 -34 Y E Y
As this relates to staffing reductions, the relevance identified is to the Council's duty as an employer to ensure its policies and procedures are fairly applied.
ES14BS17
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Children's Partner-ships
Review of Children's Partnership Team
-41 -162 -203 -203 Y EV Y
A cut in the service over a four year period will see cessation of the team. All statutory duties managed within this team will have to be delivered by other services where expertise may be problematic
ES14BS02
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Fair Access & Youth Provision
Reconfigur-ation of Youth Centres - 2 remaining Council retained Youth Centres to be run on the community model
-80 -160 -160 -160 Y E Y
As this relates to staffing reductions, the relevance identified is to the Council's duty as an employer to ensure its policies and procedures are fairly applied.
Page 120 of 124
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
ES14BS03
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Fair Access & Youth Provision
Implement-ation of Adventure Learning Foundation Efficiencies gained through the implement-ation of the Adventure Learning Foundation
0 -40 -80 -120 Y E N
As this relates to employees being TUPE transferred into a new organisation, the relevance identified is to the Council's duty as an employer to ensure its policies and procedures are fairly applied.
ES14BS15
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Prevention & Commissioning
Children's activities - Public Health contribution to activities relating to Children's
-500 -500 -500 -500 Y E N
There will be no change to these services and it is only the funding stream that will change. The exception is the expansion of the support to Children at risk of Sexual Exploitation through increased capacity to RU Safe, increased work with Schools and Youth Centres, increased awareness raising and training and increased expertise and social work capacity.
Page 121 of 124
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
ES14BS04
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Prevention & Commissioning
Early Years Services - Review and implement changes in response to legislative changes
-100 -100 -100 -100 Y E Y
As this relates to employees being TUPE transferred into a new organisation, the relevance identified is to the Council's duty as an employer to ensure its policies and procedures are fairly applied.
ES14BS05
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Prevention & Commissioning
Childmind-ing Contract Savings - Childmind-ing Support Service contract costs to be reduced through renegotiation of the contract
-50 -150 -150 -150 Y V N
Impact on staffing will require further consultation and all efforts made to comply with BCC procedures This service is provided by a national not for profit organisation. While the overall impact on the organisation will be small (e.g. a reduction of approx 1.5% based on 2012 budget), the proposal is likely to have staffing implications locally.
Page 122 of 124
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
ES14BS06
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Prevention & Commissioning
Connexions recommis-sioning - Connexions contract due for renewal with efficiencies and savings being achieved through retender
0
-200
-200
-200
Y
E&V
Y
Population data and projections from the 2011 census suggest that numbers of BME, children in care/leaving care and young people with learning difficulties or disabilities will all increase over the next 5-10 years. All of these groups are currently over represented in the NEET group. Young people who are NEET have an increased risk of entering the criminal justice system, misusing controlled substances and have an increased chance of suffering from mental health conditions. (The Cost of Exclusion – Counting the cost of youth disadvantage in the UK – Prince’s Trust). Approximately a 7% reduction on current contract value which is currently held by a not-for-profit provider.
Page 123 of 124
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
CS14BS25
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA Prevention & Com-missioning
Review use of Children's Voluntary Grant
-50 -50 -50 -50 Y E&V Y Full impact assessment required awaiting info from Ben Thomas
ES14BP02
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA SEN Increase capacity for monitoring SEN cases - To ensure compliance with the actions agreed following an inadequate audit report, increasing capacity for case monitoring
100 150 150 150 Y E N No adverse impacts identified in the screening assessment
Page 124 of 124
Ref Service Activity Description 14/15 £000
15/16 £000
16/17 £000
17/18 £000
Screening complet-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Type of relevance identified? Equality (E) VCS (V) None (N) Not applicable (NA)
Full assess-ment require-ed? Yes (Y) No (N)
Comments
ES14BS16
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA SEN Savings to meet grant reduction
0 -994 -994 -994 NA NA NA Further work required to determine any impact. This will be conducted during 2014/15 as no savings required until 2015/16.
ES14BP05
LA Learning, Skills & Prevention
LA SEN Impact of SEN legislative changes - Investment to meet the requirements of SEN legislative changes
0 0 60 150 Y E N No adverse impacts identified in the screening assessment