Agenda item

7.1

The Committee received a report of the Executive Director, People Services, which set out the draft strategic proposals which had been produced with regard to the recommissioning of services for young people in 2018 and which were currently the subject of consultation.  The report was supported by a presentation given by Sam Martin (Assistant Director, Integrated Commissioning Unit).  Also in attendance for this item was Councillor Jackie Drayton (Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families).

7.2

Members made various comments and asked a number of questions, to which responses were provided as follows:-

·                Early intervention and prevention was an important part of providing services for young people and it was important to work with partners in this regard.  It should be borne in mind that there were lots of activities across the City which were not run by the Council and it was important to ensure that there was a range of provision across all parts of the City.

·                Funding the provision of young people’s services was a challenge and the continuing quality of the service, in the face of funding reductions, was a testament to the hard work of the staff involved.  Targeted work had resulted in a reduction in the number of NEETS (Not in Education, Employment or Training) and those involved in the Criminal Justice System over the last five years.  A collaborative approach to funding in the future was part of the Council’s Vision and it was important for all partners to work together.

·                Statistics were available regarding the transition from school into further education, training or employment at the age of 16.  This data had been provided to the Committee as part of a report about post 16 learning in 2016.

·                There were 20 Youth Officers in the City who worked on crime prevention and Councillor Bob Pullin would be provided with details of their activities in his Ward.  Consideration would also be given to Councillor Pullin’s suggestion to make links between young people’s services and Magistrates.

·                It was not possible to simply renew the existing contracts for Youth Services, so this had to go to tender and, in doing this, the Council had taken the opportunity to look at the full picture, but it was felt that the Youth Teams worked well.

·                In terms of the monitoring and scrutiny of any services commissioned in the future, the usual contract management processes would apply, with meetings being held with the provider at least every quarter to check delivery and quality. 

·                The provision of a needs led response to issues in communities was a challenge, but it was felt that Sheffield Futures was currently doing a good job with the resources available.  It should be noted that part of the proposal was to free resources to develop a more responsive approach.

·                Sheffield Futures had secured some external funding for young people’s services, and for the Council it was becoming more a case of providing funding for the services which were required by statute.

·                The Young People’s Enrichment Fund was designed to be used by a range of voluntary groups and organisations.

·                There had been no formal evaluation of the current One Stop Shop.  The Council did not directly commission or provide all the services in the One Stop Shop, but played a key role in commissioning the infrastructure that enabled it to operate, such as triage services.

·                It was important to have a neutral central location for the provision of sexual health services to young people, which was provided by the One Stop Shop.

·                The Youth Cabinet provided opportunities for active joint working between young people and politicians and this could be built upon in the future.

·                Sheffield now had the lowest proportion of young people who were NEET compared to the other Core Cities.  A good system was in place for tracking the progress of NEETs and Sheffield was a top performing City with regard to apprenticeships. 

·                These proposals were just about the provision of young people’s services and it should be pointed out that the Council supported young people in other ways, such as apprenticeships, training and education and safeguarding.

·                These were Council proposals, but they had been arrived at following conversations with partners, such as the Police and voluntary organisations, on their feasibility, and further consultation would be taking place with these stakeholders.

·                The biggest part of the proposed budget was to be spent on the recommissioning of Youth Teams, with smaller amounts being spent in respect of the One Stop Shop and encouraging the voice of young people.  The spend on the Young People’s Enrichment Fund was estimated at being potentially between £250,000 and £500,000, but this depended on matched funding.

7.3

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)       thanks Councillor Jackie Drayton and Sam Martin for their contribution to the meeting;

(b)       notes the contents of the report and presentation and the responses to Members’ questions and comments;

(c)        welcomes being involved at an early stage in the process of the future commissioning and delivery of young people’s services;

(d)       expresses its general agreement with the principles of the proposal set out in the report; and

(e)       requests that:-

(i)          it be kept informed of progress with the proposals for the future commissioning and delivery of young people’s services; and

(ii)         the monitoring of quality and the purchasing of services on an as and when needs basis to provide a degree of flexibility in provision, be included in the final contract.