Agenda and draft minutes

Cabinet Member Ben Callard.

None.

None.

Jonathan Davies introduced the report and answered the members’ questions with Will McLean, Peter Davies, Deb Hill-Howells and Jane Rodgers:

Will a reduction in employer pension contribution rates, similar to the changes being made to the Teachers' Pension Scheme, also apply to the Local Government Pension Scheme, and what impact would that have on the Council's finances?

The Council is expected to see a similar reduction in Teachers' Pension Scheme contribution rates, but this will not generate a direct saving because the associated funding is provided through Welsh Government and will be offset accordingly. For the Local Government Pension Scheme, the Council agreed contribution rates with the pension fund approximately 12 months ago, resulting in rates that are already 3% lower than the previous level for the next three financial years. This reduction is already benefiting the Council's budget and reflects the strong financial position of the pension fund. The expectation is that these lower contribution rates could continue beyond the current three-year period.

The report shows significant underlying financial pressures, including undelivered savings, a shortfall in planned children's placement savings, and worsening school deficits. Given that some schools are now significantly behind their recovery trajectories, what specific interventions are being put in place for the highest-risk schools, and at what point would the Council conclude that existing recovery plans are no longer credible and require a fundamentally different approach?

The Council recognises that the financial position in schools has worsened and has been transparent about those risks. However, these challenges have developed over a number of years and are not unique to Monmouthshire. Recovery plans are already in place and are being actively monitored by officers, governors and schools. The current focus is on reviewing whether those plans remain realistic, whether they are being implemented effectively, and whether different measures may be needed where circumstances have changed. The Council considers it essential that recovery plans remain flexible and reflect the actual financial position of each school. Schools themselves, through headteachers and governing bodies, retain responsibility for managing their budgets and delivering recovery plans, although the Council will continue to provide support and challenge where required.

The Council is carrying out detailed professional discussions with schools involving finance, education and inclusion officers to assess financial risks and provide assurance. These discussions have shown that some schools may not be making full use of available central support and contingency funding, particularly in relation to learners with additional learning needs. The Council is working with schools to ensure they understand the resources available and is challenging schools to review staffing structures where costs have become unaffordable. While there is no single point at which recovery plans are automatically abandoned, the review process is intended to test whether existing plans remain achievable or whether a different approach is required to address the financial challenges. The Council has been clear with schools about the financial risks they present and acknowledges that difficult discussions and decisions will be needed to close funding gaps.

The Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Jane Rodgers introduced the report and answered the members’ questions with Jenny Jenkins:

The social care budget appears broadly balanced overall, but this masks a children's services overspend and an adult services underspend. Can assurance be provided that the adult services underspend reflects genuine management of demand rather than unmet need or staffing constraints?

The Adults services underspend was supported by late-year grant funding, particularly funding intended to support hospital discharges and community-based care. These grants were used to offset core care costs, including residential care and care-at-home provision. Officers stated that the underspend did not result from unmet need or reduced service provision, but reflected the availability of additional grant funding that helped manage expenditure while continuing to meet people's care and support needs.

What measurable benefits are expected from the Council's investment in developing in-house residential and fostering provision? How many children are currently in external placements, what are the associated costs, and can it be demonstrated that in-house provision delivers savings once staffing, property and support costs are taken into account?

Developing in-house provision is helping to reduce reliance on external placements while also improving outcomes for children. During the year, the Council opened a residential children's home in Monmouthshire and developed additional bespoke placements. At the end of the reporting year, seven children were living in in-house residential provision, increasing to eight by the time of the meeting. The Council also had four young people in supported accommodation provision, with plans to open a further children's home and another supported accommodation facility during the current year.

External residential placements can vary significantly in cost, ranging from around £4,000 to £4,500 per week at the lower end to £15,000 to £17,000 per week for children with the most complex needs. The Council's in-house provision has delivered the savings anticipated in the original business cases and provides better outcomes for children while contributing to the service's savings targets.

In addition to residential provision, the Council has invested in strengthening its in-house fostering service by improving the financial support and wider offer available to foster carers. Officers reported that the authority had achieved a clearer distinction between children placed with its own foster carers and those placed through independent fostering agencies, resulting in both financial benefits and improved placement stability. The contribution of in-house foster carers was highlighted as a significant factor in reducing costs and increasing capacity within the service.

The Member welcomed the explanation and noted the importance of evidence that in-house provision is delivering positive outcomes for children and young people as well as value for money.

The fostering element of the strategy is equally important as the residential provision programme and highlighted the progress made in increasing the use of in-house foster placements, which has reduced reliance on more expensive independent agency placements while helping to achieve better outcomes for children.

The report indicates that external residential placements can cost between £200,000 and £800,000 per child per year. How many in-house children's homes does  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The members’ questions were answered by Jessica Scarisbrick, Diane Corrister and Jane Rodgers:

The report refers to the use of the “strike process” in relation to antisocial behaviour. The report appears to suggest that police resource pressures are affecting the effectiveness of this approach, particularly in identifying individuals and following through with appropriate intervention. More broadly, does the lack of police resources affect safeguarding work, and does it create difficulties in operating preventative processes such as the strike system?

The reference in the report related to the development of an adult strike process, rather than the well-established children's strike process. Progress on implementing an adult version has proved more difficult because of the complexity of antisocial behaviour cases involving adults and the resources required to support the process. Strong working relationships exist with the police and these relationships are important in supporting safeguarding responsibilities. While police resource pressures are recognised and can create challenges, collaborative arrangements mean safeguarding work is able to continue effectively. Where resource issues affect safeguarding activity, these concerns are raised through the regional safeguarding board.

Police resource constraints are acknowledged as a genuine issue and can make some aspects of safeguarding and community safety work more difficult. However, close working relationships between agencies help ensure that safeguarding responsibilities continue to be met, even where there are pressures on police capacity.

Is it fair to say that the police resource situation does affect safeguarding work and that additional police resources would assist the effectiveness of these processes?

Additional police resources would be beneficial. However, because of the strength of existing working relationships and a shared commitment to safeguarding, agencies continue to work together effectively. The lack of resources is a recognised issue, particularly when trying to develop new approaches such as the adult strike process, but it has not prevented safeguarding partners from carrying out their core responsibilities.

Training compliance for Group B safeguarding training is reported at only 64%, child protection conferences have increased by 20%, and cases involving harmful sexual behaviour are becoming more severe and complex. At what point would these issues trigger escalation, and what additional intervention or capacity is being put in place to address them?

The 64% Group B training compliance figure reflects the recent inclusion of housing staff within the Social Care Directorate. Additional Group B training sessions are being delivered to ensure housing colleagues receive the same level of safeguarding training as other staff within social care and public protection. The expectation is that compliance levels will rise significantly over the coming year and move closer to the 80-90% level that would normally be expected.

The rise in harmful sexual behaviour had been a significant concern during the previous year, particularly among younger age groups. Increased joint working between education, social care and youth services has helped reduce the number of such cases. However, a smaller number of cases are now presenting with greater severity and complexity, reaching a criminal threshold. These cases are managed through established child protection  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Noted.

Noted.

The minutes were confirmed.

13th October 2026 at 10.00am.