Decisions

12.1

The Strategic Commissioning manager introduced the report which which explained that due to a reduction in the number of children taking up a place in its nursery provision over several years, governors at Springfield School decided to temporarily close the nursery in September 2023. A temporary closure is possible for 2 years only, before the nursery must reopen or close permanently.

It also explained that following a review of the nursery and engagement with the school, a permanent closure is recommended. It was stated that in order to do this, the Making Significant Changes, (Prescribed Alterations) statutory process, would be followed, which includes a period of consultation. Approval is sought from committee to go ahead with that process.

12.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

1. Agree to publish a statutory proposal to close the nursery permanently, in line with the statutory process for prescribed alterations. A four-week formal consultation will then take place.
2. Note that a final decision regarding the future of the nursery will be made by Committee, within two months of the consultation closing.

12.3

Reasons for Decision

12.3.1

Permanent closure of the nursery at Springfield School and continued use of the space to support the community, linked to Family Hubs, Start for Life and wraparound care is recommended because it:

• Allows the school to focus on meeting the complex needs of their Reception to Year 6 pupils with increasing SEND/EAL needs, by redirecting financial resource. Meaning that children are supported by a ‘good’ school where they can thrive to fulfil their educational potential.
• Provides a great community asset to use for community and family support in an area of high need and deprivation, such as the health and family learning workshops currently being held. This will enable the community to feel valued and supported, whilst tackling inequalities and celebrating the diversity of the community.
• Prevents further deficit to the school’s budget so that they can ensure financial resource is further invested into meeting the needs of their pupils to become a high performing primary school.
  
  

12.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

12.4.1

Option 1: Reopen as was prior to the temporary closure (up to 52 places over 2 sessions) – rejected for the following reasons:

·       No evidence of immediate/short-term demand to fill enough places for the nursery to be financially sustainable.

·       All efforts to make existing provision viable have been exhausted.

·       Further negative impact on school budget, increasing deficit.

12.4.2

Option 2: Reopen and extend the age range to take 2-year-olds – rejected for the following reasons:

• No evidence of immediate/short-term demand.
• Additional resource requirements for 2-year-olds and increased staffing demand (ratios/leadership and management time).

• Physical environment would need to be adapted for 2-year-olds – capital investment required.
• Risk that would not be financially viable.
• Distraction from core mission of become a high performing primary school.
• Threat of redundancies if no demand for places.

14.1

The Head of Commissioning for Children and Families introduced the report which updated the Committee members on the delivery of Sheffield All-Age Emotional and Mental Health and Wellbeing Strategy which was previously agreed in spring 2023.

14.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

1. Note the progress to date and requests an update on an annual basis, with the next expected in September 2025.
2. Approve that the responsibility for oversight of theme 2 will transfer, along with wider responsibility for the emotional health and wellbeing and mental health of babies, children and young people aged 0-18 and care leavers aged 18-25 from the Sheffield Mental Health, Learning Disability, Dementia and Autism Delivery Group to the Sheffield Children and Young People Delivery Group.

14.3

Reasons for Decision

14.3.1

Partners regularly review activity in this area at the Mental Health, Learning Disabilities, Dementia and Autism, and the Children and Young People’s Delivery Group, of which councillors are members. An annual update to both adults’ and children’s committees is an appropriate way to update a wider group of councillors and the public. This review has also provided an opportunity to consider the most appropriate governance structures for future delivery of the strategy.

14.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

14.4.1

Delivering the strategy is a key objective for the city’s partners; the only alternative option is not to work together in partnership to improve emotional and mental health and wellbeing. This option is not recommended.

13.1

The Assistant Director for Children and Families introduced the report which explained that Sheffield City Council last reviewed its Kinship Care policy in 2017 and that the proposed policy revision should leave all new Kinship Carers in Sheffield with access to financial support which is equitable and applies to all.

13.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

1. Review and agree the recommended policy approach for managing payments for new Kinship Carers.
2. Review and agree the recommended policy approach for managing payments for pre-existing Kinship Carers.
   
   

13.3

Reasons for Decision

13.3.1

Following the publication of the National Care Review and more recently The National Kinship Strategy (Dec 2023), there has been a significant change to the national direction of travel in relation to safeguarding children. There is a renewed emphasis on the need to move away from costly state intervention to a family help approach. In Sheffield this change in direction fits with the principles in our revised Sufficiency Strategy by ensuring that when children cannot live at home they live with people in their existing network (connected carers).

13.3.2

This policy update will standardise the financial support model to provide consistency for all kinship care families, ensuring the family is able to plan for and around the needs of the child. The process and timeline for accessing kinship care funding will be clear, consistent, easily understood by all parties and able to be applied regardless of circumstance. Additional financial support will be available for those kinship care families most in need.

13.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

13.4.1

Alternative Option 1: Do Nothing.

Operate current mixed payment methodology: This option does not help us to meet our goal of leaving all new Kinship Carers in Sheffield with access to financial support which is equitable and applies to all. We would not be standardising the financial support model and additional financial support would continue to be driven by assessment timescales and knowledge of the system rather than an assessment of need.

Legal Risks: this option would leave us vulnerable to legal challenge. A number of Local Authorities have been subject to challenges and Local Government Ombudsmen investigations around the equitability and consistent application of their Kinship Care Policies. Doing nothing would not protect us from this.

Alternative Option 2: Maintain Kinship Care agreements as they currently are for a period of 3 years and then review this decision.

This would allow a period of consistency and enable good medium[1]term financial planning for current Kinship Carers. This would include any Skills Payments Kinship Carers currently receive (around 8% currently receive these). In terms of cost, this option would cost the Local Authority £10.7m per year over 3 years, with an additional amount needing to be set aside to cover any increase in the Kinship Maintenance Allowance. This option does not mitigate against the risk of legal challenge on our current Kinship payment arrangements.

Alternative Option 3: Maintain Kinship Care agreements as they currently are for a period of 1 year and then review this decision

As above, although costs would be lower.

Alternative Option 4: Move current Kinship Carers on to the new policy.

This option has the lowest financial cost to the Council but is likely to have the greatest risk of legal challenge as current Kinship Care arrangements would be being changed potentially at a financial detriment to the Kinship Carers (through changes to individual agreements and/or loss of Skills Payment).

Alternative Option 5: Phased move on to the new policy.

This option is a variant of the one above, giving more notice and providing an element of mitigation to the Carers. If this option were to be pursued, we would need to agree the length of the phasing and the degree of financial change at each phase. We would need to give notice to Carers. Again, there is thought to be a risk of legal challenge around this option and with several different individual agreements in place applying a blanket approach to a phased move no to the new policy may prove confusing for carers (‘what does this mean for me’) and may not be appropriate

11.1

The Head of Service for Resourcing and Business Planning introduced the report which updated Members on the projected growth trajectory in Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) issuance and on progress of the review currently underway of associated demand for Home to School Travel services, an assessment of current service delivery, and proposed action plan.

11.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

1. Notes the findings of the review of Home to School travel to date.
2. Notes the actions undertaken and proposed in the report to mitigate anticipated pressures.
3. Note that Officers will work to develop any necessary detailed implementation plans for the proposals in this report so, once agreed, they can be implemented during the 2024/25 financial year.

11.3

Reasons for Decision

11.3.1

Implementation of the actions laid out in section 2 will increase independence for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities and make best use of resources, reducing expenditure whilst maintaining flexibility for families.

There will also be sustainability benefits in the form of reduced administrative burden by improving workflow and systems, and a reduction in single passenger taxi journeys within the city.

11.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

11.4.1

Do Nothing.

Doing nothing is not a viable option as the current arrangements do not meet the needs of all young people in terms of their transition to adulthood and supporting them to develop their independence and gain a key life skill. In addition, the predicted levels of increased demand for travel support and accompanied costs cannot be met within Council budgets and will pose a key challenge to the long-term financial health of the Council.

10.1

The Head of Commissioning introduced the report containing proposals that will ensure that the Local Authority meets its statutory duties under the Education Act 1996 to provide sufficient mainstream and SEND education places, promote parental choice, diversity, and fair access.  Ensuring that there are sufficient mainstream and SEND education places for every child and eligible young person is a fundamental responsibility of local government and is essential to the Local Authority’s focus on enabling children and young people to have a great start in life, achieve their full potential, and contribute to the success of the city.

10.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

For Primary

1. Monitor the impact of falling rolls in mainstream settings and provide the sector with latest forecast data.
2. Support mainstream schools with sustainability challenges and undertake actions as required, including reduction in published admission numbers where needed.

For Secondary

3.     Utilise allocation forecasts which are uplifted by 3% to provide a contingency of additional places in the mainstream secondary system, to allow for in-year movement, in-year admissions and to help mitigate demand from variable factors.

4.     Continue to work with the secondary sector to develop solutions to help address the citywide mainstream deficits. This includes consideration of options to expand or develop new additional provision to support sufficiency.

For Post-16

5.     Continue to work with the post-16 sector and the Department for Education to better understand the sufficiency position across the city and identify gaps and solutions to address.

For SEND

6.     Continue to work with the education sector, health, care and wider partners to develop solutions to help address continued rising demand for SEND education places, with a focus on:

a.     Further increasing and developing provision in mainstream settings.

b.     Targeted growth within the specialist sector. Page 62 Page 5 of 27

c.     Long-term strategic developments to provide high quality provision for future generations.

10.3

Reasons for Decision

10.3.1

This report is to update the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee on our sufficiency plans. Members are requested to note the contents of the report. When committee decisions are required, we will return to the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee.

10.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

10.4.1

Alternative Option 1: Do nothing.

“Do nothing” would mean the Local Authority does not intervene in the education sector. This option has been rejected due to the risk of the Local Authority breaching its statutory duty to ensure sufficient education places for children and young people within Sheffield.

10.4.2

No other alternative options have been considered that are not outlined in the report. This is because we are in the process of exploring all options to ensure sufficient education places in Sheffield and mitigate the risks associated with surplus and deficit places forecast.

8.1

The Director of Finance and Commercial Services submitted a report bringing the committee up to date with the Council’s revenue outturn position for 2024/25.

8.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

1. Note the updated information on the 2024/25 Revenue Budget Outturn as described in this report including the detailed committee budget monitoring information and management actions provided.

8.3

Reasons for Decision

8.3.1

To record formally changes to the Revenue Budget.

8.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

8.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balance budget and to ensure that in year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

9.1

The Strategic Director of Children’s Services introduced the report which provided an update on the performance and governance of Children’s services, including progress in meeting DCS (Director of Children’s Services) accountabilities and delivering on the statutory requirements. It also provided an update regarding progress in relation to the Council’s Delivery Plan, key strategic events and issues on the horizon. Additionally, the report sets out the forward plan for Education, Children and Families Committee agreed by Strategy and Resources Committee on 30th May 2024.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

1. Note the Strategic Director of Children’s Services report and agrees key activity for the coming months.
2. Agree Education, Children and Families workplan for the following year and hold regular knowledge briefings related to the work programme.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

The report provided an update with regards to Children’s Services activities for Members.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

Not applicable – no decision or change is being proposed.

5.1

The Head of Commissioning, Children and Families introduced the report which sought approval for the procurement of the sub-regional Appropriate Adult Service which will be procured by Sheffield on behalf of Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Doncaster Youth Justice Services (South Yorkshire Local Authorities). The service will be monitored by the Sheffield City Council Children and Families Commissioning Service on behalf of the sub-region. The service has been delivered by the current Provider since April 2021 and the contract is due to end on 30th November 2024. The current service provider provides the service on behalf of Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Doncaster Youth Justice Services.

5.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

1. Approves the re-procurement of an external provider to deliver an Appropriate Adult Service as part of a joint commission with Rotherham, Barnsley, and Doncaster Youth Justice Services. The total value of the contract (including contributions from the South Yorkshire Local Authorities) is £1,400,000. The estimated total cost to Sheffield City Council over 4 years is £798,000, as set out in this report.

5.3

Reasons for Decision

5.3.1

To support the development of a consistent service delivery and key services across the sub-region that supports the statutory requirements of the youth justice teams. By the four regional youth justices services joining together in a single contract (as joint contracting parties each being solely responsible for their respective service areas) for the appropriate adult service we are ensuring best value for money and cost effectiveness, and will be better able to achieve a higher standard of service throughout the region which is consistent with each YJS regions delivery plan as well as the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Plan. There is a statutory requirement set out within the national standards for the delivery of youth justice services which are subject to an inspection and audit regime for the provision of an Appropriate Adult Service, and these are as set out within the contract.

5.3.2

To note the contents of this report and approve the strategy for Integrated Commissioning to commission the Appropriate Adult Service to the sub[1]regions Youth Justice Services.

5.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

5.4.1

Do nothing is not an option, the provision of this Service is a statutory duty for SCC.

5.4.2

Deliver the service in-house – we currently do not have the expertise or capacity to deliver the service in-house Due to time constraints for recruitment plus the additional complexities of providing the service for multiple local authorities, SCC does not have sufficient capacity to provide a single service and it is not economically viable to recruit additional resource in order to do so. The procurement of an external provider using combined resource across the region from all South Yorkshire councils benefits from the economies of scale.

5.4.3

Procure an external provider for SCC only – this will not allow for joined up working across local authorities who have the same requirements from the service. It will also restrict the ability to benefit from economies of scale that come from multi-local authority commissioning.

5.4.4

Procure an external provider for South Yorkshire Local Authorities - this joined up approach would maximise the interest and competition from the market thereby generating better value for money and efficiencies

8.1

The Senior Capital and Construction Category Manager introduced the report which provided details of proposed changes to the existing Capital Programme as brought forward in Month 03 2024/25.

8.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Finance and Performance Policy Committee:-

1. That the committee approve the proposed additions and variations to the Capital Programme listed in Appendix 1.
2. That the committee approve the proposed variation to the Capital Programme identified in Appendix 2 subject to a successful outcome of the external funding bid.
3. That the committee approve the acceptance of grant funding as identified in Appendix 2

8.3

Reasons for Decision

8.3.1

The proposed changes to the Capital programme will improve the services to the people of Sheffield.

8.3.2

To formally record changes to the Capital Programme and gain Member approval for changes in line with Financial Regulations and to reset the capital programme in line with latest information.

8.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

8.4.1

A number of alternative courses of action are considered as part of the process undertaken by Officers before decisions are recommended to Members. The recommendations made to Members represent what Officers believe to be the best options available to the Council, in line with Council priorities, given the constraints on funding and the use to which funding is put within the Revenue Budget and the Capital Programme.

9.1

The Director of Finance and Commercial Services introduced the report which brought the Committee up to date with the Council’s outturn position for 2024/25 including General Fund revenue position, Housing Revenue Account, and Capital Programme Monitoring (Appendix 2 of the report). The report also provided an update of the Council’s Treasury Management activity (Appendix 3 of the report) and the Collection Fund Account (Appendix 4 of the report).

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Finance and Performance Policy Committee:-

1. Note the updated information and management actions on the 2024/25 Revenue Budget Outturn as described in this report.
2. Note the detailed committee budget monitoring information and management actions provided in Appendix 1.
3. Note the updated information and management actions provided by this report on the Q1 2024/25 Capital Programme monitoring as described in Appendix 2.
4. Note the Treasury Management report for Q1 2024/25 as described in Appendix 3.
5. Note the Collection Fund monitoring position for Q1 2024/25 as described in Appendix 4.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

To record formally changes to the Revenue Budget.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balance budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

13.1

The Executive Director City Futures submitted a report stating that, in February 2024, Strategy & Resources Policy Committee considered an International Update Report covering the Council’s known international relationships and making recommendations in respect of them.  As part of this consideration, the Committee agreed that the City Council enter into a Friendship Agreement with the City of Nablus, situated on the West Bank in Palestine.

This report outlines subsequent steps taken to implement the decision and seeks approval of draft wording for the proposed Friendship Agreement between the two cities.

13.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-

(a) approves the draft wording for a Friendship Agreement with Nablus, attached to this report as an Appendix and agrees that a signing ceremony (either virtual or in-person) be arranged; and

(b) notes the further steps to develop the relationship between the cities of Sheffield and Nablus, as described in the report.

13.3

Reasons for Decision

13.3.1

Alternative Option 1:

Do not enter into a Friendship Agreement with Nablus

The alternative option would be not to proceed to enter into a Friendship Agreement with Nablus.  Given the existing links with Nablus established through Sheffield community groups and the frequent public representations encouraging the Council to proceed to link with Nablus, it is felt that this would not be desirable.

13.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

13.4.1

Entering into a Friendship Agreement with Nablus provides the mechanism to find out more about Nablus and to identify any synergies and potential areas of collaboration between our two cities.

Following an initial 12-month period, the Friendship Agreement would be subject to review.  If either party felt that there was no merit in continuing the relationship, then there would be scope to step away.

Sheffield City Council is supportive of the community links that have been established between groups in Sheffield and Nablus.  Agreeing to enter into a Friendship Agreement between the two cities, presents the opportunity to raise awareness of these activities within the public domain.

10.1

The Director of Finance & Commercial Services submitted a report bringing the Committee up to date with the Council’s revenue outturn position for 2024/25.

10.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee notes the updated information on the 2024/25 Revenue Budget Outturn as described in this report including the detailed committee budget monitoring information and management actions provided.

10.3

Reasons for Decision

10.3.1

To record formally changes to the Revenue Budget.

10.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

10.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balance budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

12.1

The Director of Policy and Democratic Engagement presented a report providing an update on progress towards the recommendations made by the Lowcock report into the street trees dispute, and the additional commitments made in the Council’s response. 

The report sets out the good progress that has been made against the substantial majority of the recommendations that were due to be completed by this point.  It also explains the reasons that a small number of recommendations have not been completed within the original timescales and describes how these are intended to be progressed and resolved. 

Finally, it sets out progress against the wider and longer-term recommendations which are not yet due to complete and proposes that these be monitored via the relevant programmes of work that these relate to, including, particularly the Future Sheffield programme.

12.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-

(a)  notes the progress made since the last update to the committee in December 2023 towards the actions agreed in the June 2023 ‘Learning from the past and moving ahead: response to the Sheffield Street Tree Inquiry’ report;

(b) notes the ongoing work to complete the remaining apologies to those who are owed them, and notes the renewed progress on the work to design and install a commemorative plaque in the Town Hall;

(c) notes the underpinning reports that sets out in more detail the key activity relating to governance, information management, organisational culture and transformation, and to agree that the remaining actions in these areas should be progressed through the relevant service areas and/or programmes as set out in section 4 of this report, with contingent decisions being made and monitored by the relevant committee; and

(d) agrees that whilst good progress has been made, the most critical lessons of the street tree dispute are the importance of listening to the people and communities of Sheffield, to hearing different points of view, to reflecting on mistakes and to being open to feedback at all times, and further agrees to commit to an ongoing dialogue with the people of Sheffield as the organisation continues to improve

12.3

Reasons for Decision

12.3.1

There has been substantial progress towards the recommendations for Sheffield City Council as set out in the Lowcock and subsequently agreed by Strategy and Resources Committee in June 2023.

12.3.2

This progress includes taking forward actions across the themes of reconciliation, Streets Ahead, and the wider council, and means that the actions that were recommended to have been taken by this point are now substantially completed.  As such, it is not proposed that a further report is brought to the committee, but that the remaining actions are taken forward within other workstreams (including, particularly, the Future Sheffield programme which will drive the wider transformation of the organisation).

12.3.3

Although the immediate actions recommended by Sir Mark in his report have now been completed, it will take concerted ongoing effort to fully respond to the findings of the report and to reset the council’s relationship with communities and to regain trust with those who were let down by the council’s approach during the street trees dispute. 

12.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

12.4.1

Alternative Option: Not to provide an update report

It would have been possible not to provide a further update report to Strategy and Resources Policy Committee on this matter.  This was dismissed because of the direct request of the committee for a further report on progress at this point, and because of the degree of public interest in the street tree dispute and the Lowcock Inquiry, and the Council’s ongoing commitment to learn lessons and take action in response to the recommendations.

9.1

The Executive Director City Futures submitted a report seeking approval for an improved approach to regeneration in Gleadless Valley that better works alongside the community, investors and partner organisations to see the ambitions in the Gleadless Valley Masterplan come to fruition. The proposal is to develop a One Council and partnership working approach to the delivery of the Gleadless Valley Regeneration Programme in order to unlock and accelerate delivery of housing and green space improvements and deliver sustainable social and economic benefits to the local community. The proposals include an improved approach to regeneration, a new delivery structure to drive social and economic regeneration and new governance arrangements to facilitate partnership working.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-

(a)    notes that due to rapid build cost inflation, the existing Gleadless Valley Masterplan proposals previously approved in 2022 are no longer deliverable within the allocated Council budget and that delivery of the housing and green space improvements has stalled;

(b)    approves the development of an improved approach to regeneration in Gleadless Valley involving working across the council, with voluntary and community groups and with delivery and investment partners to bring additional expertise, capacity and funding into the programme;

(c)     agrees that the current approved Gleadless Valley Masterplan proposals should be reviewed and updated to reflect the new approach to regeneration. The review should also consider the potential for physical improvements to housing and open spaces to be complemented by social and economic interventions to address the high levels of deprivation in the area and build thriving communities. Once the review is complete the draft revised proposals to be brought back to the appropriate Council Policy Committee for consideration and approval;

(d)    agrees that a Delivery Plan for the updated Gleadless Valley regeneration proposals should be developed over the coming year in partnership with the local community and potential delivery partners and investors. The Delivery Plan, once drafted, to be brought to the appropriate Council Policy Committee for consideration and approval, at which point the full financial implications and risks will be considered;

(e)    agrees to the establishment of a new Gleadless Valley Regeneration Board, bringing together residents, local community organisations, delivery partners and Council representative with the purpose of advising on the overall strategy for Gleadless Valley and aligning stakeholders to deliver the vision;

(f)      agrees that residents living in blocks that are identified in the existing masterplan for demolition or remodelling should be informed that the plans for their blocks are being reviewed and may change; and

(g)    approves the transfer of £662,300 from the Gleadless Valley Housing Revenue Account Capital Allocation into a Gleadless Valley Housing Revenue Account revenue budget to cover additional expenditure in the current financial year to implement the new approach to regeneration and develop the Delivery Plan.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

The Council embarked on the masterplan work in 2017 and spent four years developing the masterplan proposals in partnership with the local community. Rising construction costs have made it unaffordable for all of the proposed works to be funded by the council’s capital programme.

9.3.2

Scaling back the masterplan to meet the council’s budget would fail to deliver meaningful change for Gleadless Valley residents. Instead, the proposed approach will explore opportunities to use council spending to seed fund and de-risk the Valley for external investment from the likes of: Housing Associations, Institutional investors, the Combined Authority, Homes England and third sector organisations.

9.3.3

This new approach would also allow Gleadless Valley to better contribute to the ambitions that the council and partners have for the future of Sheffield as set out in the City Goals and Council Plan, for example inclusive housing growth, net zero and great local centres and facilities.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

Alternative Option 1: Allocating additional HRA capital funding to the project in order to deliver the masterplan proposals in full

This option is rejected as unaffordable within the HRA business plan. Sticking precisely to the existing masterplan would also fail to deliver significantly against the council’s net zero commitments, or housing growth targets (a net increase of only 115 homes based on current plans) and would not address resident priorities for improved shops and services.

9.4.2

Alternative Option 2: Allocating additional HRA capital funding to the project in order to deliver the refurbishment, remodelling and green space improvements while delivering the redevelopment aspects of the masterplan through disposals to housing associations

This option would still require a very significant uplift in the capital allocation to the project (from £40m to c£100m excluding any works to the shopping centres) which is considered unaffordable within the HRA business plan.

9.4.3

Alternative Option 3: Reducing the scope of the proposed works to meet the available HRA capital budget.

This would allow delivery of (for example) around half of the refurbishment proposals in the masterplan plus some public space improvements. It would be a fast and relatively low risk delivery option but would deliver very limited improvements, lead to significant reputational damage and fail to deliver meaningful change for Gleadless Valley residents.

11.1

The Strategic Director of Public Health and Integrated Commissioning presented a report seeking authorisation to spend the Local Stop Smoking Services and Tobacco Control Interventions Support Grant, which is being made available to the Council by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) totalling £650,694 from April 2024 for the delivery of stop smoking services and tobacco control interventions in Sheffield and across South Yorkshire. An officer decision was taken on 25th March 2024 to permit the Council to become the accountable body for this grant.

This proposal will contribute to the achievement of the vision of the 2022-2027 Tobacco Control Strategy in Sheffield which aims for people to live longer and healthier lives, smokefree. The vision is also that Sheffield children grow up in a city where smoking is unusual; and that Sheffield is a smokefree city in which to live, work and play. Our ambition to make smoking obsolete by 2030 or to get to 5% prevalence in adults across all social groups. This strategy was signed off at Council Cabinet in April 2022.

11.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-

(a)  approves the grant of £65,000 to Humber and North Yorkshire Integrated Care Board to contribute to the Yorkshire and Humber Smokefree campaign, as outlined in this report;

(b) notes the Council’s intention in becoming a key partner and funder of the South Yorkshire Tobacco Control Alliance and entering into a partnership agreement. (This decision will be taken via an officer decision report); and

(c) notes the £127,694 being allocated to the incentive scheme in which the Council will commission goods and services, as outlined in this report. (This decision will be taken via an officer decision report).

11.3

Reasons for Decision

11.3.1

By approving the grant of £65,000 to Humber and North Yorkshire Integrated Care Board to contribute to the Yorkshire and Humber Smokefree campaign on behalf of the South Yorkshire Tobacco Control Alliance will enable Sheffield to maximise the opportunity to support smokers further in increasing quit attempts and quit outcomes and ultimately reducing smoking prevalence and associated harm and health inequalities amongst our most vulnerable groups.

11.3.2

Furthermore, by the Committee noting the Council’s intention in becoming a key partner and funder of the South Yorkshire Tobacco Control Alliance and entering into a partnership agreement, as well as noting the intention to deliver an incentive scheme ensures the committee have a full overview of the spend of the Local Stop Smoking Services and Tobacco Control Interventions Support Grant re: 2024/25 and future years. These plans will accelerate declines in smoking in Sheffield and South Yorkshire.

11.3.3

This proposal will contribute to the achievement of the vision of the 2022-2027 Tobacco Control Strategy where people to live longer and healthier lives, smokefree. Children will grow up in a city where smoking is unusual; and that Sheffield is a smokefree city in which to live, work and play. Our ambition to make smoking obsolete by 2030 or to get to 5% prevalence in adults across all social groups.

11.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

11.4.1

Alternative Option 1:

All additional funding to be allocated to the community stop smoking service.

This would lead to a contract larger in size than the demand we could hope to treat via services. Some money would be dormant in the contact and not used to best effect. Only 5% of the smoking population attend services – which is why large promotion and engagement is required. Population level interventions are necessary such as mass media campaigns to elicit behaviour change across the whole smoking population. By funding a range of interventions, we maximise the opportunity to meet the needs of a range of smokers, as people are motivated by different factors to quit.

11.4.2

Alternative Option 2:

Smokefree App

Whilst Smokefree App’s have been proven to support smokers in achieving successful quit attempts at a population level with wide reach. Previous use of these in Sheffield has led to low uptake. Also, they do not support those who are digitally excluded and could in some cases such as, where English is not your first language provide further barriers to accessing support. This was not viewed as the best option to maximise quit attempts.