Cambridge House, 131 Camberwell Road, SE5

Southwark Forum

Thursday 17 June, 10.30am – 12.30pm

Cambridge House, 131 Camberwell Road, SE5

Attendees

1. Introduction

Chris Sanford welcomed members to Southwark Forum and explained the purpose of the meeting. Jamal Ettetuani discussed the Aiming High Community Chest Fund and invited CAS members to apply. CS then introduced Councillor Peter John, the new leader of Southwark Council.

1. Presentation and Q&A new Leader of the Council

Councillor Peter John began by thanking the voluntary sector for their hard work and contributions to the borough. He stated that the Labour party achieving a clear majority in the local elections in May has brought a political unity to governing of the borough.

However, PJ acknowledged that funding cuts are inevitable. He noted that 3.5 million pounds had to be cut by the end of the financial year, 2.5 million pounds of which has already been ring-fenced from the education budget.

PJ stated that he wanted to change people’s perception of Southwark Council. He wants to achieve this by ensuring: that all council employees and contractors spend Council money with the same caution they would spend their own money; and that council employees and contractors treat the public with the same respect and urgency they would for their own family.

PJ outlined two main challenges for the voluntary sector: Personalisation and Budget cuts of around 5 – 6%. PJ emphasised the importance of partnership working and innovative thinking to tackle these challenges. He has been looking to do this at every level with and within the council, declaring ‘Southwark Council is open for business’. He used Southwark Council’s discussions with Lambeth Council about sharing back office functions to make efficiency savings as an example of this.

PJ stated that Southwark Council will be setting the budget from October onwards and that they would like to engage the voluntary sector in the process. PJ offered to attend another Southwark Forum in a few months to discuss further developments.

Question and Answer session with Peter John

Q: “Will the new Labour Administration expect the voluntary sector to reduce its costs? Will they impose cuts or will they seek consultation and agreement?”

Les Alden, People Care Association

A: PJ stated the voluntary sector, like Southwark Council, should expect 5-6% funding cuts but that there will be consultation over how these cuts are made. PJ recognised that he and his party are politically accountable for the decisions they make whether they are popular or unpopular but due to the economic climate, that funding cuts are unavoidable. This consultation process will begin in October with the budget.

Q: “In economically difficult times, there is a greater demand for services from the voluntary sector. However, despite this, the sector is facing funding cuts. How will the Council go about supporting and investing in the Voluntary Sector?”

Peter Cox, UBS Independent Age

A: PJ recognised the value of the voluntary sector and stated that as much as he would like to be able to commit to holding budgets, it was not possible. He assured the attendees that he did not want a repeat of the level of unemployment in the 1980s and that he will be doing his upmost to protect the provision of frontline services in the borough.

Q: What is being done to improve the council's "adequate" rating for adult social care, including safeguarding, Older People’s services and partnership working - which used to be excellent with Beacon status for partnerships?

Brenda Bond, Age Concern

A: PJ stated that adult social care had not been examined externally for 7 years so that it was possible that the quality of services had been sliding unnoticed throughout this period. He also stated that rather than criticise the inspection process, as the previous local administration did, it was important to accept the criticism and address the problems.

B Bond stated that this attitude was refreshing to hear. PJ said it was important to shake this ‘silent mentality’ when facing difficulties. PJ added that the council would be looking to work in close partnership with the PCT in address this rating.

Q: A worry I have is that “youth work”, programmes and activities for young people in their leisure time generally in the evening and at weekends, will not be given a high priority in the future reductions that we are all aware of, talking about and at some points in the future are going to experience. What is your view and your administration's position with regards to “youth work”, long term relational work not short-term project based work, and how big a priority youth work it be given in Southwark in the future?”

Mark Blundell, Salmon Centre

A: PJ stated youth work is essential but that he currently feels that the borough’s residents do not currently get value for money from Youth Services at the council and that there needs to be a widening of the reach of services. In terms of prioritising the work, PJ reiterated that from October onwards they will be consulting on the Council’s budget and all input would be welcomed.

Q: Which areas of the budget might be ‘protected’ and what advice can you give the voluntary sector in relation to financial planning for the future?

Barbara Scott, Dulwich Helpline

A: PJ said it was not currently possible to say in relation to the voluntary sector. He had to honour manifesto pledges around free hot school meals for primary school children and subsidised ‘Meals of wheels’ for the elderly but that he would be happy to return to Southwark Forum in the winter to have further discussions with the sector.

PJ also stressed that Southwark Council will give as much notice as possible around finishing funding streams. Chris Sanford added that Community Action Southwark had led a strong campaign to agree a suitable notice period and had received assurances that the organisations would be given 3 months notice from the moment they are notified their funding stream is coming to an end. PJ added that he would happily return at the end of the year to take further questions/have further discussions.

Q: Given that the new government has stopped the Future Jobs Fund which Southwark council were planning to apply to give up to 10 people with learning disabilities work – what are the council now going to do to look at offering work opportunities to people with learning disabilities in the council?

Helen Key, Camden Society

A: PJ acknowledged that this was a negative step taken by the new Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government and that it was a valuable work experience opportunity lost. PJ outlined the possibility of using the money for local services from the private developments as a way of compensating for this.

PJ concluded by saying that he was determined to respond to all emails and letters sent to him. His email address in

1. Workshops

Three workshops were held that followed up the key themes of Peter John’s talk. These workshops focused on Employment, Personalisation and Collaboration. Full notes are in Appendix 1. The key findings are outlined below:

Key findings from workshops

Workshop 1: What does Southwark want/need from an Employment Academy.

Facilitator: Thamesreach Employment Academy, Monica Geraghty

Exciting opportunity for partnership working. The multi-agency/multi-borough approach is potentially very effective of dealing with the worklessness agenda.

Consultation is essential and Thamesreach will be looking to have more dialogue with groups between now and the Employment Academy’s inception.

Workshop 2: Collaboration

Facilitator: Chris Todd

Use all of the platforms available to you including the Southwark subgroups and online social networking tool, Basecamp.

It would be useful map the activity of voluntary sector groups in Southwark in order to identify collaborative opportunities

Collaboration is not a quick solution to cuts: time, money and compromises are often necessary to collaborate.

It is important to look for collaborative opportunities with all sectors including the public and private sectors.

Workshop 3: Personalisation

Facilitator: Karen Walkden

Essential to develop an understanding of personalisation as early as possible as it is likely to affect the entire sector.

Organisations need to prepare themselves for the assessment process

Business plans should be developed around how to adjust the back office function to deal with the personalisation agenda.

This is a learning curve for both the voluntary sector and the council. We need to ensure there is constant dialogue between the two to identify and solve potential sticking points.

1. Southwark Trustee Network

Karen Walkden discussed the work of CAS’s Trustee Network. CAS are holding a Trustees Network Event on Saturday 17 July at the Wells Community Church. The theme is Personalisation – assessment of the challenges and the opportunities for voluntary sector organisations.

The event runs from 10am until 1pm and is open to any trustee, management committee or steering group member working with an organisation delivering services in Southwark.

To book a place at this event contact or book online

through

5. Vetting & Barring Scheme

Chris Todd explained that the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 laid the foundation for a new Vetting and Barring Scheme, which has been phased in from 12th October 2009. The scheme aims to stop unsuitable people from working with children and/or vulnerable adults by improving vetting procedures for potential employees or volunteers.

CT explained that some of these plans are on hold after a change at central government. CAS’s training on the subject is now postponed, but CAS will keep members informed of any changes as and when these are decided.

6. Date of next meeting:

Thursday 25 November at 0.30am. Venue to be confirmed.

Appendix 1

Southwark Forum Workshop, June 17 2010

Flip Chart Notes

Workshop 1: What would Southwark want/need from a new Employment Academy?

Potential to work with all age groups from 16 years plus

Good to be able to give support at both ends of the scale in helping people to return to work – from getting people engaged to direct support to find jobs, but some concerns about funding capacity to support this

Opportunity to deliver a service such as training or make use of the office space there

Needs to be effective, concern about the limits of capturing the broader demographic outside of those who live locally – will people travel there?

Like the idea of housing multiple services and these working in partnership and the accessibility that this bring individuals using the project

Might not be helpful having a brief that is too broad and this needs to be pinned down more clearly

Openness and not denying a service due to borough boundaries – positive that the project is supported by Southwark and Lambeth

Is Employment Academy the right name – is it sending the right message to those who are not ready to job seek

Workshop 2: Collaboration workshop

Noted collaborations encompass a wide range of joint workings, from very loose one off arrangements to more strategic partnerships (such as joint bids for funding) to the ultimate collaboration which is merger

The workshop focussed on CAS’s role in assisting organisations to come together – putting them in touch with each other - worries expressed that CAS might not now have the knowledge or the capacity to out orgs in touch with each other.

Collaboration is not just about responding to the cuts – it is about holding people’s hand - what support can CAS provide? – there are many ‘how to’ guides available on the net

How could CAS facilitate collaborations?

- Electronic means such as:

Basecamp

An activity map (clusters)

CAS acting as a ‘dating’ agency

- Have groups days (organisations working in similar service areas coming together to discuss common issues

Pointed out that close collaborations take time and money – given the often short timeframe of cuts collaborations may not be a good response. There are also risks. There may also be sacrifices.

Collaborations might involve the public and private sector – the latter being a very new area for local orgs.

Workshop 3:Personalisation Discussion

CAS members participating in the discussion group deliver services for vulnerable

people who are elderly, disabled, have mental health difficulties or sickle cell.

Services provided included environmental projects and therapy. The Southwark

cabinet lead for childrens services also joined the group.

Some participants in the group had been part of the national scheme to train

voluntary sector staff to provide support brokerage others had contributed to pilots in

Southwark.

The issues arising included:

Varying levels of understanding of what personalisation is. The main stages

being:

o Self assessment to identify needs

o Submission of assessments to social services where, if the criteria are

met, an indicative budget is provided

o Individuals, with or without support, spend the individual budget in

order to meet their needs.

Voluntary sector organisations have a potential role to play at each stage in

the process. Individual budgets can be used flexibly as long as the desired

outcomes are met.

There have been pilots in Southwark – including those with the elderly – but it

is not clear how they have been evaluated and where we go from here.

Completion of the assessment forms is time consuming – and users have

difficulty in interpreting the questions. One participant estimated that it takes

20 hours to complete the self assessment, and that a high level of support is

needed for vulnerable people to do this effectively so that their needs are

articulated clearly.

Some groups appear to be excluded from personalisation eg those with

mental health issues. There have been no pilots for this group. Voluntary

groups will continue to provide services for those who fall outside the criteria.

But how will this be funded? It is not clear who is in and who is out –

especially where there are multiple and complex needs. Some transparency

needed around criteria, levels of budget allocated and appeals processes.

The need to include emergency care planning in the spending of individual

budgets. Or to have a separate process in place to respond to changes in

need.

Vulnerable people may need to become employers and develop an

understanding of employment legislation eg sick pay, maternity rights. A4E is

an organisation providing employment advice for people using Direct

Payments in this way. There is a charge for the service, which can be

purchased using the Direct Payments.

The top three issues were:

1) The need for good advice and information so that informed choices can be

made on the selection and purchase of services. Brokerage pilots have been