The Early Years, Children’s Centres
and Family Support Review
Purpose of today’s session:
• To share headlines from the analysis work including data analysis,
quality research and engagement events
• To share and test our initial thinking on what the options could be
• To consider the impact of these options on children’s outcomes.
• To consider the impact of these options on finances and there value
for money.
Background to the Review
• As part of the 2013/14 Service Reviews, Members
recommended The Early Years, Children’s Centres and
• The Review was set up to look at how early years
services can produce improved outcomes for children
and their families, providing the best value for the money
available by answering a number of fundamental
What is the current early years picture?
What is the mission of early years services?
What is the impact of early years services?
What should the future should look like?
Key Questions
Early Education
• Is access to provision and quality fair, equitable and
value for money?
What the analysis tells us
– Children’s outcomes are most affected by where they live (levels
of deprivation) and whether or not they attend early education.
– There are variable unit costs for each type of setting (average
spend per child ranges from £2,790 to £7,993).
– There are no differences in children’s outcomes at Early Years
Foundation Stage between different types of settings.
Issues that require further investigation
– The analysis has raised the question – do we need to know
children’s starting point in order to measure value for money?
– We need to see further evidence from providers to see that
higher funding is tackling higher deprivation needs.
Key Questions
Children’s Centres & Health
• Is the provision of children’s centres equitable, accessible, effective
and value for money?
• Are statutory organisations paying for the right areas of children
centre delivery?
– To improve children’s outcomes and narrow the gap, there needs to be a
stronger focus on targeting engagement work to reach the families that
need it most.
– Universal provision to be delivered from children’s centres by a multiagency approach, including health and community groups.
– Potentially rationalising children’s centres based on robust analysis of
local need.
• Transfer of HV into local authority in 2015/16 will enable a more
integrated approach to early years.
– We need to start a dialogue with health colleagues on the role of Health
Visitors and Children’s Centres as a key role in the multi-agency
Key Questions
Financing Early Years
• Part A DSG financed £6m
– Do we think this was value for money in 2014/15 and
how much are schools forum prepared to fund in
15/16? The city council has to ensure statutory duties are
– In addition DSG have historically funded support
around early education – is this value for money?
(Foundation Stage Parenting Support, EY Consultants)
– The council would not be able to cover the costs of some of
these areas so often it will be DSG funded or cut.
• Part B, additional £5m savings required
– To come from reducing, re-modelling children’s centres
and/or potential to discuss further funding with schools
forum and public health.
Ideas/models from the Early
Years Reference Group
• Reference Group on 6th June 2014 provided the following
ideas for EY
– Children Centres - Multi-agency approach/integrated working/
‘hub’, with a key worker for families
– Number of Children Centres to meet local needs
– Health Visitors role to be key at the universal provision and their
capacity to be looked at in new way; Council to focus resources
– A shared vision, with a network of support across the sector
– Early Education; – 2, 3 and 4 year old part time places delivered
in a integrated way
• Ideas are being shaped into options for future
• Reference Group also asked the question of costs and
finances for new model
Option 1
Do Nothing
• Deliver services as currently configured
This would mean
– £11m overspend for Birmingham City Council.
– Children’s outcomes would not improve
– Equity and access to services would not improve
– Narrowing the Gap – we would not improve for
• This is therefore not an option
Option 2
Cut Services
• To make £11m Savings = £6m of 14/15 DSG
funded services, £5m additional savings.
– Stopping central services currently funded by DSG
– £5m from reducing children’s centres budgets, by
efficiency savings, reducing overheads, reconfiguring
services and refocus and targeting of services, so
stopping delivering universal element
– Some early potential ways to reduce costs are:
• 0.4m following more integrated working between CC &
HV (new Birth visits)
• Potential 0.9m saved from achieving breakeven on BCC
childcare or cessation of BCC childcare.
• Exploring charging of services for those who can afford it
Option 3
Service Re-design 1
• DSG provides £11m financial support moving forward
– Continue to fund £6m agreed for central functions that
contribute to school readiness
– Provide additional £5m financial support for CCs which
provide parenting support/school readiness
– Deliver part time places to 2, 3 and 4 year olds from Sept
2015, which would enable a saving to DSG in 2015/16, and
£4m/ £4.5m fully realised for 2016/17
– Involve topslicing the DSG by £11m (will need to determine
from which blocks) and/or reduce the average cost per place
– Children Centres re-position to provide more 3 and 2 year old
self funded provision
– CC redesign to a multi-agency approach for universal
services, building social capital, and to build capacity to
deliver support to early education entitlement providers – a
saving for DSG
Option 4 – Service Redesign 2
Mix between cuts and DSG support
• DSG to continue to fund up to 5.5m for early years:
• Those central services and children’s centre functions
which are of most value to early education entitlement
and school readiness
• Deliver part time places to 2, 3 and 4 year olds from Sept
2015, which would enable a saving to DSG in 2015/16,
and £4m/£4.5 fully realised for 2016/17.
• Involve topslicing the DSG by £5.5m (will need to
determine from which blocks) and/or reduce the average
cost per place
• Remaining 4.5 to 5M look at reducing costs:
• Saving 0.4m following more integrated working between
CC & HV (new Birth visits)
• Potential 0.9m saving from stopping subsidising BCC
childcare, or looking to a break even model
• Restructuring or ceasing functions in both central and
children’s centres, focusing on statutory requirements,
reducing any duplication, focusing on targeted resources,
multi-agency approach/social capital for universal
To help us shape our re-design options, can you help
answer the following questions around those support
functions which are currently part funded by DSG.
• Which functions best contribute to help improve
outcomes for children?
• What do you value most as a function to providing
effective support?
• How do we best deliver that function, giving best value
for money?
• The details of these functions are on the next slide…..
Central Funded Functions
Support for PVI Settings
(including Childminders)
Costs for central cost that only support PVI settings, including
area like: Early Years Teachers, quality, inclusion,
safeguarding, workforce development, learning and welfare
£ 4,924,766
support for Children's Centre
cost for central costs that only support Children's Centres,
including areas like: strategic Management, monitoring, asset
management and events
£ 655,803
Support for EEE
operational cost of FEF.
£ 47,587
Staffing and infrastructure
Costs that support the running of early years sector, that are not
split by function of provider, includes: Leadership, admin,
sufficiency, information, systems, EY development
£ 1,244,700.00
Family Support staffing and
(delivery to hard to reach families and PHP)
£ 896,422.00
Parenting Support for
settings - language
(practitioners trained)
£ 85,405.00
Parenting support for parents (parents on course)
£ 157,999.00

People’s Directorate Children & Young People’s Services