We Asked, You Said, We Did

Below are some of the issues we have recently consulted on and their outcomes.

We Asked

We asked for contributions and opinions on the Draft Surrey 2016-21 Tobacco Control Strategy.  We specifically asked for feedback and comments on the strategy ambition, outcome and five priority areas. 

You Said

We received 19 responses to the consultation.  This included feedback from voluntary Organisations, Borough and District council, NHS, Children’s Centre, Surrey County Council, Clinical Commissioning Group, Business and members of the public.

68% of respondents supported the strategy ambition and outcome statement, agreeing that it was realistic and achievable. 

We Did

We have taken on board the feedback received and will implement the following changes:

  • Changing of the wording of priorities to ensure they are measurable
  • Ensure priorities are clear and focussed
  • Ensure it is clear that an action plan supports the delivery of the priorities
  • Remove infographic of borough and district smoking prevalence because of low confidence levels of the data

We Asked

We asked for your views on our proposals for improving road safety in Coleford Bridge Road, Mytchett.

You Said

The results showed a clear preference for Option 2 which included the introduction of additional road markings and vehicle activated signs.

We Did

Given the result of the public consultation, Surrey County Council are progressing with Option 2. The lining parts of the scheme have already been completed. The remaining works, including installation of a new post and two new vehicle activated signs, is expected to be finished by April 2017.

We Asked

We asked via this website, social media, posters displayed in all 58 libraries and by contacting resident groups including our highways customer panel members:-

Are you in favour of the Council switching off street lights for part of the night where deemed safe to do so in order to reduce energy bills and reduce CO2 emissions?

You Said

Nearly half of the 850 respondents were in favour of switching off many lights and overall 76% were in favour of switching off at least some lights.

We Did

The Council's Cabinet approved the decision to implement Part Night Lighting across Surrey at its meeting on 18 October.  The full report, including the reasons for implementing this, can be found on our website

The council will be implementing part night lighting across the county between December 2016 and February 2017 depending on where you live.  The full work timetable including a list of roads subject to the part night lighting is available on our website.

 

We Asked

Whether Sunnydown School should be redesignated as Communication and Interaction Needs (CoIN).

You Said

83% of responses agreed with the proposal.  17% disagreed.  Concerns were raised about the impact on existing pupils.  However there are no plans to change the pupils currently attending the school, and these pupils fit within the CoIN need description so would be unaffected.

We Did

Statutory notices were published on 12 April for a further 4 week period during which interested parties can make representations.

We Asked

Should we amalgamate The Hope, Epsom with The Hope, Guildford to become one pupil referral unit (PRU), with one establishment number, but based across two sites.  Pupil admissions would remain unchanged, and the existing single management committee would continue to oversee both centres; there would be no change to existing staffing structures or working arrangements.  By being registered as a single PRU, the service would receive a single Ofsted inspection, instead of two.

You Said

A total of 4 responses was received during the consultation period which closed on Wednesday 7 October 2015.  All the responses agreed with the proposal to amalgamate The Hope Epsom and The Hope Guildford to become a single establishment.

We Did

It was decided to proceed with the proposal and the statutory notice was issued on Monday 12 October 2015.  No further representations were submitted.  The proposal and consultation results were presented to the Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement on Monday 14 December 2015.  The Cabinet Member approved the recommendation of the proposal to amalgamate both sites.  From January 2016 the Hope Service will be registered as one school based over two sites.

We Asked

In May 2015, Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust informed the Surrey County Council, the CCGs and family voice Surrey that it proposed to discontinue short breaks services at Beeches from November 2015. In light of this outcome, Cabinet agreed on 29 July 2015 to consult further before determining if Surrey County Council should fund services at Beeches, or fund alternative services, which may result in Beeches being closed.

You Said

The feedback from current users is centred on the impact the removal of the service will have on their children and the wellbeing of their families. The families that do not currently use Beeches say that there is unknown need within the community and Surrey County Council is failing to reach out to families. They comment that Beeches is not offered as an overnight short break option to families and that it does not feature in Surrey County Council’s directory of short breaks. Overall, the feedback is that short breaks are a lifeline to families (described in the joint strategic review) and without them they would not be able to cope with their children’s needs.

We Did

At Cabinet on 27 October 2015, the following recommendations were approved. 1. Surrey County Council contracts with Surrey and Borders Partnership (SABP) for overnight short break at Beeches for up to 12 months commencing on 1 December 2015 as an interim arrangement. 2. The interim arrangement is reviewed by Cabinet as part of a revised special educational needs and disability (SEND) strategy be brought back to Cabinet that includes recommendations from the SEND Governance Board regarding future provision for short breaks. 3. A report is presented to Cabinet within the 12 month interim period based on an assessment of the needs for children with disabilities in the east of the county, and an assessment of capacity available in order to meet demand, in relation to short break provision.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

Members of the public cited concern over the substantial reduction in youth work delivery at Banstead youth centre (YC).

Members of the public wanted to see more links between Banstead YC and Phoenix YC.

We Did

Whilst we may not have always been able to fully address every concern, we have listened and will be making the following amendments in response to feedback:

  • We are proposing to increase the youth work delivery at Banstead YC from the original 3 hours to 6 hours per week. In addition to this a further 6 hours youth work per week will be delivered by YMCA East Surrey.
  • The CYWS recognises the good work of the young leader programmes at both Banstead YC and Phoenix YC. We will therefore develop a joint programme between the centres which we will look to implement in other youth centres in Reigate & Banstead.
  • The youth and community worker based at Phoenix YC will line manage CYW staff at Banstead YC.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

A desire for a more equal distribution of sessions across the five centres.

It was suggested that we should ensure there was a service provided to support young parents, specifically with finding employment.

It was suggested that a young carers session was needed that young people from across the borough could access.

We Did

Whilst we may not have always been able to fully address every concern, we have listened and will be making the following amendments in response to feedback:

  • We have highlighted the distribution of sessions across the five centres that are specific to the area and those that are borough wide programmes.
  • The borough wide programmes will be located in the areas of highest need for that specific target group.
  • There is a borough wide targeted session for young parents in which we will be able to address employment. There are also two 16-24 drop in sessions that could be accessed by young parents.
  • We will be delivering a session for young carers as part of the borough wide programme. We will ensure that this takes place.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

There was strong support for the services decision to apply the resource allocation system and hub and spoke models to youth work deliver in Guildford.

The areas of identified needs were considered to be accurate and the correct locations to divide up the youth work resources across Guildford.

We Did

We were very pleased to have received overwhelmingly positive feedback from the local community about our plans for community youth work in Guildford. As a result of this, we will still be implementing our changes as planned with your support.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

There was strong support for the services decision to apply the resource allocation system and hub and spoke models to youth work delivered in Surrey Heath.

The areas of identified needs were considered to be accurate and the correct locations to divide up the youth work resources across Surrey Heath.

There was disappointment at the reduction in resources in some centres across Surrey Heath

We Did

We were very pleased to have received overwhelmingly positive feedback from the local community about our plans for community youth work in Surrey Heath. As a result of this, we will still be implementing our changes as planned with your support.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

Members of the public expressed concern over the withdrawal of neighbourhood local prevention provision from Hurst Green and whether this could be picked up by the Community Youth Work Service (CYWS).

Members of the public also showed concern that some villages / communities would miss out on youth work opportunities such as in Warlingham and Lingfield.

Members of the public also wanted to see more links with schools/schools work and local community events.

We Did

Whilst we may not have always been able to fully address every concern, we have listened and will be making the following amendments in response to feedback:

  • We are proposing to continue to develop work with young people in Hurst Green through outreach work from the county council spoke in Oxted and where appropriate in conjunction with the local prevention provider.
  • Work within the villages and communities will be more integrated with the local prevention provider to ensure we can respond to local issues that may arise that need a youth work intervention quickly whilst still maintaining a core offer in areas identified as high need.
  • The CYWS will develop links with schools and attend key community events where possible.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

There was broad support for the service’s decision to apply the resource allocation system and hub and spoke models to youth work delivery in Runnymede.

The areas of identified needs were considered to be accurate and the correct locations to divide up the youth work resources across Runnymede.

There was disappointment at the reduction in resources.

We Did

We were very pleased to have received overwhelmingly positive feedback from the local community about our plans for community youth work in Runnymede. As a result of this, we will still be implementing our changes as planned with your support.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

Feedback was unanimous that we were putting youth workers in the areas where youth work was most needed and it could make the biggest difference to young people.

It was highlighted however that there should be an increase in youth work resources to support young people from Longmead.

It was felt that further consideration should be given during sessions to the travelling communities, Portuguese young people and those with disabilities.

It was suggested that partnership delivery approaches should be further developed to better support young people in the borough.

It was suggested that an open-access drop-in session should be introduced at The Focus.

We Did

Whilst we may not have always been able to fully address every concern, we have listened and will be making the following amendments in response to feedback:

  • Keep the youth work offer in the areas proposed.
  • Increase detached youth work delivered on the Longmead estate from 2.5 hours to 8.5 hours.
  • Continue to build on partnership links. Develop partnerships with Local prevention commissions to improve outcomes on Longmead and develop wider links with police, leisure and others to enhance the offer for young people.
  • Introduce an open session at The Focus.
  • Re-launch The Edge Youth Centre in Watersedge- Ruxley Ward.
  • Continue to make open sessions inclusive to all young people.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

There was strong support for the principles of allocating the available joint resources to the needs of young people and particularly to the communities across Woking borough that need it most.

The areas identified for additional provision (Knaphill and Byfleet) were confirmed as areas in need of support.

There was concern that there would be less hours of provision at Goldsworth Park. Although the number of evenings per week would remain at 3.

We Did

We were very pleased to have received overwhelmingly positive feedback from the local community about our plans for community youth work in Woking. As a result of this, we will still be implementing our changes as planned with your support.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

A number of concerns were raised about the potential discontinuation of the Go Karting project at Ashtead.

It was perceived that the document did not accurately reflect the number of face to face hours that would be delivered in the centres.

It was identified that a large proportion of young people access the Leatherhead centre from the Ashtead wards and vice versa.

We Did

Whilst we may not have always been able to fully address every concern, we have listened and will be making the following amendments in response to feedback:

  • The Go Karting session which was initially recommended to be disbanded will now continue as a partnership project. The county council will provide the equipment, buildings, insurance and lead member of staff and partnership funding will be sought for running costs and additional members of staff/volunteers expenses. This project will also be expanded to a district offer.
  • The delivery table now reflects both face to face hours and the number of actual hours paid to staff for clarity purposes.
  • A concern was expressed over the loss of specific targeted/issue based sessions within some centres. CYWS will retain a focus on these issues within our core offer and look to external organisations to enhance delivery within the open access sessions.
  • Clarification was requested as to how many staff would work within each session. Whilst this is dependent on the session the expectation for an open access session would be a minimum of one leader in charge and two assistant youth workers.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

  • There was strong support for the services decision to apply the resource allocation system and hub and spoke models to youth work deliver in Waverley.
  • The areas of identified needs were considered to be accurate and the correct locations to divide up the youth work resources across Waverley.
  • There was disappointment at the reduction in resources in some centres across Waverley.

We Did

Over the last 10 weeks the service has been working with local partners to negotiate and secure external resources and partnerships to ensure the delivery of positive activities for young people in communities or centres where the service has relocated provision. Whilst we may not have always been able to fully address every concern raised, we have listened and will be making the following amendments in response to feedback:

  • Three sessions per week have been secured for Haslemere Youth Centre through local voluntary community and faith sector partners and more is expected to be agreed before the changes take place.
  • Cranleigh parish council has agreed to work with the Community Youth Work Service (CYWS) to explore future joint funding of the CYWS in Cranleigh. Both partners have agreed to work together to develop a new offer for young people in Cranleigh from January 2016.

We Asked

There is less money available for Services for Young People overall. This means we need to find ways of delivering youth work that make the most of the money we have. We want to use the money we have for youth work to make the biggest difference to young people. In particular, this means helping them to prepare for work and their adult life. To do this we need to divide the money we have between different parts of Surrey fairly to make sure that the young people who need support the most get it. We want to find out what you think about our plans and your ideas of how we can do things better.

You Said

The key findings from the consultation were:

  • There was disappointment that the council’s staffing resources were being withdrawn from current projects in Claygate especially (86% of responses) but also Weybridge (8% of responses). Residents of both venues cited historical reasons and improvements that the youth centres should be staffed by the county council.
  • Claygate residents raised concerns that the plans would provoke an increase in anti-social behaviour and a rise in the needs of young people. It was also said that those with current high needs would be neglected in favour of young people from other areas.
  • There was concern that young people would be affected by staff moving around and new organisations coming in to run community spokes.
  • Field common was regarded an unnecessary place for a detached project. It was pointed out that Hersham youth club is close enough to walk to, and many young people currently do.
  • There should be an increase of sports and art projects.

We Did

Whilst we may not have always been able to fully address every concern, we have listened and propose the following amendments in response to feedback:

  • It should be re-emphasised that it is not the plan to close either Claygate or Weybridge youth centres. In both Claygate and Weybridge discussions are ongoing about a transition to becoming a community spoke. The county council’s CYWS will maintain staff at both centres until a successful transition has been made. After transition support will continue with training, safeguarding, material resources and maintenance. We will also work closely with the local prevention services provided by Lifetrain, Eikon and Surrey care trust to work with the highest need people in more targeted work in Claygate and Weybridge.
  • The idea of a Field common detached project from the original plans has been scrapped in favour of working closer with the Local Prevention providers to promote Hersham, Walton and Molesey youth clubs with their outreach project.
  • The CYWS will plan to run borough-wide projects in the holiday periods, incorporating trips, residentials and one-off day sports and art projects across all the venues.

We Asked

Do you agree with the proposed change to enlarge Dovers Green School from two forms of entry (2FE) at Reception to three forms of entry at Reception (3FE), to allow for a roll of 270, comprising three classes of 30 pupils in each year group, effective from September 2016.

You Said

We received one response to the consultation, who didn't know whether they agreed or disagreed with the proposal; they expressed concern regarding continued inclusion of children with additional needs.

We Did

Surrey County Council's Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement has approved the change; Surrey County Council will undertake building and refurbishment works, subject to planning approval. From September 2016, Dovers Green School will have a PAN of three forms of entry (3FE) at Reception. The total capacity of the school will be permanently increased from 168 to 270 pupils. Due to bulge classes currently being accommodated, the school will reach its new capacity of 270 places in September 2016.

We Asked

Do you agree with the proposal to make West Ewell Infant and Nursery School a 2FE primary school with a 52 place nursery from September 2017?

You Said

We received 100 responses to the survey, 80 of which agreed with the proposal (80%). Twelve responses disagreed, and four didn’t know.

We Did

The Surrey County Council (SCC) Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement has approved the change; SCC will undertake building and refurbishment works, subject to planning approval. In 2017, West Ewell’s Reception PAN will reduce to 60 places, and pupils who were in Y2 in 2016 will be able to stay on in Y3. For 2016, SCC is proposing an in year variation to reduce the 2016 PAN to 60.

We Asked

Do you agree with the proposal to make Ewell Grove a 2FE primary school with a 26 place nursery from September 2017?

You Said

We received 144 responses to the survey, 130 of which agreed with the proposal (90%). Twelve responses disagreed, and two didn’t know.

We Did

The Surrey County Council (SCC) Cabinet Member for Schools, Skills and Educational Achievement has approved the change; SCC will undertake building and refurbishment works, subject to planning approval. In 2017, Ewell Grove’s Reception PAN will reduce to 60 places, and pupils who were in Y2 in 2016 will be able to stay on in Y3. For 2016, SCC is proposing an in year variation to reduce the 2016 PAN to 60.

We Asked

Do you agree with the proposal to make Danetree Junior School a 4FE primary school with a 52 place nursery from September 2016?

You Said

We received 36 responses to the survey, 27 of which agreed with the proposal (75%). Five responses disagreed, and four didn’t know.

We Did

Danetree’s governing body and GLF Schools are making a Fast Track application to the Secretary of State for Education to allow “a significant change to an academy”. Surrey County Council will undertake building and refurbishment works, subject to planning approval. In 2016, Danetree’s junior PAN will remain as 128 Y3 places and include an additional Reception PAN of 120. From 2017 there will be no junior PAN.

We Asked

Do you agree with the proposed changes to Hawkedale Infants - A Foundation School, to expand from a single form of entry (1FE) infant school to a single form of entry (1FE) all through primary school. The change would come into effect from September 2017, and the school would reach full capacity of 210 by September 2020.

You Said

We received 84 responses to the consultation. Fifty-four agreed with the proposal (64%). Twenty-two responses (26%) disagreed; eight responses (10%) did not know. Concerns were raised about access to the school during drop-off and pick-up, potential traffic congestion, lack of parking and safety of pedestrians. However it was stated that Hawkedale is a good, welcoming and nurturing school, and that there is a need for more school places in Sunbury.

We Did

As a foundation school, the governing body has agreed to progress with the proposal, and statutory notices have been published. Surrey County Council will undertake required building works to provide additional accommodation, subject to planning approval.

We Asked

Should the age range at the Willows be changed so that only primary pupils are accommodated at the provision from 1 January 2016? The change of age range means that the statutory provision for primary aged pupils continues but the non-statutory provision for secondary pupils will close. This will make significant annual savings to the High Needs Block funding that can be used towards statutory provision.

You Said

A consultation period started on 6 May 2015 and concluded on 20 May 2015. A public meeting was held at the school on 13 May 2015 and approximately 20 people attended. It was originally proposed to issue Statutory Notices on 21 May 2015. Due to the number of responses received it was agreed to defer the issue of Statutory Notices to analyse the outcomes and themes and consider these against alternative arrangements for pupils. This information was fully considered and it was then decided to proceed with the issuing of Statutory Notices which were published on 15 June 2015. This has allowed a further 4 week period for representations regarding the proposal to be made. Nearly all respondents provided additional commentary. The feedback received can be broadly grouped into the following four categories: lack of alternative appropriate provision; vulnerability of the service users; grounds of decision and timing of the proposal; gender of service users. The Statutory Notice period of four weeks ran from 15 June 2015 and generated two further responses to the proposal.

We Did

The Cabinet Member has given approval of the Statutory Notice, and the proposal to change the age range of the WIllows to a primary only provision will be implemented.

We Asked

Should Limpsfield Grange School be redesignated from September 2015? The school would be redesignated for pupils with Communication and Interaction needs (CoIN).

You Said

A total of 2 written responses were received during the consultation via the Surrey Says website, post and email. One response was received from a parent and one from another responder. Of the 2 responses received both agreed with the proposal to re-designate the school. The Statutory Notice period of 4 weeks from 21 May 2015 generated no further responses to the proposal.

We Did

The Cabinet Member has given approval of the Statutory Notice, and the proposal to redesignate Limpsfield Grange School for pupils with Communication and Interaction Needs (CoIN).

We Asked

For your views on how you experienced Children's Services:

You Said

see Published Results:

We Did

1. We will ensure that all findings are distributed to teams for discussions and learning at their team meetings 2. LADO Service (for allegations against professionals working with children) have agreed to confirm advice given in an email to the referrer so that they are clear as to the advice given. They now have 2 phone numbers to assist callers getting through the social care system. 3. Update User Feedback Service Improvement Plan to incorporate findings from April 2015 feedback 4. Follow up all with service users who have asked to be contacted after they completed their feedback and their comments shared with managers and social workers 5. Learning from user feedback weeks will be distributed to Consultant Senior Practitioners who will be delivering this learning to social workers and family support workers through workshops