BRIEFING PAPER: SUSTAINABILITY

EDUCATION AND EARLY INTERVENTION

1. / How have the impact of current year (2011/12) activity levels and budget variances (under and overspends) been reflected in proposals for 2012/13 and beyond?
1.1 / Budget monitoring currently forecasts an underspend in Education & Early Intervention. Work has been carried out to categorise these savings as one-off, early achievement of planned savings, or a new permanent/sustainable saving. These have then been considered as part of the budget-setting process.
2. / Is the budget sustainable in the medium-term?
2.1 / The most important issue for the sustainability of the budget over the medium-term will be the government’s plans for school funding reform, including changes to the approach to funding services which are delegated to schools, and calculation of LA LACSEG on a national formulaic basis, from 2013/14:-
School funding and LACSEG recoupment. In addition to their basic per-pupil funding, Academies are provided with a grant (LACSEG – Local Authority Central Spend Equivalent Grant) to cover the costs of services that are provided by the local authority to maintained schools but not to academies, such as education welfare, behaviour support, and school improvement. This money is currently recouped from local authorities in two main ways: through a flat-rate annual reduction in formula grant (LA LACSEG), and through reductions in Dedicated Schools Grant on a school-by-school basis (DSG LACSEG). As part of a wider consultation on school funding, the government is planning to make significant changes to this system from 2013/14, including adopting a more consistent national approach to funding services which are delegated to schools, and calculating LA LACSEG on a national formulaic basis[1]. Although the details of these changes are not expected to be confirmed until late 2012, they are likely to lead to significant funding reductions. Hertfordshire already spends substantially less, and delegates more to schools, than most other local authorities, while the sums being recouped and transferred are based on national averages. The government has also set out its intention to resolve the issue of ‘double-funding’ in the national system, which will mean there will be less money in the system as a whole.
2.2 / The details of these changes will not be confirmed until late 2012. In the meantime, a ‘Trading with Schools’ programme is underway to ensure that services affected by reductions in funding through the recoupment of LACSEG and other transfers of funding and responsibility are supported to develop services on a traded (full-cost recovery) basis, where appropriate.
3. / What is the reliance on one-off funding/reserves/government grants etc?
3.1 / There is some reliance on temporary grant funding, for example through the SEN and Disability pathfinder, Children’s Centre Payment by Results Trial, 2-year-old free childcare trial and Community Budgets. However, care is taken to ensure that these grants are not used to fund core or ongoing services, and so do not pose a risk to the sustainability of the budget.
4. / How do proposals contribute to CO2 reduction/increased recycling?
4.1
4.2
4.3 / Changes to home to school transport include specific objectives to promote more sustainable transport to school, including walking and cycling.
The Developing Special Provision Locally programme is increasing local special educational provision, thereby reducing the need for long-distance travel.
Rationalising the use of property, by relocating staff currently based at Bluecoats and Stag House in Hertford, will also reduce the department’s carbon footprint.

CHILDREN’S SAFEGUARDING AND SPECIALIST SERVICES

1. / How have the impact of current year (2011/12) activity levels and budget variances (under and overspends) been reflected in proposals for 2012/13 and beyond?
1.1 / Budget monitoring currently predicts an underspend in Safeguarding & Specialist Services, and work has been carried out to categorise these savings as one-off, early achievement of planned savings, or a new permanent/sustainable saving. These have been considered as part of the budget-setting process.
2. / Is the budget sustainable in the medium-term?
2.1
2.2 / The key issue for the sustainability of the budget relates to levels of demand for children’s social care, including the volume of referrals, numbers of children with child protection plans, and number of children looked after. It can also depend on the complexity of need, where a small change in the number of children and young people with particularly high-cost support needs can impact on the sustainability of the budget.
Safeguarding & Specialist Services continue to work closely with the Education & Early Intervention service group to strengthen Hertfordshire’s early intervention support, and therefore control and reduce the escalation of need and demand for higher-cost services. However, there will always be risks that the level of demand increases as a result of factors over which the service has limited control. These might include, for example, a national safeguarding scandal (such as Baby Peter) or new legal rulings. Key indicators and performance measures relating to demand and cost drivers are monitored closely, so that any changes can be addressed at the earliest opportunity.
3. / What is the reliance on one-off funding/reserves/government grants etc?
3.1 / There is some reliance on temporary grant funding, for example through the Social Work Improvement Fund, Special Educational Needs and Disability Pathfinder, and Community Budgets pathfinder. However, care is taken to ensure these are not used to fund core or ongoing services, and do not pose a risk to the sustainability of the budget.
4. / How do proposals contribute to CO2 reduction/increased recycling?
4.1 / Environmental and CO2 implications are considered as part of service development and commissioning, for example in the use and location of residential units and new Disability Hubs. The service is seeking to make maximum use of its most energy-efficient buildings (such as those funded under PFI). A priority for Safeguarding & Specialist Services is to increase the availability and use of local placements and services (rather than out-of-county provision), which reduces the use, cost and environmental impact of taxis and other means of transport.

HEALTH AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

1. / How have the impact of current year (2011/12) activity levels and budget variances (pressures) been reflected in proposals for 2012/13 and beyond?
1.1
1.2 /

Demography pressures are factored into Health and Community Services’ budget proposals annually and are based on national forecasting tools for older people and people with physical disabilities – and on a detailed list of named people and anticipated care costs for people with learning disabilities. All projections are compared with trends from previous years and any current projected budget variance.

Benchmarking information has shown Hertfordshire has higher numbers of care placements annually for all care groups. All care groups therefore have an efficiency relating to keeping people at home with parents or in suitable private or rented accommodation as they wish. This manifests itself in challenging targets for permanent admissions into care and in targets to bring people who live in expensive out of county placements back to Hertfordshire into supported living tenancies.

1.3
1.4 /

Despite the department projecting an underspend as a whole for 2011/12 there are underlying overspends against care budgets specifically on higher cost learning disability placements, slightly higher numbers of older people placements – and older people who were former self-funders turning to the council for funding because of diminished savings and capital.

The use of personal budgets is a key priority. This will manage people’s expectations on what HCS can provide to meet their level of needs, encourage them to use the natural support from family, friends and community groups and be more imaginative in meeting their care needs to achieve a better outcome for best value.

2. / Is the budget sustainable in the medium-term? What is the reliance on one-off funding/reserves/government grants etc?
2.1
2.2 /

The Dilnot Commission which reported in June 2011 acknowledged that the current social care system and the way it is funded is not sustainable in the long-term. The ageing population (particularly the baby boomer generation requiring social care), ‘miracle babies’ turning 18 and people’s rising expectations for their own social care and that of their adult children has placed tremendous pressures on council budgets. The government’s response to the review is promised for Spring 2012.

A specific programme has been initiated to take forward a number of projects to reduce the average cost of new care packages for people with learning disabilities. This will be achieved through the commissioning of new more cost effective services like ‘shared lives’ adult placements, alternatives to respite care and different models of supported living.
2.3
2.4 /

For the last two financial years, additional winter pressures monies have been provided by the Department of Health via Primary Care Trusts to local authorities with social services responsibilities. Agreement was reached with the PCT to spend this money on new initiatives which benefit both health and social care – including rapid response homecare, enablement beds, weekend working for hospital social workers and provision for costs falling on social care attributable to faster hospital discharge. These are non-recurrent monies and all schemes can be either ended or a business case drawn up to continue them with existing budgets. This was approximately £2M in each year for Hertfordshire.

Significant additional money has also been provided for four years from 2011/12 – 2014/15 via PCTs to fund pressures within the social care system. This amounts to approximately £11M per annum for Hertfordshire and has effectively funded one year’s worth of demographic pressures on adult social care (or reduced the savings requirement).

3. / How do proposals contribute to CO2 reduction/increased recycling?
3.1 / Day Services Modernisation has involved moving out of large day centres (and disposing of these properties) and operating from smaller project-based sites which have reduced CO2 emissions by 10% for day services in 2011/12. We are also decreasing the number of large minibus vehicles in our day service fleet in favour of smaller people carriers which offer the service more flexibility during the day. Service users have been encouraged to participate in carbon reduction and recycling schemes as part of their independent living skills training. Housing associations are introducing electricity and water meters for tenants of supported living where this possible within the constraints of the buildings. The reduction in library opening hours will incidentally reduce the carbon footprint of the library service.

ENVIRONMENT AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES

HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORT

The main budget proposals for Highways and Transport for delivery in 2012/13 are:
-Re- procurement of the Highways contract by October 2012 and the relocation of the service to a single office base.
-Implementation of part night lighting –that street lights be turned off completely where there is little or no footfall and part night lighting rolled out in urban areas.
-Complete implementation of the agreed passenger transport service reduction budget, including the impact of the Home to School Transport Review.
-Locality budgets to councillors for Highways projects.
-Initial delivery stages of the Croxley Rail Link project.
1. / How has the impact of current year (2011/12) activity levels and budget variances (pressures) been reflected in proposals for 2012/13 and beyond?
1.1
1.2 / A big uncertainty within the budget is around the impact that the weather has on the roads each year. The major proportion of the highways and transport budget is employed to manage and maintain the highways asset valued at £4 billion (excluding bridges).The operational needs do not change significantly between years, however, severe winters (like the past three years) have impacted on the network. The network is currently estimated to be depreciating at a rate of at least £30 million per year and therefore works have to be prioritised based on the impact of the weather and severe winters. Securing sufficient funding to arrest deterioration of the assets continues to be a priority.
The output of the Home to School Transport Review, alongside the need to make best use of safety and travel advice resources has facilitated the bringing together of two units. This has resulted in in-year savings which have been reflected in the budget proposals.
2. / Is the budget sustainable in the medium-term?
2.1 / The budget is sustainable in the medium term but there are a number of uncertainties which will affect it:
- As stated above the weather is a huge variable on the sustainability of the budget.
- The economy and the impact of the recession (recession decreased traffic flow marginally, there is a reduction in development control activity)
- Rising energy prices – eg for street lighting
- Uncertainty around how the bus market will respond to a whole range of pressures being places on it by local authorities and central government
2.2 / The Hertfordshire Highways contracts are currently being procured. This provides the opportunity to review the current model for service levels and how the services are delivered in line with budget availability.
3. / What is the reliance on one-off funding/reserves/government grants?
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4 / Many areas of the department’s work were previously supported by government grants. Much of this funding was reduced in-year in 2010/11 and arrangements have had to be made to reduce activity to the level of funding available or funding found from elsewhere.
The Safety Camera Partnership had been funded from a road safety grant since 2007/08. However, this funding was reduced in year in 2010/11 and will not continue in 2011/12. Despite this, Cabinet recognised the contribution that safety cameras make, agreed to continue funding the safety camera unit, albeit at a reduced level, by channelling other safety related budgets into this area.
This year, the service will receive a grant for the Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF).
The Croxley rail link will be substantially funded by government grant.
4. / How do proposals contribute to CO2 reduction / increased recycling?
4.1 / The service is a key contributor to the corporate objective to Reduce Carbon Emissions by the promotion of sustainable transport modes through infrastructure improvements and passenger transport services; TravelWise campaigns; sustainable development control policies and local capacity building initiatives such as Safer Routes to School, pedestrian and cycle training & promotion and Travel Smart programmes.
4.2 / Specific projects which will contribute to reducing the carbon footprint of the county council are:
- Implementation of part-night lighting across the county. This will enable a significant reduction to be made in the carbon footprint of the street lighting stock.
- The relocation of the Highways service into one single office will also contribute to a reduction in the services’ carbon footprint.

ENVIRONMENT AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES

WASTE MANAGEMENT, ENVIRONMEN AND PLANNING AND STRATEGY, COMMUNICATIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

The main budget proposals/developments for Environment and Commercial Services for delivery in the year 2012/13 are:
-Continuing, significant savings (an additional £2 million) from restructuring of various waste management contracts
-Contracting out of Aldenham Country Park Management
-Transfer for Herts Biological Records to the University of Hertfordshire
-Transfer of carbon reduction activity to the resources and performance department
-Creation of a joint HCC/Hertfordshire LEP Economic Development Team
Further development of the Herts Local Programme
1. / How has the impact of current year (2011/12) activity levels and budget variances (pressures) been reflected in proposals for 2012/13 and beyond?
1.1 / The budget proposals cater for expected activity levels in all waste, environment and planning services. Pressures for these services have also been noted as:
- Significant savings were built into the IPP last year from a range of waste contracts e.g. £0.6m in 2010/11 rising to £5m in 2012/13 for interim waste disposal following intensive negotiation with suppliers and thorough investigation of likely future markets.
-The impact of Landfill Tax increases has been factored-in, based upon the latest information available. Similarly, the currently known or predicted impacts of flooding and water legislation and those of the carbon reduction commitment have been incorporated.
1.2 / The services continue to react and adapt to the national situation, for example, the restructure of the economic development team and co-location with the LEP has been undertaken because of changes and challenges nationally, and the cessation of a number of external funding sources.
2. / Is the budget sustainable in the medium-term?
2.1
2.2
2.3 / Yes, the proposals are considered to be sustainable in the medium term and are based upon a balance of acceptable performance levels and continuing cost reduction.
The HWRC and Rights of Way services rely upon capital budgets for the 17 Centres and 3000km of paths respectively. In recent years, central government grants e.g. the Waste Infrastructure Capital Grant (WICG) supported both HWRC improvements and district council waste projects. However, this funding expired in 2010/11. The current capital programme for waste comprises of WICG slippage and HCC’s own funds.
Flooding and water legislation has introduced new burdens for HCC. As a new Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA), there are responsibilities associated with plans production and for Sustainable Urban Drainage, standards, approval and adoption. The budget proposals will enable HCC to develop and maintain the capacity to meet its LLFA obligations
3. / What is the reliance on one-off funding/reserves/government grants?
3.1 / Whilst the county council is funding the core costs of the new Economic Development service, the LEP will be dependant upon securing external funding from government and EU sources, and obtaining private sector investment to support its key projects and priorities.
4. / How do proposals contribute to CO2 reduction / increased recycling?
4.1
4.2
4.3 / Service efficiencies can be expected overall to make positive contributions to both controllable CO2 emission reductions and waste minimisation targets. The Waste Management function is central to both residual waste reduction and meeting recycling targets and works closely with the Hertfordshire Waste Partnership.
The LEP and HCC’s agreed Economic Development Strategy looks towards a low carbon approach to future economic growth.
One of the key priorities of the communications team is to promote the key message of carbon management and conserving energy, working across HCC departments

COMMUNITY PROTECTION