Children’s Services Statutory Returns Suppliers’ and Focus Group Joint CIN Meeting
12 January 2010
Chair: Ian Casey, DCSF
These notes are in addition to the slides and report tabled during the meeting, which were emailed on 13 January 2010 and are also available at the CIN TeacherNet site,
1. Introduction from Ian Casey, meeting Chair.
2. Action summary from previous meeting (Julie Hickey, Business Development, Data Services Group, DCSF).
Reviewing the action points from the meeting on 23 July, Julie confirmed the following: -
Action 1: DCSF to clarify open case status dates issue. Cleared.
Action 2:DCSF to issue next and final version of CIN 2009-10 Technical Specification together with updated Guidance Notes. Cleared. V1.5 of the Technical Specification and V1.4 of the Guidance notes are the current versions published in October 09.
Action 3: DCSF to issue FAQs for 2009-10 CIN. Cleared. FAQs were issued in August 09.
Action 4: DCSF to issue CIN 2010-11 Technical Specification and Guidance Notes by end September 09. Cleared. The Technical Specification and Guidance notes for 10-11 were issued in October 09.
Action 5: DCSF to arrange one to one feedback sessions with suppliers to go through the specifications. Cleared. One to One feedback sessions were held last autumn – feedback from these meetings is a following agenda item.
Action 6:DCSF to consider options for improved report generation from COLLECT for the 09-10 collection.Cleared.This was taken away from the last meeting and as far as possible has been reflected in the COLLECT familiarisation blade that went live in November 09.
3. Feedback from one to one meetings with software suppliers (Aspa Palamidas, Business Development, Data Services Group, DCSF).
Aspa tabled a summary report and went through it. Meetings were held last autumn with 10 software suppliers and 2 LAs with in-house systems. The main findings from these meetings are listed below:
Feedback on CIN 08-09 – summary of responses to questionnaire.
Not many LAs are using theXSLT to validate.
Guidance notes are found to be useful – only 2 had not used them.
Technical spec is useful – 1 had not used the XML Schema.
There was useful feedback on the COLLECT guidance and those comments have been taken on board.
More LAs than suppliers use the helpdesk. Assurances were given that the helpdesk will be manned to full capacity during the live collection.
For those LAs who participated in the online survey, responses have been summarised and fed back to supplier.
Encouraged to hear that evaluations have been made on the first year and that user groups are being utilised.
Readiness for CIN 09-10
There were concerns about system readiness for the data collection and data extraction – this varies considerably between suppliers. In some instances work is still ongoing with releases expected to be available by the end of January to enable extraction to be generated.
Feedback from the conferences highlighted that some LAs are running their own reports alongside supplier’s reports.
Outputting XML – a wider issue is that not all data is held on just one system.
Suppliers were encouraged to use familiarisation blade prior to April.
Other comments and next steps
09-10 collection – The guidance now clarifies how PIs are calculated and it is important that the correct dates are used. It was stressed that users must work in accordance with the guidance to ensure consistency.
Specifications for the six National Indicator reports had been produced and will be issued as a separate document shortly.
Group concerns were that there has to be plenty of notice of changes and asked that once the guidance is produced that there are no updates to avoid re-working. Aspa was able to feedback to the group that requirements remain static for 09-10 and 10-11 but there may have to be some changes in the 10-11 specification as the Collect validation rules will be reviewed and there may be refinements and additions.
It was agreed that making the technical specification and the guidance notes available together is the favoured approach.
Proposal for one nominated ICS LA lead per supplier to attend meeting of the group.
The Project Board will receive a report from the meetings with the suppliers and system readiness.
Aspa asked that LAs and suppliers kept the department updated on their plans and that further one to one visits could be arranged in the future.
Aspa assured the group that there is a commitment to providing weekly updates to LAs during the ‘live’ data submission period.
Alan Lowther and Jane Sharpe will remain as secondees until the end of March 2010 and focus on providing targeted support to LAs in their preparations. The group asked what support would be available after the secondee support is no longer available. The plan is for the helpdesk to be resourced to provide ‘expert’ support during the ‘live’ data collection period.
The group would like it recognised that suppliers have conflicting projects and need time to implement releases in conjunction with their other projects.
4. Children in Need census 2009-10 - Update following the conferences (Jane Sharpe, LA secondee for CIN, DCSF).
Jane provided feedback, using the responses from the feedback forms and the group sessionscompleted during theautumn CIN conferences.
Feedback - most helpful
Group sessions - could benefit from being a little longer but were really useful.
Networking with other LAs and feedback from their experiences
LA presentations
Feedback – least helpful
COLLECT overview – most people are already familiar with COLLECT.
2010-11 – is too far in future to consider at the moment.
Work completed
Questions from postcards and group sessions have been circulated to DCSF staff for answers.
Collated information from group sessions.
Next steps
To update FAQs by the end of January incorporating questions from the conferences.
Contacting individual LAs who posed specific questions during the conferences
To publish report based on group sessions.
To publish specific case examples – Jane asked the group to forward any examples they have to her.
ACTION 1 - Group to forward case examples.
Raising the profile of the CIN census
There has been attendance at some regional group meetings.
Matt Walker and Richard Bartholomew attended a recent ADCS meeting in November to raise the profile of the collection and to alleviate concerns previously raised by this group – the ADCS were supportive of the collection but had concerns of the scope of the census and the resource issue as it is felt that it had been greatly underestimated how long the 08-09 census would take to complete.
Aspa and Isabella attended a recent Star Chamber meeting to update the Scrutiny Board on the CIN census.
Ian informed the group that DCSF are currently trying to secure funding for future conferences and asked what the group felt about the timing of future conferences.The group felt that the timing should be linked to when the data are published. However, DCSF noted that time was needed to evaluate the data before the conferences.
5. COLLECT familiarisation and related technical issues. (Jenny Simpson, Technical Development, Data Services Group, DCSF).
Jenny ran through issues related to the COLLECT familiarisation;
22 LAs and 1 supplier have loaded data – Jenny said these figures are slightly disappointing and would encourage everyone to access this if only using dummy data just to get used to it.
Helpdesk has been reporting issues coming through though there is no particular pattern forming.
2 LAs have reported loading files and codes do not match – the advice is to leave blank.
Advice is to load as much data as possible and if LAs find they have missing data they should contact the helpdesk.
XSLT release has been delayed as DCSF were not happy with it and returned it to the contractor – to date there are still some outstanding issues.
The helpdesk telephone line has a number option for each collection; CIN will be added as an option once the collection goes live. For ease of use the option number for CIN will be published in the next newsletter.
ACTION 2– Helpdesk to publish option number.
The group asked if there is a full list of validation rules available – last year the helpdesk had a list and the aim is to produce the list again which the group agreed would be very helpful.
Action 3 – DCSF to produce list of validation rules.
6.Reports and Validation rule changesand Processing issues – Year on Year corrections (Alison Butler, Customer Services, Data Services Group, DCSF).
Alison updated the group on changes to the reports and changes to one particular validation rule for the 09-10 collection.
Reports
Reports remain the same as 08-09 – no changes.
Reports have been added for the six National Indicators (NIs)
User Acceptance Testing has been ongoing since October, there have been some small changes to how the validation rules are implemented, and most issues have been fixed.
Action 4 - DCSF to issue NI report specifications
Validation rule amendment
Rule 8880 in Collect - will now allow an initial assessment to open and close on the same day and for a core assessment to start on the same day – the validation rule will change to reflect this. Suppliers present confirmed this late change would not impact on their systems’ development.
Year on Year Corrections
This work is still under development.
Alison informed the group that there is to be a workshop with the contractor’s developers before the end of January about how this should work; she asked the group to forward any specific suggestions to her before the meeting.
ACTION 5–Group to forward specific suggestions.
Options
Alison asked the group if they had any thoughts on the optionsforYear on Year corrections which would either be flagged up within the existing 09-10 blade or sit in a separate Year on Year corrections blade alongside:
Within the existing blade it will involve manual updating of discrepancies between 08-09 and 09-10 and updates will be continue to take place overnight. Any 08-09 data that differs in 09-10 can be overridden if it is in a separate blade. The group agreed that year on year the knowledge of a child grows and it is usual to discover that last year’s data was incorrect. The instance of date of birth changes was highlighted - where asylum seekers’ dates of birth were input incorrectly initially, attached to a children’s team but later discovered not to be a child, the date of birth error needs to be amended to avoid wider implications.
The group askedwhether either option would have an adverse effect on COLLECTperformance – Alison said that it may be slower when doing year on year but a solution to this would be discussed during the contractors’ workshop.
The general feeling was that contained within one blade it is easier to do comparisons without having to be logged into two systems at once.
The group felt that one blade is better for audit trail purposes.
The group queried whether LGR would favour a particular option – Alison said that it would not have any impact on the final decision.
Making more use of data – group discussion
Alison asked the group for their thoughts on the sharing of data particularly whose data and what data can be shared and how to go about it.
DCSF do not intend to publish any further 08-09 data at LA level due to issues with the quality of individual LA returns, however we recognise that some LAs may chose to share their own data with others and in which case, may want to be able to share comparable data. The group felt that they should have the option to share their own data between their statistical neighbours even if it was not good, they felt that the decision to share should be available to them as it would give a greater understanding of the differences between ‘neighbours’. They felt that they would benefit from knowing if they were achieving the same, better or a worse standard as other LAs based on the amount of work they do to undertake this and that they want to be able to present the comparable evidence to their Service Managers.
Suggestions made as a result of this discussion were:
Have a system set up nationally that LAs could opt into if they did wish to share their data.
DCSF could consider producing a report that would show what LAs actually submitted against what they thought they were submitting.
When submitting what LAs feel it unreliable data, they could attach a ‘health warning’ email highlighting their specific concerns.
Produce a league table to enable authorities to see how they are performing against each other.
The outcome was that DCSF will draft a table and will look into canvassing the views of each LA as to whether they wish to opt in to sharing their LA level data. To help formulate a table that is useable for LAs, Alison asked if any LA would be interested in forming a data user group so we could consult on this and in the future when drafting tables for publications.
ACTION 6- DCSF todraft table.
ACTION7 - Volunteers to form user group.
8. Children Looked After SSDA903 return – update (Victoria Obudulu, Customer Services, Data Services Group, DCSF).
Victoria gave an update on what has happened during the last year, the changes that have taken place and what is happening between January and June.
Update and improvements for this year
The team have taken on board the issues that LAs have experienced to ensure that the collection goes smoothly this year.
A new improved system will be available by the end of January which will support the loading of large XML files.
When refreshing data records will validate automatically rather than the current edit/save process.
From 1 April there will be a single point of contact at the helpdesk to support users.
Aiming to streamline and structure communication strategy during collection.
Next steps
DCSF testing of new system will be completed by the end of February – early March.
System will then become available to LAs from early March for familiarisation testing (Victoria to confirm if this will also be available for suppliers).
ACTION 8– Victoria to confirm system availability
Correct dates confirmed as ‘Go live’ on 1 April. LAs to load data by 31 May with a view to clear errors by 30 June.
Main changes to collection
Ethnicity codes have changed to align with School and CIN census’
SDQ score – this data item has become compulsory.
LEA codes are to be used instead of LA codes to align with the CIN census.
Other information
FAQs and validation document will be available prior to the start of the collection.
Guidance notes will be published on the website before the end of January. Any feedback on the updated guidance notes would be very much appreciated.
Can LAs please notify of any staff who are no longer involved in the collection so they can be removed from the system.
ACTION 9 –LAs to notify DCSF of staff changes.
9. Children in Need census 2010-11 - Feedback on baselined technical specification and guidance notes (Aspa Palamidas, Business Development, Data Services Group, DCSF).
Aspa reminded the group that the technical specification and guidance notes had been available since early October. For 2010 -11 there were no major changes but to be aware there will be some updates to these documents, if anybody highlighted any issues they should get in touch with her. Aspa encouraged the group to use forums such as these meetings to let the DCSF know of any issues they face and how we can help.
Aspa said to be aware that the Children’s Statistical Returns website is undergoing a revamp and it will look different to users accessing it in future.
10. AOB and close of meeting
Isabella Craig notified the group of a change in the 2011-12 collection. Referrals – Source of referral and reason for referral. Isabella asked if members of the group had Codesets currently being used for source and reason for referral within their LA could they forward the list who is currently looking into this issue.
ACTION 10 –Group to forward Codesets to DCSF.
Isabella asked the group what they thought of multiple entries and did they currently use them
Next meeting, date to be confirmed, will be during week commencing 22 March. Confirmed as Tuesday 23 March.
Key action points
1.Group to forward any specific case examples to Jane Sharpe for publication.
2.DCSF helpdesk to publish CIN helpline option number in next CIN newsletter.
3.DCSF to share with LAs spreadsheet that will list all key validations and error messages for 09-10 CIN with explanations on what action to take.