Member

Subject

Reason

Interest

Councillor Dann

Plymouth Education System (minute 38)

Chair of Governors of Plympton Academy

Private

Councillor Mrs Aspinall

Plymouth Education System

(minute 38)

Member of Multi Academy Trust

Private

Councillor McDonald

Plymouth Education System

(minute 38)

Member of Corporation of City College Plymouth

Private

(a)

the legal advice provided on the potential formation of a partnership delivery vehicle for this activity;

(b)

the governance implications of forming such a partnership, particularly relating to the future of the Plymouth Education Board;

(c)

concerns regarding the under-performance of children in the City at all key stages compared to the national average, the causes of such failings and whether such a partnership would address these complex issues;

(d)

the provision of exam results in quartiles to identify Plymouth’s position both nationally and within its family group;

(e)

further information relating to the range of spending per pupil both nationally and Plymouth;

(f)

the reasons why school nurses had not been included within this partnership;

(g)

the role of the Regional Schools Commissioner in relation to providing additional funding to improve the attainment results;

(h)

whether the department had a risk register, and if so, how it was managed;

(i)

whether action plans had been developed to mitigate the £1.4m budget deficit;

(j)

whether the number of Councillors permitted to sit on governing bodies should be increased (current legislation prevented this was occurring);

(k)

the role of scrutiny to help drive through the changes required to ensure that the low level of attainment was addressed and how the partnership would fit into the wider picture for the Council in the creation of further work places;

(l)

whether the formation of this partnership would have any implications on the Torbay partnership and whether the Council was obliged to talk to Ofsted regarding the formation of this partnership delivery vehicle;

(m)

whether a delivery plan had been developed for the proposed partnership; and

(n)

should this proposal not be viable, whether there were any other options that could be explored.

(1)

to scrutinise the full business case for the partnership which should include an assessment of interdependencies of both partner agencies and other local authority services, in relation to children and due consideration of legal advice; whilst exploring the potential for it to become a broader funded and evaluated project with regional and national agencies;

(2)

that the business case should include a full assessment of risks;

(3)

that a further scrutiny session is held, in the context of the planned partnership, to review the steps being taken to improve attainment levels of pupils, particularly for Key Stages 3 and 4 engaging with the Plymouth Education Board.

(a)

clarification of which aspect of the delayed transfers of care the CQC Local System Review would be looking at;

(b)

concerns regarding the ongoing challenges of delayed transfers of care, despite intervention measures being put in place;

(c)

whether it could be evidenced that the integration of staff had helped to address the issue of delayed transfers of care;

(d)

the sustainability of investment within social care with decreasing funding;

(e)

concerns that the Council would be penalised, as a result of the CQC Local System review, if issues identified following the review had not been addressed within a specific timeframe;

(f)

whether the outcome of the CQC Local System review would support the local authority in identifying the funding issues within the system;

(g)

whether the Health and Wellbeing Hubs would be part of this integration;

(h)

whether the Council, as the planning authority, had a responsibility to encourage developers to build age appropriate dwellings;

(i)

what measures the Council could put in place to future proof workforce development across the health care service;

(j)

concerns relating to the provision of age appropriate equipment in dwellings and the length of time these adaptions were taking to install;

(k)

whether the rise in emergency admissions of over 65’s could be attributed to issues within GP primary care;

(l)

the availability of adaptation equipment (seven days a week), to enable people to be discharged over a weekend period; and

(m)

whether the reablement/rehabilitation of older people (aged 65 and over) was working well.

(1)

that as a result of the CQC Local System Review Report, the improvement plan is included on the work programme in order to review the progress on implementation;

(2)

to include its work programme, at an appropriate point, the Better Care Plan, in order to assess issues of sustainability in the context of decreasing funding;

(3)

to review age appropriate dwellings, particularly for over 65’s, to help people transfer from hospital to a safe environment appropriate to their needs.

(1)

Health and Wellbeing Hubs;

(2)

Dementia Friendly City (impact and evaluation);

(3)

End of Life Care (Select Committee Review);

(4)

Community Safety Partnership;

(5)

Care Quality Commission Local System Review (review outcomes and improvement plan);

(6)

Primary Care Services (already included on the work programme);

(7)

Age Appropriate Dwellings;

(8)

Better Care Plan;

(9)

Plymouth Education System –

?

business case (including the risks);

?

review steps being taken to improve attainment levels of pupils, particularly for Key Stages 3 and 4 engaging with the Plymouth Education Board).