Agenda item

To scrutinise a model to increase in-county placement options and provide care without profit.

Cabinet Member Ian Chandler andJane Rodgers introduced the report and answered the members’ questions with Peter Davies and Nicholas Keyse. 

Key points raised by members: 

·        The level of demand and the basis for the 6 bespoke children’s placements, Members questioning whether there is historical low demand and whether the number will be sufficient long-term. Questions also asked as to why it will be 3 separate dwellings, rather than have the placements under one roof. 

·        The report mentions securing grants from Welsh government in relation to the acquisition of suitable properties – Members asked how confident the council is in meeting objectives in this area and how far along the discussions are, so that the councildoesn’t have to utilise more of the Children’s Services budget. 

·        The number of young people from Monmouthshire being looked after by other local authoritiesand vice versa and whether the provision would lead to some of the young people being moved back into Monmouthshire. 

·        With joint projects like Myst with Torfaen, given the boundaries are so close between local authorities, whether there are any plans to buy properties with other authorities, as a partnership. 

·        Whether individual business cases for large spending on assets that the Cabinet wishes to repurpose will be brought back to scrutiny (the report notes post-decision scrutiny). 

·        The comparison with other authorities and any learning from them. 

·        Whilst children’s placement numbers are low, would the provision lead to an increase.  

·        The suitability of properties in terms of urban/rural and how accommodation spaces would be built around the 16–25-year-olds category. 

·        Whether consultation with young people in residential provisionor ex-care leavers has informed the proposals. 

·        Whether vacancies in a property would be rented to neighbouring authorities. 

·        Whether there will be discussions with local ward members on any asset reprovision.  

·        A member suggested the policy needed to state that fostering would be the initial option, as it’s better for children to be with a family. 

·        How much consideration has been given to the revenue implications and whether there would be independent inspectors. 

Chair’s Summary: 

Thanks were given to the Cabinet Member and officers for attending. Discussions focussed on the sufficiency and suitability of bespoke placements, how adequate and flexible they would be, the likelihood of securing Welsh Governmentgrants and the exchange of placements with other local authorities. Membersasked questions around the possibility of joint projects for neighbouring authorities and asked about the learning from other councils. Questions were asked around the issue of sibling room sharing, the impact of bringing young people back to their communities, and property type and location. The Committee also asked how consultation hadbeen held with young people and there were questions about the types and numbers of placements needed, the revenue implications and the acquisition of repurposing properties. Discussions also took place on the borrowing headroom and the governance and transparency around the purchase ofassets. The committee endorsed the proposaland raised theopportunity for post-decision scrutiny.