Welcome and Introductions

1. Antonia Roberts welcomed the TWG members. Apologies had been received from David Singer.

Minutes of meeting on 12 December/matters arising

2. The minutes were agreed.

Action points from previous minutes

3. These were covered under subsequent agenda items.

New codes for the SSDA903: temporary placements and legal status (Paper TWG 03/1/2)

4. Annie Sorbie introduced this paper. The proposed changes were based on feedback received from Local Authority representatives at the CLA6 workshops held in January. The LAs had felt there was a need for temporary placement codes so that these placements could be recorded in the new system, but still be excluded from PAF indicator A1. The paper proposed four new optional codes for temporary placements: T1, T2, T3 and T4 for different types of placement.
   
   
5. Two new legal status codes for recording short term breaks, V3 and V4, were also proposed in the paper, to replace the current code V1. This was to differentiate between children whose episodes are recorded separately and those whose are not, so that it is easier to count the number of care days. LAs were happy with this proposal.
   
   
6. TWG members felt that introducing the four codes T1-T4 was adding too much complexity to the system, and suggested having a single code, T0, for all temporary placements. It was decided to give LAs the option of using either T0 or T1-T4 for 2003/04. All of these codes would be excluded from PAF A1.
   
   
7. LA members asked for the definition of code T3 to be clarified. Annie Sorbie explained that although the foster carer could have more than two holidays in the year, only two could be recorded as code T3. Tish Gailey felt that as two breaks of 21 days each could be recorded, it would also be reasonable to record 42 days worth of shorter breaks. In some cases it would be better practice to offer a carer several short respite breaks than two longer breaks.
   
   
8. There was further discussion about the subtleties that affect PAF indicator A1. There are some situations that count as a change of placement but which may not mean there is instability in the child’s care, for example changing schools, foster placements becoming an adoptive placement, and a foster carer moving to a different area. Having several temporary placements with the same carer is probably more stable than having a different carer each time. LA members felt that these were policy rather than statistical issues.
   
   
9. Antonia Roberts said that these issues would be picked up in the Children’s PI work. However some of them had been looked at in detail before by the PAF group, and it had been decided not to take them into account. LA members agreed that any change could have implications for other definitions so the whole area would need to be looked at carefully.

Action: DH to raise issues surrounding placement stability in the Children’s PI group.

10. There was some discussion about how data are recorded for the PSS EX1. LA members felt that the definitions needed to be reviewed. Linda Moore suggested that a small group should be set up to review the EX1. Terry Davies suggested that there should be a list of all complaints and issues about data collections so that it is easy to see what is outstanding and what the priorities are. It was agreed this was a good idea. The list could be referred to at TWG meetings. Antonia Roberts suggested that the potential for LAs to add issues to the list using the DH website should be explored. It would be important to distinguish between issues relating to PIs and those relating to the base data collections. The list would be started by asking Keith Childs for a list of outstanding issues on PAF indicators.

Action: DH to produce a list of outstanding issues relating to data collections.

11. The issue of indicators being presented in quartiles was discussed. Worth Houghton explained that the Audit Commission provides quartiles for BV indicators because people ask for them. However some LA members thought that quartiles were not relevant for all indicators and could sometimes be misleading.

Update on sub-groups (Paper TWG 03/1/3)
(a) Adult and Older People Social Services Statistics Review

12. Kate Anderson introduced this paper. The RAP review group had been renamed the Adults and Older People Social Services Statistics Review Group. The aims of the group are to review all statistics on services for adults and the elderly, including looking at all related returns and at LA management information requirements. The draft terms of reference for the group had been discussed at the last RAP review group meeting. Policy input was important to ensure the policy requirements for the data were clear.
    
    
13. A work programme for the group had been proposed. Issues about intensity of care packages and collection of data on equipment were discussed, and some more work will be done on these before the next meeting in June. Proposed changes to data collections will be brought to TWG at the appropriate time.
    
    
14. Terry Davies said that the broader terms of reference were a welcome development as it was important to look at the whole configuration of services. Supporting older people at home was a priority. Kate Anderson said that ministers were interested in looking at home care, but also at all other community based services. Terry Davies said that the HH1 return in particular should be looked at, as it affects several indicators. Issues relating to day care, partnership working and finance should also be thought about.
    
    
15. Kate Anderson said that for 2002/03 the RAP forms and guidance had been issued, and for 2003/04 the forms had been issued and the guidance would be issued shortly.

(b) Disability

16. Kate Anderson introduced this paper. A Disability Review group had been set up because there is limited information available on different groups of people with disabilities. The group will look at what the minimum data requirements are in this area, what information is available and how suitable it is, taking into account the fact that there is a 6-month time lag before new collections can be introduced. The group will be chaired by SD and will include policy colleagues representing the range of disability groups. It will later be extended to include representatives from LAs, other areas of the Department and disability groups.
    
    
17. Terry Davies said that when collecting data on people with disabilities it was important to consider the transition from child to adult. Children up to the age of 18 have a much wider range of services available to them than adults do. It could be interesting to collect national information on this. Tish Gailey said that disabilities were sometimes defined and categorised in different ways for adults and children, and that more coherence was needed.
    
    
18. Linda Moore said that people with disabilities are an increasing and expensive group. She also mentioned that some LAs are already monitoring long-term care needs for the ‘Better Care, Higher Standards’ charter. Kate Anderson agreed to look into it.

Action: Kate Anderson to look at how the ‘Better Care, Higher Standards’ charter is relevant to the Disability group.

User/Carer surveys (Paper TWG 03/1/4)

19. Nalyni Suntheralingam introduced this paper. It had not been possible to bring this issue forward any sooner because of a lack of resources. The proposal was to set up a working group and to focus initially on 2003/04. Terry Davies said that the working group could not be a subgroup of both the new Performance group and the TWG, and that he would prefer it to be part of the Performance group.
    
    
20. Terry Davies was keen to see a restricted number of compulsory questions at a national level, so that LAs could have control over other questions and issues that affected them locally. He said that the banding methodology also needed to be considered. Data coming from the survey should be made available to Local Authorities, at least from the compulsory questions. Linda Moore thought that there might be interesting information about ethnicity and client groups, which LAs might want to compare with local information. Nalyni Suntheralingam said that results of previous surveys had been put on the website. LA members had not been aware of that. It was felt that paper copies were not necessary as long as a clear web reference was given, otherwise it was hard to find things on the web. Terry Davies felt that SSRG should be informed of developments, and suggested going through David Allen.
    
    
21. Nalyni Suntheralingam would consider approaching PSSRU for volunteers as they had two representatives from LAs. As the group would have to start meeting soon, early volunteers would be needed. However more people could join the group later. Linda Moore said that Tim Quelch from Surrey had asked her to put his name forward, and Tish Gailey volunteered to be on this group instead of RAPS.

Action: LAs to suggest LA representatives for the User/Carer working group.

PAF update (Paper TWG 03/1/8)

22. Peter Steele introduced this paper, which included an update on the new performance group. The first meeting has been arranged for later in March. The group will meet regularly to discuss high-level issues such as star-rating methodology, the 50 PAF indicators and bandings for them, and freedoms. Technical discussions will continue to happen elsewhere. There will also be subgroups as there will be too much work for just one group to do. These will have input from policy leads, SSI and SD. Local Authorities, SSRG and SSI had already been contacted asking for people to be involved in the groups. Peter Steele said he would be writing to policy leads soon, although some are already actively involved. All the volunteers will be contacted during the first half of April. The subgroups will report to the main performance group. Peter Steele will make sure the groups are aware of areas where there is overlap between the groups.
    
    
23. Tish Gailey was concerned that policy colleagues would be involved in discussing statistical issues about data collections, which are not their specialist area. Terry Davies said it was important to have a clear relationship between the different groups. It was also necessary to have rules for how decisions are made about returns. The position statement and Quality Protects PIs had not been constrained enough by rules and the definitions were not always thought through. Peter Steele said that the remit of the performance group would include rules for what goes in the position statement, and that the subgroups would not only be for PIs but for the wider evidence base. Tish Gailey said that issues such as bandings were not always well explained and that it would be useful for the new groups to discuss definitions of numerators and denominators.

Definition of delayed transfers of care indicator

24. Nalyni Suntheralingam introduced this paper. There were some issues about the form of the indicator and an agreed definition was needed as soon as possible, certainly before the first cut of data provided to LAs/SSI in August. Linda Moore asked about the quality of the data. Nalyni Suntheralingam said it was improving and that some of the issues had been resolved. Terry Davies said that it made sense to use SITREPS data.
    
    
25. It was proposed that a small working group should be set up to discuss the definition of the indicator. The first meeting would probably be in mid-April. Nalyni Suntheralingam asked for volunteers for the group. It would be useful to have ‘technical’ people who could choose the best definition. The indicator is different to others because it consists of several local targets rather than one national target.
    
    
26. The extent to which LAs miss their locally agreed targets could be a KPI. This will be discussed at the first performance group meeting.

Action: LAs to propose volunteers for working group on delayed transfers of care indicator.

Implementing the revisions to population estimates (Paper TWG 03/1/5)

27. Nalyni Suntheralingam introduced this paper, which explained how and when the revised population estimates would be used for PAF indicators and other data sets. LA members said they were happy with the plans. Terry Davies asked whether the likely impact on current bandings had been looked at. This had not been done yet.

Compliance costs (Paper TWG 03/1/6)

28. Patrick Tucker introduced this paper. He asked TWG members to confirm that they were happy for the form to go to a small group of about six LAs, and asked for more volunteers. Terry Davies and David Singer had already volunteered. Terry Davies suggested it could be mentioned at the IMG meeting on Friday. Nalyni Suntheralingam said that the different types of LA needed on the group should be identified.
    
    
29. Tish Gailey said that one of the biggest compliance costs was changing an information system, and the cost varied depending on whether the LA used an external IT supplier or an in-house IT Department. It was also difficult to estimate any compliance costs because they could vary a lot over time, and there were one-off costs as well as ongoing ones. Patrick Tucker said that these were the sort of issues that the LAs testing the form would look at. Antonia Roberts said that the time and cost spent on the form must be kept proportional to the benefits.
30. Worth Houghton said that the form should say exactly what is required, rather than just ‘Compliance cost’, in case the person filling it in did not have all the notes with them. He also asked what calculations would be done using the time and expenditure figures. Linda Moore said that many activities involved several people of different grades working on them, which could make it difficult to fill in the form. LAs were also concerned about how to interpret the terms Senior manager, Middle manager and Junior manager. Ann Custance suggested that they could be defined in terms of paybands, which LA members agreed would be possible. Tish Gailey said that it might be easier to give a total cost rather than listing individual members of staff. John Eyre and Tish Gailey volunteered to pilot the form.

Update on deaths in care (Paper TWG 03/1/7)

31. Anne Foulger introduced this paper. DH will not be asking LAs for information on the cause of death of looked after children. Instead DH will send some data from the SSDA903 to the Office for National Statistics, who will match the records with their mortality database and return the cause of death. Terry Davies asked how the matching would work when a child died in a different LA to the one they were looked after by. Anne Foulger said that although sometimes knowing the child’s LA might help with the matching, ONS were aware that the LA would not always correspond to the place of death. The main fields used in the matching would be date of birth, date of death and gender. The matching had not been tested yet but hopefully there would not be a problem as the number of children who die in the population is very small.
    
    
32. Terry Davies asked whether there was an easier way of obtaining the data, for example LAs could tell ONS when a looked after child dies so that the records could be matched automatically. However ONS get their information when the deaths are registered rather than from LAs. Terry Davies also suggested that LAs could tell DH the cause of death for each child directly. Annie Sorbie explained that it would be easier to use ONS data, which are suitably coded and already in the public domain, than to ask social workers for the information.
    
    
33. Tish Gailey suggested that for the second stage of the pilot the LAs could tell ONS a list of names rather than ONS asking LAs if they have got the correct names, so that ONS would not have to disclose any additional information. Anne Foulger explained that the Data Protection Act only applies to people who are alive so even if ONS told the LA about another child who had died it would not be a data protection issue.
    
    
34. Terry Davies asked why the data were needed. Anne Foulger said that policy colleagues were interested to know why looked after children died. They were sometimes asked questions by people who assumed that looked after children died as a result of abuse, but it is expected that a large proportion of the deaths are because of a long-term illness or disability. Tish Gailey mentioned that some of the high profile cases of children dying from abuse, for example Victoria Climbié, were not looked after children.
    
    
35. Linda Moore asked whether ONS would provide data on whether an inquest had been held. Anne Foulger said that they would. Tish Gailey volunteered to take part in the pilot.

Social Care Information Policy Unit (SC-IPU) Workplan: Current developments (Paper TWG 03/1/9)

36. This paper was for information. TWG members did not have any comments on it.

Work programme and TWG conference

37. Antonia Roberts asked what LAs members wanted from the conference. Terry Davies felt that the conference in its original form was not needed, as there was now much better communication between LAs and DH, and several opportunities to work together in small groups. John Eyre suggested that the first half of the day could be used for an LA review. DH members would join the LA members at lunchtime. In the afternoon LAs could provide DH with feedback from the review meeting. It was also agreed there could be discussion of the workplan and the responsibilities of the new subgroups, and how they relate to each other. Although communication had improved DH would still wish to explore ways of engaging all LAs with the TWG agenda and information issues.

Future Meetings
15 May 2003 – Conference
11 September 2003
11 December 2003

Anne Foulger
March 2003

Present:

SUMMARY OF ACTION POINTS

Back to TWGPSS homepage

Top

copyright: ©|