Performance Indicator Frequently asked Questions (Printer-Friendly)
CFH/006 Payment of Invoices
Q: Does 'other payment instrument' include payment by purchase card. There are no specific exclusions mentioned in the definition as set out for 07/08.
A: Other payment instruments can include purchase cards.
CHR/001 Employee Turnover
Q: Can you please provide further clarification on the term 'school based staff'. A clerk working in a school would obviously be excluded from the calculation for this indicator but what about an Education Welfare Officer (EWO) who's time is split between being based at a school, visiting families and also some office based time away from the school. Do we exclude them wholly or try and exclude the proportion of their time spent in the school?
A: EWOs are employed by the LEAs and not the schools, and would therefore be counted as within the scope of this definition. The term school-based staff refers more to the fact that they are specifically employed by that school to perform a function at that school. EWOs may spend time at a school but are essentially employed by the LEA and so should be included in this indicator.
Q: Can you please provide further clarification on the term 'school based staff'. A clerk working in a school would obviously be excluded from the calculation for this indicator but what about an Education Welfare Officer (EWO) who's time is split between being based at a school, visiting families and also some office based time away from the school. Do we exclude them wholly or try and exclude the proportion of their time spent in the school?
A: EWOs are employed by the LEAs and not the schools, and would therefore be counted as within the scope of this definition. The term school-based staff refers more to the fact that they are specifically employed by that school to perform a function at that school. EWOs may spend time at a school but are essentially employed by the LEA and so should be included in this indicator.
Q: Should supply teachers who work regular hours be treated as a casual?
A: Supply teachers who work regular hours should be treated as ‘casual’ unless they have been offered any kind of contract of service.
Q: Do staff lost as a result of housing stock transfer count as leavers for the purposes of this PI?
A: Local Authorities should exclude staff who transfer from an LA to a new housing association as a result of housing stock transfer. This only relates to those staff directly transferred to the new organisation. Anyone who has retired or leaves the employment of the authority because of the stock transfer should be counted as leaving in the normal way, as should anyone who left the authority to take up a new job at the new organisation rather than transferring. Also anyone seconded to the new organisation should not be counted as a leaver. It is important that those transferring are excluded consistently from both the numerator and the denominator of this indicator.
CHR/002 Sickness Absence
Q: What are the differences between NAWPI 1.10 and CHR/002?
A: The differences between NAWPI 1.10 and CHR/002 are as follows:
NAWPI 1.10 calculated the denominator as the average number of FTE employees at 1 April year 1 and 1 April year 2, whereas CHR/002 calculates the denominator as the average number of FTE employees based on figures at 31 March year 1 and 31 March year 2.
NAWPI 1.10 excluded temporary employees, whereas they are included in CHR/002.
Q: Does CHR/002 include bank holidays and extra statutory leave?
A: The PI guidance states that "‘Working days/shifts’ means days/shifts scheduled for work after holidays/leave days have been excluded." Bank holidays and extra statutory leave, such as an extra day's leave for all council employees at Christmas or Whitsun should be excluded as they fall into the holidays/leave category.
Q: The definition for CHR/002 states that casual employees should be excluded for both the numerator and denominator. With this in mind should we therefore exclude hours worked above a person’s contract i.e. overtime?
A: Only use the contracted hours.
Q: Can you confirm the following statement regarding CHR/002: "For employees who work part-time, the authority should calculate the FTE equivalent for both the numerator and denominator on a consistent basis." Does this mean that a person working 18.5 hours for example would be a 0.5 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) and therefore if they had 10 days sick it would only be counted as 5 days for FTE reporting? Would the calc be 10 / 0.5 or 5 / 0.5?
A: For part-time employees you will need to calculate the FTE equivalent for reporting purposes. The calculation you will need to do for the example will be 10 * 0.5 = 5 days sick leave.
Q: Should employees who are on long term sick for over a year and are no longer being paid be included in this indicator?
A: Yes.
EDU/003/004/006
Q: Should 'disapplied' pupils be included?
A: Yes, all pupils other than NEWBIEs should be included regardless of outcome.
EDU/006 Teacher assessments in Welsh (first language)
Q: Should pupils moving from first language Welsh to second language Welsh be included?
A: In short, no.
Q: Should NEWBES i.e. pupils arriving from a Non English/ Welsh Based Education System be included the denominator of this PI?
A: Exclude pupils who have been identified as having arrived from a non-Welsh or non-Welsh based education system. The criteria used to identify “eligible” pupils is that: • the pupil’s first language is not English or Welsh; • the pupil has arrived from a non-English- or non-Welsh-based education system; and • arrived in the UK on or after the start of the previous school year. For example, pupils reaching the end of a key stage in summer 2007 could be eligible for this status if they arrived in the UK on or after 1 September 2005. These pupils should be excluded from both the numerator and denominator
Q: Can you clarify if this indicator means receiving a teacher assessment at every level i.e. levels 1-6 at KS2 and levels 1-8 at KS3?
A: The indicator is measuring the take up of Welsh as a first language by pupils rather than the ‘skill level’ of those taking it up, so, yes it is all levels.
Q: Which pupils should be used to calculate the indicator?
A: Eligible pupils are those that are on roll in a local authority maintained school and in the final year of the relevant key stage. It has nothing to do with attendance on the day of the assessment.
Q: Should refugees from other countries be included in the denominator of this PI?
A: There is no reason for excluding any pupils educated in an authority's schools from this indicator.
EDU/008 Rate of permanent exclusions
Q: Should special schools be included in the figures?
A: No, do not include special schools
Q: Should the figure exclude out of county children? (If it depends on where the legal and financial responsibility lies, does this lie with the authority supplying the education or with the authority in which the child resides?)
A: All education indicators are based on pupils attending schools in the LEA.
Q: If a pupil is registered at a primary/secondary school & a PRU/special school and is excluded from the PRU/special school should this be included in EDU/008?
A: No as the indicators specifically mentions primary and secondary schools so we should only count exclusions from these schools and not include exclusions from PRUs and special schools - irrespective of whether they are dually-registered. It is the excluding organisation which is key.
Q: We have two cases where pupils were excluded by the Head at the end of the 2006 summer term. According to the guidance I believe they should be included in the 2005/06 academic year. However, the notes accompanying the Permanent Exclusion Monitoring Form which we are required to complete & return to the WAG for each term states: "Include only those permanent exclusions which have been upheld by the Governing Body's Pupil Discipline Committee". In the 2 cases mentioned above the decision was not upheld until the start of the Autumn 2006 term so they would be included in the 2006/07 academic year returns to the WAG. Could you please confirm if it is the date the Head teacher excludes or the date it was upheld by the governing body that should be used. I assume that WAG would prefer that the termly returns & PI data would be consistent.
A: It should be the date of the Headteachers decision.
Q: Should excluded pupils registered only at a PRU or special school be included in EDU/008?
A: No as the indicators specifically mentions primary and secondary schools so we should only count exclusions from these schools and not include exclusions from PRUs and special schools - irrespective of whether they are dually-registered. It is the excluding organisation which is key.
Q: Are PRUs to be included in this indicator?
A: In short, no.
EDU/008/009/010
Q: Should EDU/008, EDU/009 and EDU/010 be measured over the academic year, i.e. the data collected for the 2007-08 PIs these will relate to the 2006-07 academic year?
A: Yes.
EDU/009 Timeliness of appropriate education provision
Q: Is part b) asking for the number of days (after the 16th day from exclusion) that no offer of either part time (10hrs or more) or full time education provision was offered?
A: The indicator definition is such that someone who gets no provision should be counted in both the part time and full time indicator until they get some form of provision.
Q: When a pupil is excluded, if that pupil's case goes to appeal to the board of governors, do we count as in NAWPI 2.11 or does the measure commence as stated in the definition from the date of the head teacher's decision?
A: The count should start from the head teachers decision as stated in the guidance.
Q: All our pupils have been offered under the stated hours for full time provision therefore part a) is going to be zero - is this correct as it could give a false impression?
A: If pupils never receive full time tuition, as defined, then the figure for part a) will in fact be huge as the numerator is the number of days that a child is going without this full time tuition.
Q: Regarding the 16th school day do you count 16 days included the day they were excluded or do you count 16 days from the day after they were excluded. Also do you count the number of days without an offer from the 16th day or from the 17th day?
A: Count the day they were excluded as it says in the guidance "A pupil should be considered to be permanently excluded from the date of the head teachers decision". The numerator states that "The sum of the number of school days beyond the 16th school day" therefore it is the 17th day.
Q: Are special schools and PRUs to be included?
A: In short, yes.
Q: If a pupil is excluded and reinstated should they be included in this indicator?
A: Yes, providing the appeal process took longer than 17 days to be determined.
Q: If a child has one offer of 10 hours provision on one date, then offered more on a later date do we go with the first or second offer?
A: After thefirst offer of 10 hours part time provision the number of days the childdid not receive an offer of appropriate education provisionshould no longer be counted in part b). However the number of days the childdid not receive an offer of appropriate education provision should be counted in part a) until they receive an offer of full time appropriate education provision.
Q: Should INSET days and enforced closure days be included in EDU/009?
A: As pupils are not required to attend on these days they should not be counted as school days for this indicator.
Q: The 2008/09 guidance states that the number of days should be counted "from the 17th school day after the headteachers decision to exclude to the date that appropriate education provision is offered or the pupil reaches the end of compulsory education" I am informed that pupils may leave school on the last Friday in June in the school year in which they reach tha age of 16. For 2008/09 (2007/08 academic year) should this date be taken as the end of 'compulsory education' or the end of term? Which date should be used for 2007/08 data (2006/07 academic year)
A: As the guidance states that the number of days should be counted "from the 17th school day after the headteachers decision to exclude to the date that appropriate education provision is offered or the pupil reaches the end of compulsory education" this date should be taken as the end of compulsory education i.e. the last Friday in June. The same principle can be applied to the 2007-08 indicator.
EDU/009b
Q: The authority only provides full-time education placements and not part-time, therefore permanently excluded pupils do not receive offers of part-time education beyond the 16th day. Should the authority put a zero for the numerator or should they leave it blank as it is not applicable?
A: The number of days the permanently excluded child does not receive an offer of appropriate education provision should be counted in both part a) and part b). In this situation part a) and part b) will be the same.
EDU/010 Fixed term exclusions
Q: Should excluded pupils registered only at a PRU or special school be included in EDU/010?
A: No as the indicators specifically mentions primary and secondary schools so we should only count exclusions from these schools and not include exclusions from PRUs and special schools - irrespective of whether they are dually-registered. It is the excluding organisation which is key.
Q: Your guidance details the data source as WAGs termly exclusion data collection form. Please can you advise me who I approach to access this form and when it will be available?
A: The form is completed by the LEA, please contact the WAG to enquire who is your authorities contact for this data within WAG.
Q: Should INSET days and enforced closure days be included in EDU/010?
A: As pupils are not required to attend on these days they should not be counted as school days for this indicator.
Q: If a pupil is registered at a primary/secondary school & a PRU or special school and is excluded from the PRU/special school should this be included in EDU/010?
A: No as the indicators specifically mentions primary and secondary schools so we should only count exclusions from these schools and not include exclusions from PRUs and special schools - irrespective of whether they are dually-registered. It is the excluding organisation which is key.
Q: Should days missed due to permanent exclusion which were subsequently overturned be included as fixed exclusion days?
A: Days missed should not be included as fixed term exclusion days.
Q: Do parts a include nursery children or just full time pupils? The guidance states 'all pupils on roll', but from memory the former Nawpi 2.8 did not include nursery children.
A: Just include pupils in years 1-6.
Q: When a pupil has received a fixed exclusion, which after further investigation the school has decided the offence merited a permanent exclusion, should the fixed exclusion period be included in EDU/010?
A: Fixed exclusions that have resulted in permanent exclusions should not be included in this indicator as the pupil would not have a definite date of return to the same school. The guidance states, 'A fixed-term exclusion means that a definite date of return to the same school has been given.'
Q: We have pupils who were initially given a fixed exclusion with a date to return to the school. During the period the pupil was off the matter was investigated further and on return to the school the pupil(s) were informed that the seriousness of their actions warranted a permanent exclusion. Should the pupils be included in this PI?
A: If the fixed term exclusion period was completed (i.e. the pupil returned to the same school) prior to the pupil being permanently excluded then they should be included as a fixed term exclusion (EDU/010) and then as a permanent exclusion (EDU/008). If the pupil was informed of their permanent exclusion during their fixed exclusion then they should not be included as a fixed term exclusion (EDU/010) and only included as a permanent exclusion (EDU/008). In the example you have provided, the number of fixed exclusion days should be included in EDU/010 as the pupil completed their fixed exclusion prior to being permanently excluded.
EDU/012
Q: How should we report a class which an equal number of Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 pupils?
A: If a class has an equal number of Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 pupils, you should count the class as Key Stage 2.
Q: Please can you also confirm that for EDU/012 we use September 07 class size information for the 2008-09 performance year.
A: The information for EDU/012 for the reporting year 2008-09 will be taken from the September 2007 class size count.
EDU/013 Pupil teacher ratio - primary schools
Q: Please can you clarify whether peripatetic staff should be included in this indicator for qualified teaching staff. We have a number of EAL support teachers who are funded by the MEAG grant and not directly from the school budget, should we also include these?
A: Teachers not funded by the school or LEA (and therefore not via RSG) should not be included.
Q: Please clarify the definition of EDU-013 and EDU-014 when it refers to 'pupils per teacher', is this the number of teachers that the school is funded for or the actual number of teachers in post because the 2 can vary?
A: ‘Pupils per teacher’ refers to the actual number of teachers not the number of teachers the school is funded for. Please see the guidance for a more detailed description of which teachers are excluded.
Q: Please can you clarify which Jan PLASC we should use for the 2007-08 performance year?
A: The January 2007 PLASC figure need to be used as the January 2008 figures will not be released until August 2008 and will still only be provisional, which will be after the submission date for the PI.
Q: Should we include nursery and reception teachers in the denominator? Also, should year 12+ teachers be included in the denominator?
A: EDU/013 should include all teachers, not just years 1 to 6 (as excluding teachers who solely or principally teach in the nursery or reception classes is not recorded in PLASC).
EDU/013/014
Q: Could you let me know how many hours a full time equivalent teacher is assumed to work for the purpose of the above indicators. I am informed that for teachers salaries it is calculated on 27.5 hours. The guidance to assist completion of the PLASC states 32.5hrs should be used.
A: According to the guidance the ‘FTE figure for part-time teachers is the number of hours worked in a school week as a proportion of the total number of hours in a school week’. As the data source for EDU/013 and EDU/014 is the January PLASC therefore use 32.5 as stated in the PLASC guidance.
Q: What children should be included in EDU/013 and EDU/014?
A: The 2007-08 performance indicator guidance states that: The total number of primary school pupils refers to all pupils on roll in local authority maintained primary schools at the time of the annual schools census in January 2007. This includes pupils in nursery classes and reception.The total number of primary school pupils refers to all pupils on roll in local authority maintained primary schools at the time of the annual schools census in January 2007. This includes pupils in nursery classes and reception.
Q: When schools complete the PLASC return they have to indicate the teaching commitment of Headteachers, as follows: 1 - Non Teaching Headteacher 2 - On Average teaches less than half a week 3 - On Average teaches at least half a week but less than a full-week 4 - Teaches Full-time As I have to include all Full Time Equivalent qualified teachers in post I am querying how to calculate the proportion of teaching if a school indicates that the teaching commitment of the Headteacher is "2 or 3" as above.
A: Regardless of their teaching commitment Headteachers should be counted as 1 FTE teacher in the denominator of this PI.
EDU/016 Attendance in schools
Q: Should we include special schools when calculating this PI?
A: If the pupil is registered full-time at a special school then he/she is excluded from this PI. However, if a pupil is dually registered in both a secondary school and a special school then the attendance at the special school is counted as attendance at secondary school when calculating this PI.
Q: What is the reporting year for this indicator?
A: For 2008/09 EDU/016 should be reporting the 2007/08 academic year and include all pupils on roll at the time of the annual schools census (PLASC) at Jan 08.
Fixed term exclusions
Q: Q. When a pupil has received a fixed exclusion, which after further investigation the school has decided the offence merited a permanent exclusion, should the fixed exclusion period be included in EDU/010?
A: A. Fixed exclusions that have resulted in permanent exclusions should not be included in this indicator as the pupil would not have a definite date of return to the same school. The guidance states, 'A fixed-term exclusion means that a definite date of return to the same school has been given.'
THS/011 Condition of Roads
Q: What weighting sets should be used for the 2007-08 data collection?
A: I can confirm the weighting sets that should be used for the 2007-08 PI's are WS223v0202 and WS2240202. This information is documented in technical note UK PMS Technical note 43.
Q: How do I know what the possible survey length of my network is?
A: The possible survey length is the total length of your surveyable network. Those roads that cannot be surveyed or do not provide valid survey data should not be counted towards the possible network length. It is recommended that roads with the following characteristics should not be surveyed: • Less than 3.2 metres wide • Less than 150 metres long (urban) and less that 250 metres long (rural) • Roads not surfaced over full width or where there is a central strip with grass • Back alleys and narrow accesses
Q: For C roads, the guidance says to survey 50% of the network in one direction or 25% in both directions. Some of our roads are only 4 metres in width so by carrying out the survey in both directions we are picking up the same defects twice.
A: You are indeed correct; the guidance states that ‘50% of the (C) network to be surveyed in one direction or 25% in both directions’. In cases where the road width is less than 4 metres, the authority could survey 50% in one direction not 25% in both directions. My understanding is that the authority stipulates to the contractors how they want their network to be surveyed, so you could request that 50% of C roads be surveyed in one direction this year and then 50% in the opposite direction the following year. It’s the responsibility of the highways inspector or similarly experienced person to make these types of decisions, as they would know their network and have the benefit of local knowledge.
WMT/001
Q: Which parts of this indicator should we use to calculate the national recycling/ composting targets?
A: The target is based on a percentage therefore you should add together parts bi) and bii).
WMT/002
Q: Should wood be included in the PI definition? If so, what should be it’s percentage bio-degradability?
A: Wood should be included and it is 100% bio-degrabable
Q: How do I calculate how much of the total tonnage of municipal waste collected is biodegradable?
A: The Landfill Allowance Scheme (Wales) Regulations 2004 stipulates that 61% of municipal waste is biodegradable. So the tonnage of BMW collected is 61% of the total tonnage of waste collected.
HHA/002 Timeliness of discharging full homelessness duty
Q: Could you clarify the definition of "suitable accommodation"? Is this permanent or temporary?
A: Chapter 19 of the NAW’s Code of Guidance for local authorities on Allocation of Accommodation & Homelessness states that suitable accommodation can be defined as accommodation that is suitable in relation to the applicant and all members of his/ her household. When assessing suitability both the medical, physical and social circumstances of the household and affordability should be considered (see chapter 19 for further guidance). To discharge the s193 duty the accommodation must have a degree of permanency.
Q: Are we counting the number of cases?
A: The denominator is the number of duties that have been discharged during the year. The numerator is the number of working days taken to discharge each of these discharged duties.
HHA/008 Homeless presentations
Q: In the numerator do we count the clients that were accepted as homeless during the period (quarter) but presented in a previous period (quarter)?
A: It is the number of clients accepted as homeless and the number presented during the year. It does not take into account whether they are all the same clients.
PSR/006 Timing of low cost adaptations not funded by a Disabled facilities Grant
Q: When is the date from which we should start counting the time taken?
A: Mrs Williams has been known to the local authority since 22nd September 2003 enquiry around mobility difficulties which resulted in recommendation for a stair lift was received on 5th April 2007 thus this is the date used to calculate time taken.
PSR/007 Houses in Multiple Occupation
Q: The 2008/09 guidance states, 'Authorities should include all Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO) that are registered with the authority. That is, any that the local authority has an official record of at 31 March of the reporting year.' here seems to be confusion over the 'reporting year' aspect of this indicator. Please can you confirm when the reporting year should be?
A: I can confirm that HMOs should be counted on 31 March of the reporting year, i.e., for 2008-09 it would be March 31 2009.
LCL/002 Use of computers in libraries
Q: Which period should this cover i.e. should it be 31.3.07 only, an average at different dates during the year, 1.4.06, or (1.4.06 + 31.3.07)/2?
A: Use the 31st March as the date.
Q: There seems to be a lot of confusion about the number of weeks the sample week should be aggregated to, is it 39 weeks or 52 weeks?
A: The sample week should be aggregated to 52 weeks and not 39. The confusion seems to arise around school holidays. The sample week should not take place during schools holidays; this doesn’t mean that school holidays should be excluded completely; this only means that the sample week shouldn’t be counted during school holidays. The Data Unit will re-issue the 2009-10 guidance for this indicator in February 2010.
BCT/004 Timing of checking 'full plan' applications
Q: Please can you clarify whether it should be the inspecting authority or the plan checking authority that includes partnership applications in their figures?
A: Applications submitted under the Local Authority Building Control (LABC) Partner Authority Scheme (PAS) should be counted within the authority in which the application is being plan checked and not the inspecting authority.
BCT/007 First time application acceptances
Q: Please can you clarify whether it should be the inspecting authority or the plan checking authority that includes partnership applications in their figures?
A: Applications submitted under the Local Authority Building Control (LABC) Partner Authority Scheme (PAS) should be counted within the authority in which the application is being plan checked and not the inspecting authority.
Q: Should the denominator for BCT/007 be less than or equal to the denominator for BCT/004?
A: Yes the number of 'full plan' applications received during the year in BCT/004 should be greater than or equal to the number of first time 'full time' received during the year in BCT/007.
Q: Please can you define "first time" in the definition BCT/007?
A: The indicator is concerned with those applications that were approved first time i.e. applications that have not received a rejection notice.
PLA/003 Success against planning/enforcement appeals
Q: Could you please confirm whether appeals withdrawn should be included in the numerator or denominator or both?
A: The PI should be calculated on the basis of the number of Decision Notices received, so withdrawn appeals should be excluded - don't count in either the numerator or the denominator.
PLA/005 Speed of resolution of enforcement cases
Q: Could you clarify how this PI should be calculated?
A: This PI is measuring how long it took to resolve those complaints that have been resolved during the year. So, at the end of each quarter count up the number of complaints that were resolved within 12 weeks of receiving the complaint. The overall denominator should be the total number of complaints resolved during the year (the sum of the 4 quarterly figures) and the numerator is the number of resolved complaints that were resolved in 12 weeks (the sum of the 4 quarterly figures).
Q: Should complaints made before the 1st April 08 be included in this PI?
A: This indicator is concerned with the number of complaints resolved during the year, regardless of when they were received. Those resolved within 12 weeks of receipt will form the numerator, while the denominator is the total number that were resolved during the year. So in essence complaints received before 1st April 08 ill be included once they are resolved.
Q: Speed of resolution of enforcement complaints: relates to the 'serving of an enforcement notice', but the data we enter is the date the enforcement notice was 'issued'...there is a subtle legal difference (and time difference of a couple of days). When a Notice is issued it is legally valid and appears on a land charges search, hence I think this is the appropriate date. The date on which it is served is literally the date it is posted to or given to the owner/occupier etc. If sent by recorded delivery, this is the same as the 'issued' date, but most of ours are delivered by hand, so it is a couple of days later. Perhaps you could advise whether we would be incorrect to use the date we currently enter against enforcement complaints where a formal notice is served.
A: As far as enforcement action is concerned it begins with the issue of the enforcement notice, not with the service of copies of it on those who are required to be so served. Consequently, the all important date, and the one from which all the requirements relating to service of copies derive, is the date of issue of the notice and not the date of service (which could be different dates where several people have to be served).
PPN/001 Inspections of high-risk businesses
Q: Should part (a) be split over the categories listed in part (b) to give figures?
A: Part (a) is also supposed to be reported according to the 4 categories.
Q: We have 15 Properties on the list to visit on 1.4.06, which sets the Target for Part a. When we received Quarter 1 result it shows 4 having been visited, giving the Q1 result for part b as 4/15 x 100 = 27% - but 1 of these visits was completed early should we: i) Change the visit due date to the actual visit date of February - which means that the (published) Target has to change from 15 to 14, and this particular visit will not be included in part a or part b? ii) Count it as a visit made during 06/07 since it was due to be done in 06/07?
A: For part a the number of High Risk businesses is that which existed on 1/4/06. If one of these businesses which had previously been High Risk in 05/06 was inspected in February 2006 and reassessed as being Medium Risk then, on 1/4/06, it was no longer High Risk. The total liable was therefore 14. If all 14 are inspected before 31/3/07, the performance figure will be 100%. Please note that the denominator of your quarterly figure should be the number of businesses liable for inspection during the quarter not during the year.
Q: For Part a) the definition states that it should be 'The number of high risk businesses that were selected for inspection/ AEA at the beginning of the year ' We have taken this to mean that any new High Risk premises which require visits that are visited during the year should not be included in part a or part b since they were not on the list on 01/04. For example on 01/04 - There are 10 High Risk Businesses subject for inspection during 06/07. In July, there are 2 New Businesses subject to a visit during the financial year. Should the 06/07 result for part a be 10 or 12, and for part b assuming all 12 properties have been visited 10/10 x 100 or 12/12 x 100?
A: For part a the number of High Risk businesses is that which existed on 1/4/06, namely 10. For part b the calculation would be 10/10 x 100 = 100%. New businesses are dealt with in PPN/005 and, if the initial inspection identified them as being High Risk, they would come into PPN/001 for 07/08.
Q: Should businesses liable for 2 inspections over the year both be included in this PI?
A: Yes, they should be included in both the numerator and denominator
PPN/001iii
Q: For Category C food hygiene premises, we don't know what type of intervention we'll take at the beginning of the year when we plan our work. How should we account for these premises?
A: You can include any Category C premises due to receive an intervention without knowing what type of official control that business will ultimately be subject to. The PI is designed to capture the programmed activity for the LA.
PPN/001iv
Q: Do we have to name the high risk businesses we select for inspection under the FIT3 programme at the beginning of the year? Should authorities be selecting actual businesses or just the number of businesses?
A: To clarify, you are not required to actually name the businesses whose activities have been identified as priorities under the FIT3 programme and are therefore selected for inspection at the beginning of the year; you only need to identify the number of businesses that you intend to inspect. If it transpires that an authority has inspected more high risk health & safety businesses than the number originally selected for inspection at the beginning of the year then the authority should report the number they selected for inspection at the beginning of the year for both the numerator and denominator, thus giving a PI value of 100%.
PPN/007 Effectiveness of enforcement action
Q: The denominator for PPN/007 has been amended for 2008/09. How does this affect the reporting of this PI?
A: PPN/007 relates to activities which are carried out in two phases (namely an identification phase and an action phase) which, for operational reasons, may not take place within the same annual period. For example, it is most unlikely that it will be possible to resolve a Significant Breach discovered in late March before the end of the year cut-off and, similarly, it is unlikely that it will be possible to visit, or receive a Self Assessment Questionnaire returned from, a New Business which was identified late in the year. Changes introduced for 2008/9 were intended to overcome this problem by carrying forward any unrectified Significant Breaches and New Businesses which had not been contacted into the next accounting period. In the case of PPN/007, the Denominator was changed from ‘The total number of significant breaches detected by Trading Standards during the year’ to ‘The total number of significant breaches of Trading Standards legislation that required rectification during the year’. The effect of this amendment was to ensure Significant Breaches that had been indentified towards to end of the year would not be written off once 31st March 2009 had passed (and so on in future years). It would also have the effect that any Significant Breaches which had been not been rectified during 2008/9 would transfer to the 2009/10 data set. It is not intended that this feature would apply retrospectively; i.e. it would apply only to Significant Breaches discovered and New Businesses identified after 1st April 2008 when the revised PIs came into force. While Local Authorities may wish to consider contacting businesses that have historically never been contacted, only data collected post 1/4/2008 should be included in the PI calculations.
Q: What are the breaches apart from Notices?
A: The classification of breaches into major and minor is an impossible task and the PI leaves it to the discretion of officers to decide what matters need to be followed up to a conclusion and which can be dealt with on the spot. It is assumed that all authorities and their officers take action proportionately in accordance with the Enforcement Concordat and matters which are of little significance and considered unlikely to re-occur will not be pursued.
Q: Does a Risk Assessment Questionnaire qualify as a self - assessment questionnaire?
A: If the questionnaire merely ascertains the activities of the business and establishes which legislation applies, but does not ask questions intended to determine whether or not the business is complying with that legislation, I would suggest that it does not fall within the current definition of ‘self-assessment questionnaire.
PPN/008 Action on new businesses
Q: Should businesses that have been both subject to an inspection and have submitted a self-assessment questionnaire be included in part a and part b?
A: No businesses that have been both subject to an inspection and have submitted a self-assessment questionnaire should only be counted once in either part a) or part b).
Q: The denominator for PPN/007 has been amended for 2008/09. How does this affect the reporting of this PI?
A: PPN/007 relates to activities which are carried out in two phases (namely an identification phase and an action phase) which, for operational reasons, may not take place within the same annual period. For example, it is most unlikely that it will be possible to resolve a Significant Breach discovered in late March before the end of the year cut-off and, similarly, it is unlikely that it will be possible to visit, or receive a Self Assessment Questionnaire returned from, a New Business which was identified late in the year. Changes introduced for 2008/9 were intended to overcome this problem by carrying forward any unrectified Significant Breaches and New Businesses which had not been contacted into the next accounting period. When PPN/005 was replaced by PPN/008, the opportunity was taken to extend the definition of new businesses to include ‘all businesses that have not previously been contacted, not just those identified during the year’. The effect of this extension was to ensure that new businesses indentified towards to end of the year would not be written off once 31st March 2009 had passed (and so on in future years). It would also have the effect that any new businesses which had not been contacted by means of a visit which included a risk assessment, nor by the receipt of a Self Assessment Questionnaire, during 2008/9 would transfer to the 2009/10 data set. It is not intended that this feature would apply retrospectively; i.e. it would apply only to Significant Breaches discovered and New Businesses identified after 1st April 2008 when the revised PIs came into force. While Local Authorities may wish to consider contacting businesses that have historically never been contacted, only data collected post 1/4/2008 should be included in the PI calculations.
Q: What are the possible sources of information for identifying new businesses?
A: This is a list of the areas by which officers might identify new businessesActions to identify and record new businesses established in the area may include:
Review of trader information received from complainants (direct and via Consumer Direct)
Review of trader information held on the national Consumer Direct database
Use of data supplied in service requests from the Office of Fair Trading relating to Consumer Credit licence holders
Liaison with other council services (e.g. Business Rates, Licensing)
Information obtained from other enforcement agencies (e.g. WAG)
Liaison with local chambers of commerce and business start-up services
SCA/003 Clients supported in the community
Q: What is the definition of ‘Community Support Day Care’?
A: Community support day care is any form of service provision which is provided or commissioned by the Social Services department. Include attendance at/ support to attend any service directly commissioned or provided by the local authority, but exclude support to attend what would be a general public facility e.g. leisure facility, public entertainment event, employment training etc.
Q: Please can you tell me what the difference is between the following two services?: - a.. Supported Accommodation = 24-hour care for clients in their own home for which they have their own tenancy agreement. b.. Supported Living - ? The definition for Supported Accommodation comes from the 'help to live at home' guidance on the PM2 return, but users in Torfaen are misinterpreting this service and using it to denote for e.g. emergency care at home (which really is a form of domiciliary care).
A: The two services you have listed below are actually the same thing, they have just been rephrased in order to better capture the correct meaning. In 2005/06 this service was called 'supported living' and in 2006/07 it has been renamed to 'supported accommodationThe definition/guidance for supported accommodation 06/07 will therefore be the same as the 05/06 guidance for supported living.
Q: Should Telecare be included if it is not just an alarm and has an ongoing financial commitment?
A: If the conditions for equipment and adaptations as per the guidance are met e.g. an ongoing financial commitment then these can be included.
SCA/007 Care plan reviews
Q: If someone was due a review during the year but then left the service or passed away, should you, or should you not include them?
A: Include those clients who were due a review during the year and who were able to receive that review during the year. Therefore in the case of someone passing away, although they were due a review during the year, they were not actually in a position to receive that review, thus they shouldn't really have received the review. They should therefore not be included within the PI.
Q: Do we include Clients with a Care Plan at 31st March, that were reviewed receiving Domiciliary and /or Residential / Nursing care?
A: As the Pi Profile doesn’t specify any type of client, it refers to clients with a care plan at the 31st March. Then, so long as these services were stated on the care plan they (Dom, Res and Nursing Care) should be included in SCA/007.
Q: Can you advise what this is actually measuring? Would it not be a more comprehensive indicator to measure those clients with a care plan who were due for review and identify those that did have a review but also those that didn't?
A: The indicator is comprehensive enough, as it already calculates what was suggested. For instance this indicator calculates:-* Of all those with a care plan who should have had a review in the year* The percentage of people who actually received a review.* The flip side of this indicator is therefore the percentage who were meant to receive areview, that didn't.* Therefore those who did receive a review plus those who didn't receive a review should equal 100% of those who should have had a review.
Q: If a client made an enquiry during the year which led to an assessment, a care plan being completed, services being provided then a review being scheduled - if they made another enquiry a short while after, would this go through the whole process again and lead to a second scheduled review, or would the first scheduled review take into account the second enquiry details? Would a client have a separate care plan each time they enquired and were provided with a service? If this is the case, would they also have separate scheduled reviews in relation to the care plans?
A: The denominator says "clients with a care plan at 31st March that should have been reviewed". Therefore you should look at the care plan in existence on 31st March and consider the reviews in relation to this, not other care plans.
SCA/018 Responding to carer needs
Q: What is a carer's assessment?
A: A carer's assessment is an assessment of the carer's needs in their role as a carer. It must be undertaken separately to the service user's assessment and recorded separately. The carer's domain of the UA is not a carer's assessment.
Q: What is a carer's service?
A: A carer's service is a service provided directly to a carer as a result of the carer's assessment, or re-assessment for existing carers.
SCC/001 Plans for looked after children
Q: Both Indicator SCC/001b and SCC/021 make reference to 2nd Reviews, however one describes the review as being due 4 months from the child becoming looked after and the other makes reference to the review being due 3 months after the first review. In theory these dates are the same, however if the first review is done a week earlier or a week late for example this would mean that if you go with the definitions for 2nd reviews then this will give us 2 dates. Which definition is to be used?
A: According to the Children Act Guidance and Regulations (volumes 4 and 5), the first review should take place within 4 weeks of a child becoming looked after. The second review should take place with 3 months of the date of the first review. Thus the second review should take place within 4 months if the first review has taken place on time.The PI guidance should not focus on set times, rather it should focus on the time period between reviews, as no ‘catch up’ is necessary i.e.:-The second review should be carried out not more than three months after the first and thereafter subsequent reviews should be carried out not more than six months after the date of the previous review
Q: Should we include all 2nd reviews that are due to take place i.e. those that take place following new placements (if the previous placement has broken down)? When a new placement starts following the breakdown of a previous placement, this has not been classed as another 1st placement.
A: Unless there is a break in continuity of being a LAC, only the information relating to the child's 'first' second review (i.e. within a single continuous period of being looked after even if there is a change of placement) is necessary in order to gather sufficient indicative info; so no, it shouldn't include all 2nd reviews - only the first one. The requirement is for looked after children to have a permanency plan in place by the second (i.e. 4 month) review. Therefore the second review refers to the second review following the child's admission to the Looked After System and reviews following changes of placement - unless this is the second review following care/accommodation - should not be counted.
Q: Respite care clients are required to have a new assessment for their placements annually. Does this constitute a new placement, as a new assessment/review is undertaken?
A: SCC/001a covers having a care plan at the beginning of the first placement. As this will not be an annual event for the non-respite care cases, there is no obvious argument for counting one each year for the respite cases. The new assessment that you mentioned refers to the need to update the original assessment as part of the review process, which applies to all LAC and should be an ongoing process each time the child's case is reviewed, to ensure that the child's needs are being met. Therefore as long as the episodes of care are part of a continuous planned programme then only the initial episode would be counted.
Q: For those children who did not have a review at four months but later on in the year, can the authority include these in data if a plan for permanence was completed within the first four months of admission date (i.e. By the due date even though 2nd review not was undertaken (in some cases) for some months after.
A: The PI wording only refers to the due date of review not that it has actually happened. It does not specify that the second review must take place for the plan to be in place.Therefore the example you stated would be included in this PI.
SCC/004 Stability of placements of children looked after
Q: On the SSDA903 I am aware that if a Foster Carer moves address this will only be recorded on the 903 if this relates to a move across the LA boundary and hence a change to the Placement Type code. For SCC/004 should this be categorised as a change of Main Placement even though the child is still with the same foster cares and in the specific instance has only moved 2 miles down the road but does happen to over crossed the LA boundary?
A: We have come to the conclusion that the guidance for SCC/004 and SSDA903 should be the same to keep the recording of this information consistent. Thus the guidance as it stands says:-A change of placement occurs when:Either a child moves to a new placement (even if this does not require using a different placement code);Or if the child remains at the same location, but the placement code changes for any other reason.On the SSDA 903 a move of placement constitutes a ’new placement’ as this relates to a move across the LA boundary and hence a change to the Placement Type code. So in line with this it has been concluded that in the scenario you have stated this would constitute a new placement in SCC/004.
Q: The guidance states that temporary placements with an alternative carer whilst the child’s foster carer is on holiday should be excluded – please could you clarify if the following circumstances should be treated as a holiday: We have 2 young people placed with a foster carer who had to leave the county following a family bereavement. They were placed with an alternative carer for approx 6 weeks and returned to her when she came back. So the carer wasn’t on holiday as such, but the move was temporary until her return.
A: Due to the length of time of the move, this would have to counted as another placement during the year. It cannot be counted as a holiday or as respite for the carer as this does not coincide with timeframes outlined in the SSDA903.
Q: I have been accessing the 2006-7 core indicators for children's services to find out numbers and expenditure relating to looked after children. In trying to find the numbers of looked after children I note that overall number cited in SCC/004 D is 4670 whereas the number in SCC/019 D is 4791. Both have the same heading "The total number of children who were looked afterat 31 March"
A: The difference in the figures you have stated, is accounted for by the inclusion of respite-short term placements in SCC/019. Respite cases are excluded from SCC/004.
SCC/006 Timeliness of decisions on referrals
Q: We were just seeking clarification as to whether a decision to obtain 'further information' on a referral would be classed as the actual 'decision' agreed by the manager and therefore be included within the 24 hour timescale? Or alternatively, do we have to count the date that the final decision was made by the manager, following the receipt of further information, leading to a decision to allocate or NFA?
A: "3.9 A decision to gather more information constitutes an initial assessment. An initial assessment is defined as a brief assessment of each child referred to social services with a request for services to be provided. This should be undertaken within a maximum of 7 working days but could be very brief depending on the child's circumstances....." I think it follows that the request for more information, by starting an initial assessment, has terminated the initial consideration of the referral. On the other hand, if the request doesn't start the initial assessment then it doesn't constitute a decision. The guidance for 2008-09 is being amended to include “decision to gather more information”.
Q: What is the definition of a referral?
A: The PI guidance states that the definition of a referral is as follows:-“A referral is defined as a request for services to be provided by a social service department where the case is not already open”There appear to be inconsistencies across
SCC/007 Referrals proceeding to allocation for initial assessment
Q: Should SCC/007 add up to 100%?
A: SCC/007 is split into three parts the sum of these parts equate to 100%. Therefore all referrals (contacts as you call them should be used as the denominator for all three parts) as per the guidance for a referral:"A referral is defined as a request for services to be provided by a social service department" The outcome will then show, how many were referred to a social worker, someone other than an social worker and how many did not get allocated for initial assessment, all of which equal 100%
Q: What is the definition of a referral?
A: The PI guidance states that the definition of a referral is as follows:-“A referral is defined as a request for services to be provided by a social service department where the case is not already open”There appear to be inconsistencies across
Q: If we are counting allocations for initial assessment there is a risk that some assessments will be counted more than once should the allocated worker change. Where an allocated worker changes from a social work assistant to a social worker during the process of the initial assessment being completed, should we count the worker who the initial assessment was originally allocated to or the worker who completed the initial assessment?
A: The original worker who the initial assessment was allocated to should be included.
SCC/010 Re-referral rates
Q: The guidance states “The 12-month period starts from the date the most recent referral was received back to the date on which the previous referral was received.” A child / young person could have had a referral several years ago and this may then have been closed within the last 12 months. They could then come back into the system but if we were to measure the time between the initial referral date and the current referral date it would fall outside of the 12 month period and would not be classed as a repeat referral. Our understanding of a re-referral within ICS is within 12 months of the closure date of the last referral.
A: The guidance is trying to identify referrals that have occurred within 12 months of a previous referral and not referrals that have occurred within 12 months of closing a case (as in your example).The reason the second example (i.e. within 12 months of the case closing) is not used is that there might be differences in the type of case picked up. If the referral date is used as the start, another referral within 12 months might suggest the need had not been assessed well. Another referral within 12 months of the end of a long period of working with the child would have a different reason.
Q: A child / young person could have had a referral several years ago and this may then have been closed within the last 12 months. This child/young person could then come back into the system but if we were to measure the time between the initial referral date and the current referral date it would fall outside of the 12 month period and would not be classed as a repeat referral. Our understanding of a re-referral within ICS is within 12 months of the closure date of the last referral. Can you please clarify?
A: The guidance is trying to identify referrals that have occurred within 12 months of a previous referral and not referrals that have occurred within 12 months of closing a case (as in your example).The reason the second example (i.e. within 12 months of the case closing) is not used is that there might be differences in the type of case picked up. If the referral date is used as the start, another referral within 12 months might suggest the need had not been assessed well. Another referral within 12 months of the end of a long period of working with the child would have a different reason.
Q: What is the definition of a referral?
A: The PI guidance states that the definition of a referral is as follows:-“A referral is defined as a request for services to be provided by a social service department where the case is not already open”There appear to be inconsistencies across
SCC/011 Effective Initial assessments
Q: What is meant by 'took place’? Does this mean initial assessments completed or started? We have a number of initial assessments that may start during one period but are not completed until the next period. Our report for this pi currently picks up both the initial assessment start and completion dates but we need to know which date to use.
A: ’Took place’ should be considered to be when the initial assessment has been completed.
Q: The guidance for this indicator for 2008/9 asks that we 'include all assessments that were completed during the year'. Should we therefore include any assessments which were started in the previous year and completed in the current year? This would seem to conflict with the denominator 'The number of initial assessments that took place during the year'.
A: The indicator is concerned with assessments that were completed in the year. The line was added about the 'completed during the year' to provide clarification but the title and detailed numerator/denominator guidance should also have been amended to reflect this. The guidance for 2009-10 will be amended to reflect this.
SCC/013 Safeguarding and promoting welfare of children
Q: Should temporary registrations be included?
A: They should not be included for this PI. Guidance in the form has been updated to reflect this.
Q: The % open cases of i) children on the CP register, ii) children looked after, iii) children in need, who a) have an allocated social worker, b) are allocated to someone other than a social worker where the child is receiving a service in accordance with their assessment or plan Why is this indicator not also measuring those cases that are unallocated - surely this is important to monitor also.
A: It was decided that the number of unallocated cases could be calculated as the residual. The group therefore did not feel that another part to this indicator was necessary.
SCC/014 Timeliness of initial Child Protection Conference
Q: Can you please confirm if children / young people who are looked after under the following placement codes are to be included in this indicator: F1 - foster placement with relative or friend (carer lives inside LA boundary) F4 - foster placement with relative or friend (carer lives outside LA boundary)
A: The Pi guidance refers only to the number of initial child protection conferences. Therefore if the child is the responsibility of the authority and they have had this initial conference, they should be included in the PI regardless of where the carer lives. There is no reason to exclude looked after children in any type of placement, e.g. see para 6.11 of Working Together to Safeguard Children.
Q: Children who are transferred into our authority will have a transfer conference logged against them and although their Initial Case Conference would have been undertaken by their originating authority the transfer conference is the initial conference with our Authority. Can you please confirm whether Transfer Conferences should be included?
A: Do not include transfer conferences (guidance will be updated for 2008-09).
Q: There are a number of indicators for Childrens Services looking at referral count. We would appreciate clarification on what constitutes a referral. Are we to include all referrals or just new referrals to fit in with the ICS guidance, i.e. 1 referral opens the case and all other referrals received whilst the case is open are not to be counted as a referral?
A: With regards to your first query, Your example with reference to ICS is correct. If you take for example SCC/006, this PI has a full definition of what should constitute a referral:-"A referral is defined as a request for services to be provided by a social service department where the case is not already open".i.e. count the referral that opens the case and not subsequent ones when the case is already open.With regards to your second query, if you look at the 'working together to safeguard children' document, you will see that this guidance suggests that a strategy meeting does not have to be a physical meeting and thus could be a 'discussion'. It is best to use the definition of a strategy discussion as outlined in the PI profile.
Q: The initial child protection conference would take place within 15 days of the date of birth, rather than 15 days of the pre-birth conference. Do you have any ideas of how these timescales should be confirmed?
A: The guidance in Working Together under the Children Act 2004 states:
SCC/015 Timeliness of initial core group meetings
Q: Can you please confirm whether Transfer Conferences should be included in SCC/014 and also if the Core Groups that arise from these conferences should be included in SCC/015.
A: The indicators as currently stated don’t include transfer conferences, so please exclude.
SCC/016 Child in need plan reviews
Q: If a child’s plan is ended because the case has been closed, should we count the case closure as a review of the plan? If not, should we be excluding these cases from the denominator?
A: You should exclude the case closure from both the numerator and denominator, unless it is a planned review. They suggest to record if a review is due and if so then check the timing. If a case is closed in between reviews then don't include.
SCC/021 Timeliness of Looked After Children reviews
Q: Both Indicator SCC/001b and SCC/021 make reference to 2nd Reviews, however one describes the review as being due 4 months from the child becoming looked after and the other makes reference to the review being due 3 months after the first review.
A: According to the Children Act Guidance and Regulations (volumes 4 and 5), the first review should take place within 4 weeks of a child becoming looked after. The second review should take place with 3 months of the date of the first review. Thus the second review should take place within 4 months if the first review has taken place on time.The PI guidance should not focus on set times, rather it should focus on the time period between reviews, as no ‘catch up’ is necessary i.e.:-The second review should be carried out not more than three months after the first and thereafter subsequent reviews should be carried out not more than six months after the date of the previous review.
SCC/022 Looked after pupil attendance
Q: From what perspective should this be measured?
A: This should be measured from the corporate parent perspective. This would therefore mean that the Authority should record attendance information for all of their Looked after children, regardless of where they are educated.
Q: The guidance says that children who are full time special school pupils should be excluded. Does this include children who are full time in special behavioral units?
A: Special Behavioral Units should also be excluded from the indicator.
SCC/023
Q: The guidance does not mention the possibility of the child’s permanent exclusion being refuted and if this happens, should the child therefore be included in part B of the indicator?
A: If the permanent exclusion is refuted, it should then be counted as a fixed term exclusion in part b of the indicator.
SCC/024 Effective planning for education
Q: If a child becomes looked after or joins a new school in the last 20 days of the financial year, should they still be included in this indicator?
A: Yes, the child would still be included in this indicator. You would count them in the denominator. In order to know whether they should be counted in the numerator, you would have to wait up to 20 days after 31 March to check whether they have a Personal Education Plan in place.
SCC/028 Reviews for looked after children
Q: The guidance I have in respect of Assessment and Progress Records is that there is no APR for children under 1 because they will have had a core assessment completed when they become looked after and subsequent assessment will be after their first birthday. Therefore if we have a looked after child aged under 1 whose third review is due in the year (because they become looked after at birth) do we exclude them from PI Calculations? Similarly there is no APR for a 16 year old. Some young people's third review could be due after their 16th birthday - do we exclude these from this indicator?
A: Both children under 1 year of age and those aged 16+ should be excluded from the PI calculation. Children under 1 year will be too young to take part in completing the APR, whereas children over 16 will generally have pathway plans (which are covered in a different indicator).
SCC/030 Assessments and services for young carers
Q: Apparently it was suggested that in the Adult PI SCA/012 on carers assessments the reference group decided that it was ok to include commissioned service assessments to other organisations. Is this principle also applicable to the equivalent children's indicator SCC/030, i.e. for instance when these assessments are commissioned to organisations such as cross roads.
A: The issue of non-social services staff carrying out reviews or assessments was briefly mentioned in the context of SCA/007. In the context of the Unified Assessment the local authority is responsible, but can delegate the process to a partner organisation, for instance with regard to this indicator I have previously responded to one authority suggesting that nurses working for the NHS undertaking reviews should be included within this indicator, as well as social care staff .In respect of the Children’s indicator SCC/030 local authorities may commission assessments of young carers to be undertaken by other organisations. However these cases should only be included within this PI in cases where the Assessment Framework has been used when counting young carers under the age of 18.Therefore in response to your initial question, where the assessment is delegated to another organisation (e.g. Crossroads) they should only be counted if the organisation has put the Assessment Framework into practice.
Q: What type(s) of assessment are you expecting to be carried out. Would it be an Initial Assessment, Core Assessment or a specific Young Carers Assessment, or would any of these suffice as long as the child was identified as being a young carer?
A: This PI has been updated for the 2007/08 collection and specifically states to include both initial and core assessments in part a.
SCC/034 Timely reviews of Child Protection Register cases
Q: The PI guidance states: 'In the case of unborn children, the first review should be held within 3 months of the pre-birth conference' However, the All Wales Child Protection Procedures 2008 (that is referred to in the guidance) states that: 'A review conference should take place within 3 months of the baby’s name being placed on the child protection register, that is, at birth. However it may be necessary to hold the review conference at an earlier stage.'
A: The guidance from the All Wales Child Protection Procedures (2008) stating that 'the review conference should take place within 3 months of the baby's name being placed on the child protection register, that is, at birth' is the correct guidance and should be followed for 2009-10 PI collection. This has been amended for the 2010-11 guidance.
SCC/036 Key Stage 3 Assessments
Q: Should all children who are looked after and within the age range be included, or only those who have had an assessment?
A: The denominator should include all children who are eligible for assessment at the end of key stage 3. The numerator is the number of children who are eligible for the assessment who achieved the Core Subject Indicator.
SCC/040 Promoting Health and Wellbeing
Q: If a child becomes looked after and remains registered with the same GP as prior to admission, would we include these children in the numerator for this PI?
A: As per the guidance, you should include instances where a child has been able to remain registered with the same doctor as a previous placement.
Q: Should children who have been in a placement for less than 10 working days be excluded from this indicator?
A: Placements that have not reached 10 working days should be excluded.
Q: If a child becomes looked after in the last 10 days of the financial year, should they still be included in this indicator?
A: Yes, the child would still be included in this indicator. You would count them in the denominator. In order to know whether they should be counted in the numerator, you would have to wait up to 10 days after 31 March to check if the child is registered with a provider of general medical services.