APPENDIX 1(a)

CARMARTHENSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

REVENUE BUDGET 2015-16 to 2017-18

CONSULTATION

Index

Page

   
 

Public Consultation

3

 

Introduction

5

 

Key findings

8

 

Summary results

10

 

Detailed feedback on policy proposals

64

67

79

81

 

Suggestion for making savings or increasing income

Scrutiny Consultation

School Strategy and Budget Forum

Consultation meeting with the Trades Unions

     

CARMARTHENSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

BUDGET 2015-18 CONSULTATION

INTRODUCTION

A mixed-method approach to ascertaining views on the 2015-18 budget took place during the period from November 2014, to January 2015.

As in previous years, proposals for savings were split into ‘managerial’, and ‘policy’. 52 proposals were identified under the ‘policy’ heading, expressly because of their potential to directly impact upon service delivery. These 52, with a combined value of 26.974 million, have been the subject of this public consultation process.

There are a variety of legal and policy reasons why the Council must undertake full and meaningful consultation, where service changes are under consideration.1 Ultimately, a flawed approach can be a means whereby decisions can be challenged through the courts, through a process of Judicial Review. A decision against the Council would damage the reputation of Council, at a time when it needs to focus on responding to its challenging financial position.

This report:

1) OUTLINE OF APPROACH AND CONSULTATION METHODS

As in previous years, the settlement provided by Welsh Government has challenged the Council to make significant cost reductions. In response, Council departments identified proposals for making savings. These were considered at a series of departmental seminars for all councillors that took place during the period from October to early December.2

Alongside councillor engagement, public consultation took place in the following ways:

Budget road shows

Following publicity, sessions were held in seven locations across Carmarthenshire.3 The road shows led to discussion and contact with a total of 496 people. Budget surveys were distributed as were ‘postcards’ highlighting the opportunity to participate through the on-line survey.

On-line survey

The survey provided financial and service information on each of the 52 proposals and asked respondents to express a view on the degree to which they supported the proposal. Views were also sought regarding the potential impact of implementing the proposal on people and communities.4 Hard copies were available by request. A total of 1816 survey responses were received from various sections of the community.5

Citizens’ Panel survey

Combined data from the September 2014 issues of the 50+ Forum and Citizens’ Panel surveys has been used as a source of comment on the Council budget (474 comments).6 Other information from the surveys has been used to provide public perception on the relative importance attached to key Council services7 (see section below). In addition, each member of the Citizens’ Panel received a copy of the budget consultation survey itself.

Youth Council

A specific engagement session took place with representatives of the Youth Council on 6th January. Views were expressed on a number of proposals, as detailed later in the report.

Other

Comments were received from a featured Carmarthenshire News coupon (141 comments), with an additional 41 comments made via email or letter.

In addition, the consultation was publicised through relevant equality groups, including Equality Carmarthenshire and the Carmarthenshire Disability Coalition for Action. Community council involvement was encouraged through attendance at the liaison panel meeting held in December. Businesses were also approached for comment, through a direct mailing.

The public consultation phase ran from 18th November 2014 to 5th January 2015.


2) SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS

‘Importance’ of main Council services

Research was undertaken using the September issue of the Citizens Panel and 50+ Forum surveys.8 883 respondents rated the importance of a number of Council services using a scale from ‘very important’ to ‘not at all important’. The table shows the Average Index Score (AIS) for each service (final column), which is used to rank the services in order of importance. For the purpose of showing possible change over time, the results for 2013 are also included in the chart below.

The table shows that individual Council services are accorded different degrees of importance by survey respondents. It also shows that the results are largely consistent over the past two years.

Council Service

very important

fairly important

neither

not very important

not at all important

don't know

2013 Rank

2013 AIS

2014 Rank

2014 AIS

refuse collection

74%

24%

2%

0%

-

-

1

1.68

1

1.71

services and facilities for ill and disabled people

74%

23%

3%

1%

0%

0%

2

1.58

2

1.7

services and facilities for older people

64%

33%

3%

0%

-

0%

5

1.48

3

1.6

road maintenance

64%

31%

4%

1%

0%

0%

3

1.54

4

1.57

bus services

64%

27%

6%

2%

1%

0%

7

1.36

5

1.52

primary and secondary education

65%

24%

6%

2%

1%

1%

4

1.52

6

1.52

pavement maintenance

59%

32%

7%

2%

0%

-

8

1.34

7

1.48

public conveniences

60%

29%

8%

3%

1%

0%

9

1.34

8

1.44

recycling facilities

55%

34%

9%

2%

0%

-

6

1.37

9

1.41

environmental health / trading standards

43%

44%

8%

4%

0%

1%

10

1.19

10

1.27

street cleaning

39%

47%

12%

1%

1%

0%

12

1.16

11

1.23

youth clubs and facilities for young people

42%

40%

12%

4%

2%

1%

11

1.17

12

1.17

street lighting

43%

36%

14%

5%

1%

-

16

1.04

13

1.14

public car parks

40%

40%

15%

4%

1%

0%

15

1.06

14

1.13

consumer protection

35%

46%

10%

6%

1%

2%

13

1.11

15

1.09

council housing

36%

40%

16%

5%

1%

2%

14

1.09

16

1.06

parks, including Millennium Coastal Park, open spaces

33%

47%

13%

6%

2%

0%

18

0.9

17

1.03

council housing repairs

34%

40%

17%

6%

2%

2%

17

0.98

18

1.01

school transport

34%

38%

18%

5%

2%

2%

19

0.9

19

0.99

bus shelters

35%

39%

16%

6%

3%

1%

20

0.89

20

0.98

playgrounds

29%

44%

16%

7%

3%

2%

21

0.8

21

0.9

adult education

25%

48%

17%

6%

3%

1%

22

0.74

22

0.86

leisure centres

23%

49%

18%

8%

2%

0%

24

0.7

23

0.83

nursery education

29%

39%

20%

7%

4%

2%

22

0.75

24

0.83

planning services

20%

45%

23%

8%

2%

3%

25

0.7

25

0.75

countryside access

19%

43%

20%

13%

4%

1%

26

0.53

26

0.6

theatres, art galleries

15%

40%

25%

14%

6%

0%

27

0.36

27

0.45

festivals and events

13%

33%

28%

16%

8%

1%

28

0.1

28

0.28

Headline results – all 52 proposals

The table below shows the results from the on-line budget consultation survey. It shows details of the proposal, then gives results for the question: ‘how strongly do you agree, or disagree, with this proposal’.9 The table is ranked in order by AIS score. Those proposals with high levels of support are those with higher AIS scores, and therefore appear first.10

Proposal

3 Year Saving ('000)

Strongly Agree (%)

Agree (%)

Neither (%)

Disagree (%)

Strongly Disagree (%)

Average Index Score

Staff & Member Parking Charges

[pp. 10] [pagination yet to be finalised]

119

47.2

25.5

9.5

7.5

10.3

0.92

Home Tuition Service [pp. 11]

100

32.4

39.5

13.6

7.3

7.1

0.83

Standby [pp. 12]

400

33.2

35.5

18.4

6.1

6.7

0.82

Democratic Process [pp. 13]

29

42.6

27.2

10.9

8.1

11.2

0.82

Schools Early Voluntary Retirement costs [pp. 14]

300

32.6

38

14.3

9.2

5.9

0.82

Oriel Myrddin CCC [pp. 15]

29

28.6

32.4

31.1

4

4

0.78

Review of Theatre Service Provision [pp. 16]

48

23.5

34.1

28.3

7.6

6.5

0.61

Looked After Children - Leaving Care, Taxis & Individual Review Service [pp. 17]

50

19.6

42.1

22.6

8.8

6.9

0.59

Day Services for Residents with Learning Disabilities [pp. 18]

175

13.9

45.9

25.4

8.4

6.3

0.53

School Effectiveness Grant [pp. 19]

150

22.5

33.5

25.3

10.7

8.1

0.52

Supported Employment [pp. 20]

94

15.5

42

26.4

9.1

7

0.5

Early Years Education [pp. 21]

40

21.4

37.2

20.3

11.6

9.6

0.49

Revenues & Cash Desk (1) [pp. 22]

25

24.3

23.3

34.9

9.7

7.8

0.47

Looked After Children – Fostering [pp. 23]

50

17.8

36.9

26.9

10.2

8.1

0.46

Establishment of a Leisure Trust [pp. 24]

30

17.6

34.5

31.1

9.1

7.8

0.45

Welsh Language [pp. 25]

10

31.1

26

13.9

14.2

14.8

0.44

Delegated Schools Budget [pp. 26]

14151

18.9

33.1

25.9

11.8

10.2

0.39

School Meals [pp. 27]

200

22.5

37.6

11.2

12.2

16.6

0.37

Secondary Speech & Language Provision [pp. 28]

50

17.9

36.3

18.8

15

12

0.33

Fostering Support [pp. 29]

100

15.9

33.4

25.7

17.2

7.7

0.33

School Improvement Service

[pp. 30]

100

20.5

27.6

24.4

15.6

12

0.29

Home To College Transport [pp. 31]

477

19.5

33.8

17.4

13.2

16

0.28

Commissioning & Social Work

[pp. 32]

173

18.1

29.2

19.5

20.6

12.5

0.2

Libraries [pp. 33]

173

17.3

31.2

19.2

18.1

14.2

0.19

Revenues & Cash Desk (2) [pp. 34]

40

20.7

25.8

15.4

20.3

17.9

0.11

Youth Services [pp. 35]

193

15

23.3

29.1

23

9.6

0.11

Closure of a number of Leisure facilities [pp. 36]

365

16.3

25.2

23.7

20.2

14.6

0.09

Proposal

3 Year Saving ('000)

Strongly Agree (%)

Agree (%)

Neither (%)

Disagree (%)

Strongly Disagree (%)

Average Index Score

Nant y Ci Park & Ride [pp. 37]

63

18.6

20.1

23

24

14.2

0.05

Environmental Enforcement [pp. 38]

15

12

30.3

22.5

19.6

15.6

0.04

CCTV [pp. 39]

50

17.4

24.8

15.1

28.1

14.5

0.02

Council Tax Pensioner Grant [pp. 40]

236

17.5

22.7

19.4

24.3

16.2

0.01

Non-delegated school expenditure

[pp. 41]

69

19.4

25.8

12.4

20.6

21.8

0

Behaviour Support Services [pp. 42]

75

17.2

22.8

17.1

26.1

16.8

-0.02

Town Centre Management [pp. 43]

19

10.8

23.7

23.3

29.2

12.9

-0.1

School Crossing Patrols [pp. 44]

110

12.7

22.2

25

20

20.1

-0.13

Highway Lighting [pp. 45]

627

16.4

21.5

13.4

27.5

21.2

-0.15

Cleansing Services [pp. 46]

587

9.3

24.3

22.8

28.7

14.8

-0.15

Local Authority Residential Homes for Older People [pp. 47]

810

11.4

21

24.8

23.3

19.4

-0.18

Community Safety Revenue [pp. 48]

48

13

16.3

18.4

39.1

13.3

-0.23

Respite Centres and Residential Unit for Profoundly Disabled Children

[pp. 49]

200

11.4

23.8

19.7

21

24.1

-0.23

Day Care Centres for Older People

[pp. 50]

120

8.9

21.9

24.1

27.8

17.3

-0.23

Public Transport Support [pp. 51]

281

11.5

22.6

16.7

22.9

26.4

-0.3

Technical Surveys & Asset Management [pp. 52]

61

6.8

17.2

29.7

28.7

17.7

-0.33

Coastal Protection [pp. 53]

27

6.5

15.2

28.4

31.2

18.8

-0.4

Inclusion Services - Special Educational Needs [pp. 54]

400

9.6

16

21.9

29.2

23.3

-0.41

Home Care Services for Older People [pp. 55]

1400

9.2

15.5

22.9

28.3

24.2

-0.43

Bridge Maintenance [pp. 56]

320

5.4

16.6

24.7

33.3

19.9

-0.46

Remedial Earthworks [pp. 57]

112

4.5

10.5

22.8

41.4

20.7

-0.63

Highway Maintenance [pp. 58]

3,271

4.8

14.8

17.2

35.5

27.7

-0.66

Flood Defence & Land Drainage

[pp. 59]

128

7

9.4

17.9

37.2

28.4

-0.71

Meals on Wheels [pp. 60]

100

7

10.5

15.8

31.7

35

-0.77

Transport to Secondary Schools

[pp. 61]

174

10.4

11.6

6.3

3.5

68.2

-1.08

3) CONSULTATION FINDINGS – ALL PROPOSALS

Below, all 52 proposals are considered individually, in turn, in order to lay out a comprehensive summary of relevant consultation information.

Each summary begins by detailing relevant facts and figures, including the value of the proposal, its average index score (AIS), and its AIS rank against other proposals. It also gives an AIS for selected categories of respondent,11 for comparative purposes, and also to help meet our Equality Duty of demonstrating ‘due regard’ to equality. It is important to recognise that some proposals will be of specific relevance to people in certain categories. This must be taken in account in reaching decisions.

Views expressed through the public consultation - whether through surveys, letters and emails - have been considered together and themes identified.

The ‘other relevant information’ section includes information from specific sources, such as representations and organisational responses.

The views of councillors, (as expressed through budget seminars or scrutiny committees) are included under the ‘councillor engagement’ heading.

Of final note, consideration of each proposal ends with a record of the recommendation to be made to Council, with reasons. The Council is committed to responding to areas of improvement identified by the recent WLGA (Welsh Local Government Association) peer review. The inclusion of this closing element will assist in ensuring these important decisions, and their rationale, can be widely understood by those with an interest in the business of the Authority.

Staff & Member Parking Charges

Total Budget: N/A

3 Year Savings: 119,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

109

10

Description: Introduce a charge to staff and councillors for parking in the Authority's car parks. Income is net of administration and set-up costs. The proposal is based on a charge of 10 per month.


Average index score: 0.92

Overall Rank (of 52): 1

Sample Size: 642

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.27

1.29

0

0.42

0.87

1.12

0.93

0.89

1.17

1.09

1.1

Rank

38

3

2

5

2

1

1

3

1

1

2

Key themes from the public consultation (204 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Home Tuition Service

Total Budget: 1,552,000

3 Year Savings: 100,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

45

55

0

Description: This service provides short-term education to learners who cannot get to school due to illness. It is proposed to strengthen the threshold by only providing to learners who have a Consultant's letter certifying the need. In addition it is proposed to develop an e-teaching approach, requiring schools to take greater management responsibility for providing the tuition.


Average index score: 0.83

Overall Rank (of 52): 2

Sample Size: 645

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.72

1.33

-0.8

0.44

0.85

0.93

0.78

0.9

0.53

0.75

0.7

Rank

5

1

16

2

3

3

3

1

8

5

8

Key themes from the public consultation (179 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Standby

Total Budget: N/A

3 Year Savings: 400,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

400

0

0

Description: Renegotiation of standby rate and the review of its application. Standby is a payment made to employees who are expressly providing advice and/or full service during non-working hours, and who are required to remain available for call-out and contact for the duration of the Standby period. The Council spends over 1m a year on Standby allowances and Carmarthenshire has one of the highest Standby rates in Wales. It is therefore appropriate that we review both the rate paid and the application of the Standby allowance.


Average index score: 0.82

Overall Rank (of 52): 3

Sample Size: 684

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.82

0.88

-0.74

0.33

1.01

0.91

0.82

0.81

0.69

0.92

0.55

Rank

1

16

15

8

1

5

2

5

4

2

16

Key themes from the public consultation (278 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Democratic Process

Total budget: 1,828,000

3 Year Savings: 29,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

14

15

0

Description:

2015/16 14k – Thorough review of meeting schedules/cycles/timing, etc.

2016/17 15K – Members' PC's and laptops to be replaced with iPads/tablets leading to paperless meetings (saving printing and postage for all meetings).


Average index score: 0.82

Overall Rank (of 52): 3

Sample Size: 643

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.82

1

0.09

0.43

0.81

0.93

0.75

0.86

0.82

0.91

0.22

Rank

1

6

1

4

4

3

5

4

2

3

26

Key themes from the public consultation (321 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Schools Early Voluntary Retirement Costs

Total Budget: 1,571,000

3 Year Savings: 300,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

150

150

Description: When teachers are made redundant by school Governing Bodies the County Council has to pay the associated costs. It is proposed to review the redeployment protocol and terms of release and work with schools to minimise the need for redundancy by redeploying staff within the wider schools system where possible. It is also proposed that schools will need to share the burden of any future costs.


Average index score: 0.82

Overall Rank (of 52): 3

Sample Size: 644

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.76

1

-0.86

0.44

0.79

0.97

0.72

0.9

0.76

0.75

1.22

Rank

3

6

19

2

6

2

6

1

3

5

1

Key themes from the public consultation (160 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Oriel Myrddin Gallery (Carmarthen)

Total Budget: 102,000

3 Year Savings: 29,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

29

0

Description: Phased transfer to independent trust status from 2016/17.


Average index score: 0.78

Overall Rank (of 52): 6

Sample Size: 602

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.74

1

-1.5

0.63

0.81

0.8

0.77

0.77

0.69

0.77

0.56

Rank

4

6

34

1

4

7

4

6

4

4

12

Key themes from the public consultation (85 comments):

Other relevant information:

Expert Group representing Carmarthenshire Museum Service – it is necessary to preserve Carmarthenshire’s rich heritage through the guardianship of artefacts. Inter-authority working would minimize administrative costs for Museum Services; Trust Status has had mixed success. Building maintenance, staff expertise and educational importance of service also requires careful deliberation.

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Review of Theatre Service Provision

Total Budget: 776,000

3 Year Savings: 48,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

0

48

Description: Reduction in service specification and review of current Carmarthenshire Theatres delivery model to meet the increased efficiency target for

2017/18.


Average index score: 0.61

Overall Rank (of 52): 7

Sample Size: 618

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.54

0.2

-1

0.16

0.56

0.81

0.52

0.72

0.32

0.61

0.56

Rank

7

35

21

9

8

6

7

7

16

7

12

Key themes from the public consultation (127 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Looked After Children - Leaving Care, Taxis & Individual Review Service

Total Budget: 711,000

3 Year Savings: 50,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

0

50

Description: Taxis are used to transport children when Looked After, either going to school, or for contact. Care leavers receive ongoing support up to 21, or even 25 if in full time education. A reduction of children coming into care; and the additional resources to support their rehabilitation home through targeted resources should contribute to a fall in numbers; both those in care, and those leaving care, and as a result, should achieve a financial reduction in these areas over time.


Average index score: 0.59

Overall Rank (of 52): 8

Sample Size: 627

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.4

0.8

-0.67

0.03

0.6

0.69

0.46

0.71

0.47

0.59

0.78

Rank

11

18

12

13

7

11

10

8

11

9

5

Key themes from the public consultation (103 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Day Services for Residents with Learning Disabilities

Total Budget: 1,334,000

3 Year Savings: 175,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

85

90

0

Description: Efficiencies and greater utilisation could be achieved by the reconfiguration of existing day opportunity provision and by working in partnership with a variety of organisations and local community groups.


Average index score: 0.53

Overall Rank (of 52): 9

Sample Size: 617

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.38

0.6

-1.6

0.41

0.49

0.8

0.51

0.55

0.65

0.6

0.78

Rank

13

23

41

6

12

7

9

13

6

8

5

Key themes from the public consultation (76 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

School Effectiveness Grant

Total Budget: 527,000

3 Year Savings: 150,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

150

0

0

Description: The Welsh Government is replacing 11 existing specific education grants with 1 new grant. Currently we have to provide some County Council funding in order to receive the Welsh Government grants. We have been advised that the level of grant will reduce and therefore the Council plans to reduce its match funding contribution accordingly.


Average index score: 0.52

Overall Rank (of 52): 10

Sample Size: 645

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.25

0.67

-0.67

-0.21

0.54

0.67

0.38

0.7

0.26

0.49

0.89

Rank

19

21

12

25

9

12

15

9

17

11

4

Key themes from the public consultation (112 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Supported Employment

Total Budget: 1,334,000

3 Year Savings: 94,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

44

50

0

Description: The Authority provides training and supported employment opportunities for people with learning disabilities. It is proposed that the Council will consider maintaining and improving the service by looking at the potential of a Local Authority Trading Company and/or working with a Social Enterprise.


Average index score: 0.5

Overall Rank (of 52): 11

Sample Size: 626

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.4

0.8

-1

0.1

0.45

0.72

0.52

0.49

0.4

0.53

0.78

Rank

11

18

21

11

14

10

7

19

14

10

5

Key themes from the public consultation (95 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Early Years Education

Total Budget: 534,000

3 Year Savings: 40,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

40

0

Description: Every three year old child is entitled to 10 hours free early years education. Currently not all Carmarthenshire 3 year olds are accessing provision. To ensure consistency and equality we have recently undertaken a review of nursery education and one option would be to transfer the responsibility and a reduced budget to all schools thus allowing all 3 year olds to access early years education in their catchment area school. Schools would have to manage within their current resources. Potential impact on private/voluntary sector providers of early years education. However, possible increase hours/employment opportunities in school.


Average index score: 0.49

Overall Rank (of 52): 12

Sample Size: 637

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.29

1.17

-0.57

0.06

0.51

0.58

0.43

0.57

0.55

0.49

0.56

Rank

18

4

10

12

11

19

11

10

7

11

12

Key themes from the public consultation (158 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Revenues and Cash Desk (1)

Total Budget: 789,000

3 Year Savings: 25,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

25

0

Description: Closure of Llandeilo Cash Office.


Average index score: 0.47

Overall Rank (of 52): 13

Sample Size: 630

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.49

1.33

-0.36

0.37

0.53

0.46

0.39

0.57

0.12

0.42

0.38

Rank

10

1

6

7

10

21

14

10

21

15

18

Key themes from the public consultation (219 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Looked After Children - Fostering

Total Budget: 2,568,000

3 Year Savings: 50,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

50

0

Description: Based on a further reduction in the number of Looked After Children. Programmes such as Flying Start and Families First are assisting with early prevention and support to families and it is anticipated that these will succeed in keeping children within their own families. Families First should also assist children to return home through targeted programmes.


Average index score: 0.46

Overall Rank (of 52): 14

Sample Size: 628

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.22

1.17

-1.17

0

0.42

0.64

0.42

0.5

0.51

0.47

0.67

Rank

21

4

30

15

16

14

12

17

9

13

9

Key themes from the public consultation (110 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Establishment of a Leisure Trust

Total Budget: 2,937,000

3 Year Savings: 30,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

30

0

0

Description: Due to only partial delivery of the efficiency associated with charging for school use at sites which are accessed by schools and the general public there is a necessity to accelerate the possible transfer of leisure facilities' management to a Leisure Trust in order to realise efficiencies as per the targets set. If approved, the realistic delivery timescale is likely to result in the full Trust status being implemented by 2017/18.


Average index score: 0.45

Rank (of 52): 15

Sample Size: 615

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.53

1

-1.6

-0.33

0.44

0.65

0.42

0.47

0.46

0.44

0.33

Rank

8

6

41

34

15

13

12

20

12

14

19

Key themes from the public consultation (110 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Welsh Language

Total Budget: 181,000

3-Year Savings: 10,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

10

0

0

Description: Reduced budget for undertaking projects to support the development of the use of the Welsh language within the Council and in the Community.


Average index score: 0.44

Overall Rank (of 52): 16

Sample Size: 669

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.56

0.29

-0.25

-0.47

0.48

0.63

0.34

0.56

0.22

0.36

0.91

Rank

6

33

3

40

13

16

16

12

19

16

3

Key themes from the public consultation (336 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Assurances sought that changes will not undermine Welsh Language Census Group

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Delegated Schools Budget

Total Budget: 109,445,000

3 Year Savings: 14,151,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

157

7,455

6,539

Description: Reduce delegated school budget in year 1 as a result of an overall fall in pupil numbers. The target reductions in years 2 and 3 are significant (13,994,000) and therefore the Local Authority will consult schools in terms of how such reductions are to be delivered.


Average index score: 0.39

Overall Rank (of 52): 17

Sample Size: 625

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0

1

-1

-0.28

0.28

0.76

0.26

0.51

0.49

0.34

0.22

Rank

29

6

21

30

22

9

19

15

10

17

26

Key themes from the public consultation (116 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

School Meals

Total budget: 1,531,000

3 Year Savings: 200,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

100

100

0

Description: It is proposed to increase the cost of a primary school meal price to 2.30 in April 2015 (inflation + 5p) and 2.40 in April 2016 (inflation + 5p). There will be similar increases in charges for food in secondary schools.


Average index score: 0.37

Overall Rank (of 52): 18

Sample Size: 663

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.35

0.67

-1.08

-0.83

0.41

0.64

0.24

0.54

0.34

0.34

0.3

Rank

15

21

28

49

17

14

20

14

15

17

24

Key themes from the public consultation (257 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Secondary Speech and Language Provision

Total Budget: 1,453,000

3 Year Savings: 50,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

50

0

Description: The County Council proposes to remodel how support is provided for secondary age pupils with speech, language and communication needs and move away from a special unit provision to enable support and provision in all schools.


Average index score: 0.33

Overall Rank (of 52): 19

Sample Size: 642

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.31

1

-0.86

0

0.33

0.48

0.34

0.35

0.21

0.34

0.11

Rank

16

6

19

15

19

20

16

22

20

17

32

Key themes from the public consultation (183 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Fostering Support

Total Budget: 983,000

3 Year Savings: 100,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

100

0

0

Description: Reduce scale of dedicated fostering support team but seek to ensure sufficient support to foster carers in the future through remodelling provision across a wider service base. Decommission dedicated out of hours fostering support and incorporate within other out of hours services.


Average index score: 0.33

Overall Rank (of 52): 19

Sample Size: 622

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.06

1

-1.33

-0.03

0.33

0.43

0.27

0.36

0.1

0.32

0.33

Rank

26

6

31

17

19

22

18

21

22

20

19

Key themes from the public consultation:

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

School Improvement Service

Total Budget: 188,000

3 Year Savings: 100,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

100

0

0

Description: Reduce County Council's School Improvement team, reducing support for humanities subjects.


Average index score: 0.29

Overall Rank (of 52): 21

Sample Size: 635

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.04

0.83

-1.5

-0.4

0.35

0.38

0.08

0.5

0.25

0.23

0.33

Rank

28

17

34

38

18

23

25

17

18

22

19

Key themes from the public consultation (124 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Home to College Transport

Total Budget: 544,000

3 Year Savings: 477,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

65

412

Description: Charging/removal of support for discretionary post – 16 transport service from the 1st September 2016. The decision is subject to statutory consultation. Other Local Authorities across Wales already charge or are considering a charge. Transport will still be available for post 16, but pupils will have to pay.


Average index score: 0.28

Overall Rank (of 52): 22

Sample Size: 650

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.3

-0.6

-1.86

-0.64

0.32

0.63

0.17

0.51

0.45

0.31

0.56

Rank

17

46

51

42

21

16

21

15

13

21

12

Key themes from the public consultation (115 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Commissioning and Social Work

Total Budget: 5,409,000

3 Year Savings: 173,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

173

0

0

Description: Reduce costs by remodelling social work teams, affording priority to maintaining manageable and safe caseloads in child protection practice, whilst acknowledging that overall capacity across children’s services will reduce.


Average index score: 0.2

Overall Rank (of 52): 23

Sample Size: 630

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.14

1

-1

0.12

0.21

0.25

0.07

0.35

-0.03

0.18

-0.22

Rank

22

6

21

10

25

25

26

22

25

24

39

Key themes from the public consultation (146 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Libraries

Total Budget: 2,412,000

3 Year Savings: 173,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

29

94

50

Description: Review delivery models for community and mobile library provision, contract cleaning and staff. Look positively at electronic / on-line solutions, along with co-location of premises where possible. Seek partnership funding from Town & Community councils for localised provision. Savings can only be delivered through significant reduction in branch libraries with a different mobile solution.


Average index score: 0.19

Rank (of 52): 24

Sample Size: 625

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.53

0.8

-0.5

0.03

0.26

0.19

0.15

0.27

0.04

0.22

0.22

Rank

8

18

8

13

23

27

22

25

24

23

26

Key themes from the public consultation (189 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

The need for change generally accepted. Consideration should be given to multi-functional sites offering other services; also, delivery via community assets like local shops or community centres (budget seminar)

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

 

Revenues & Cash Desk (2)

Total Budget: 789,000

3 Year Savings: 40,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

40

0

0

Description: Introduction of charging for credit card payments.


Average index score: 0.11

Overall Rank (of 52): 25

Sample Size: 644

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.13

0

-0.82

-0.35

0.24

0.04

0.1

0.13

-0.37

0.14

-0.11

Rank

23

40

17

36

24

31

24

29

37

25

37

Key themes from the public consultation (245 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

    1

    2

    3

Youth Services

Total Budget: 556,000

3 Year Savings: 193,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

93

100

0

Description: It is proposed to reduce the scale of Youth Service provision by removing some existing services and re-model provision in line with conclusions of the Education and Children's Services Task and Finish Group review of youth clubs. This could potentially impact on the numbers of young people classified as NEET (Not in Employment, Education or Training).


Average index score: 0.11

Overall Rank (of 52): 25

Sample Size: 635

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.21

1

-1

-0.14

0.12

0.22

0

0.28

-0.1

0.04

0.11

Rank

36

6

21

22

27

26

28

24

28

28

32

Key themes from the public consultation (171 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

 

Closure of a Number of Leisure Facilities

Total Budget: 2,937,000

3 Year Savings: 365,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

35

330

Description: With the efficiency targets set for the Division a review of leisure provision throughout the County has to be undertaken with potential closure of some venues. The service will also explore alternative service delivery models i.e. Trust model.


Average index score: 0.09

Overall Rank (of 52): 27

Sample Size: 630

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.23

0.4

-1.83

-0.33

0.06

0.28

0.01

0.17

-0.14

0.05

0.22

Rank

20

30

50

34

28

24

27

27

30

27

26

Key themes from the public consultation (183 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Nant y Ci Park and Ride

Total Budget: 64,000

3 Year Savings: 63,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

63

0

0

Description: Remove Park & Ride facility. Currently, the Park and Ride facility attracts approx. 800 users per week on average. The service supports Carmarthen town centre and helps mitigate traffic pressures. It may lead to reduced availability of parking in the Centre. Loss of over spill parking area for events held in the Showground.


Average index score: 0.05

Overall Rank (of 52): 28

Sample Size: 612

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.28

0.6

-1.5

-0.13

0.03

0.11

-0.11

0.18

0.06

-0.03

-0.13

Rank

39

23

34

21

29

29

32

26

23

30

38

Key themes from the public consultation (146 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Environmental Enforcement

Total Budget: 527,000

3 Year Savings: 15,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

5

10

0

Description: Environmental enforcement covers dog fouling, nuisance vehicles, abandoned vehicles, graffiti and fly posting offences - it is proposed to reduce the supplies and equipment budget associated with this service and undertake individual service review to achieve savings.


Average index score: 0.04

Overall Rank (of 52): 29

Sample Size: 617

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.06

1

-1.5

-0.23

0.14

-0.09

0.12

-0.09

-0.1

0.08

-0.29

Rank

26

6

34

26

26

37

23

36

28

26

40

Key themes from the public consultation (137 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

CCTV

Total budget: 154,000

3 Year Savings: 50,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

25

25

Description: Reduce monitoring to peak activity times only - hours to be confirmed by discussion with police colleagues, depending on future staffing levels. It is anticipated that these key times would include weekend day and evening shifts. This will reduce effectiveness of the service in identifying crimes and suspected offenders, directing of police operations etc.


Average index score: 0.02

Overall Rank (of 52): 30

Sample Size: 661

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.31

0.29

-0.41

-0.05

-0.02

0.11

-0.05

0.09

-0.17

0.01

0

Rank

43

33

7

19

32

29

29

31

31

29

34

Key themes from the public consultation (295 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Council Tax Pensioner Grant

Total Budget: 15,371,000

3 Year Savings: 236,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

236

0

0

Description: Discontinuation of the former Welsh Government "Helping Pensioners with their Council Tax" scheme. The Scheme in recent years has involved making additional payments to pensioners in receipt of partial Council Tax benefit. The additional payment has been 100 per qualifying pensioner household (or the actual amount of their annual bill if less than 100).


Average index score: 0.01

Overall Rank (of 52): 31

Sample Size: 635

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0

-0.43

-0.82

-0.08

0.03

0

-0.11

0.11

-0.29

-0.05

-0.56

Rank

29

44

17

20

29

33

32

30

35

31

44

Key themes from the public consultation (275 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Non-delegated School Expenditure

Total Budget: 597,000

3 Year Savings: 69,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

69

0

0

Description: Schools need copyright licenses in order to be able to use DVDs, CDs, music, books and magazines as part of lessons. At present the County Council pays for these licenses but it is proposed to transfer the cost to schools.


Average index score: 0

Overall Rank (of 52): 32

Sample Size: 660

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.36

0.43

-0.67

-0.84

0.01

0.18

-0.07

0.04

-0.22

-0.14

0.5

Rank

14

29

12

50

31

28

30

32

33

35

17

Key themes from the public consultation (283 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Behaviour Support Services

Total Budget: 1,552,000

3 Year Savings: 75,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

75

0

0

Description: This service provides advice and support to schools on managing the behaviour of pupils. A remodelling of the management of the service is proposed to reduce costs and a reduction in the number of behaviour support teachers. Reductions in staff will result in a reduced service for schools in respect of support and advice on managing challenging behaviour.


Average index score: -0.02

Overall Rank (of 52): 33

Sample Size: 644

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.3

0.5

-1

-0.03

-0.03

0.03

-0.19

0.17

-0.19

-0.07

0.33

Rank

42

27

21

17

33

32

35

27

32

32

19

Key themes from the public consultation (250 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Town Centre Management

Total Budget: 61,000

3 Year Savings: 19,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

7

12

0

Description: Proposal relates to the maintenance, cleansing and repair of town centre assets - furniture, benches and paving. Maintenance of town centres will be limited to emergency works to deal with trips and falls, with limited scope for the maintenance, cleaning and renewal of street furniture, canopies, signage and chewing gum removal.


Average index score: -0.1

Overall Rank (of 52): 34

Sample Size: 619

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.07

0.6

-1.5

-0.32

-0.04

-0.17

-0.1

-0.13

-0.24

-0.09

0.63

Rank

32

23

34

33

34

40

31

39

34

33

10

Key themes from the public consultation (148 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

School Crossing Patrols

Total Budget: 218,000

3 Year Savings: 110,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

55

55

0

Description: Efficiencies can be gained by de-selection of School Crossing Patrol sites using the criteria for the assessment of school crossing patrol sites, published in RoSPA’s School Crossing Patrol national guidance document.


Average index score: -0.13

Overall Rank (of 52): 35

Sample Size: 631

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.17

-0.63

-1.43

-0.3

-0.1

-0.05

-0.16

-0.06

-0.08

-0.1

0.3

Rank

34

48

33

32

36

34

34

34

27

34

24

Key themes from the public consultation (139 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Highway Lighting

Total Budget: 1,616,000

3 Year Savings: 627,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

258

196

173

Description: Phased switch off of a minimum 9,100 lights permanently (out of a county stock of around 20,000); Re-assessment of service levels and standards which will lead to a lower level of service. Inability to provide for any future asset growth as a result of new developments, traffic calming measures etc; a reduction in reactive maintenance; column renewals and upgrades of highway/street lighting would cease. A review of manning-levels, transport and plant will form part of this process. This may increase the risk and frequency of road traffic accidents. There would also be a potential increase in anti-social behaviour and residents' fear of crime.


Average index score: -0.15

Overall Rank (of 52): 36

Sample Size: 633

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.1

0.17

-1.57

-0.36

-0.06

-0.17

-0.27

-0.01

-0.45

-0.22

0.22

Rank

33

39

40

37

35

40

39

33

39

37

26

Key themes from the public consultation (251 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Cleansing Services

Total Budget: 2,028,000

3 Year Savings: 587,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

312

159

116

Description: Service review to be undertaken that will include reassessing current service levels and standards in order to meet proposed budget constraints, whilst continuing to meet the obligations of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. This will necessitate a re-evaluation of the current resources deployed within the service, including a reduction in the number of mechanical sweepers and a reduction in the frequency of litter picking and sweeping in town centres and urban areas, with cessation of routine litter collection in outlying and residential areas.


Average index score: -0.15

Overall Rank (of 52): 36

Sample Size: 613

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.09

0.4

-1.5

-0.26

-0.13

-0.13

-0.2

-0.15

-0.33

-0.15

0.63

Rank

24

30

34

27

38

38

36

40

36

36

10

Key themes from the public consultation (186 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Local Authority Residential Homes for Older People

Total Budget: 4,795,000

3 Year Savings: 810,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

580

230

0

Description:

1) In order to minimise the disruption to clients and staff from the closure of Glanmorlais & Tegfan and the opening of the Ammanford Extra Care scheme it is proposed to close either Glanmarlais or Tegfan early.

2) In order to remove excess capacity within the authority's Residential Homes it is proposed to review and realign provision in the Llanelli area.

3) In 2015/16 it is proposed to charge for flexi beds which will generate income of 50k.


Any home closures will impact on bed capacity and this will affect service user choice within the localities they are situated.

Average index score: -0.18

Overall Rank (of 52): 38

Sample Size: 613

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

0.08

0.2

-1.75

-0.26

-0.16

-0.18

-0.31

-0.08

-0.49

-0.24

-0.33

Rank

25

35

49

27

39

42

41

35

41

40

41

Key themes from the public consultation (143 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Community Safety Revenue

Total budget: 61,000

3 Year Savings: 48,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

33

15

0

Description: Reduced support for projects delivered in partnership to target Community Safety Partnership priorities including acquisitive crime (burglary, scams, rogue traders and vehicle crimes); anti-social behaviour and criminal damage; road safety; and violent and substance misuse related crime.


Average index score: -0.23

Overall Rank (of 52): 39

Sample Size: 640

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.29

0.5

-0.31

-0.16

-0.22

-0.27

-0.24

-0.21

-0.46

-0.23

-0.75

Rank

41

27

4

23

41

44

37

42

40

38

49

Key themes from the public consultation (255 responses):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Respite Centres and Residential Unit for Profoundly Disabled Children

Total Budget: 1,200,000

3 Year Savings: 200,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

0

0

200

Description: There is potential to move from 2 respite centres to 1, with a compensating increase in home based outreach respite support, realising up to 200,000 of expenditure savings. Some staff may be redeployed to the outreach service, others may be made redundant. The children who currently use this service would need to be offered support for them and their families by using more community support packages and retaining residential care for only the most complex of children for whom community support alternatives would be difficult to develop.


Average index score: -0.23

Overall Rank (of 52): 39

Sample Size: 630

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.49

0.2

-0.5

-0.19

-0.32

-0.06

-0.33

-0.12

-0.43

-0.23

0.33

Rank

49

35

8

24

43

36

42

37

38

38

19

Key themes from the public consultation (151 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Day Care Centres for Older People

Total Budget: 661,000

3 Year Savings: 120,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

120

0

0

Description: Saving to be made by continuing to implement the Review of Day services for Older People.


Average index score: -0.23

Overall Rank (of 52): 39

Sample Size: 626

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.36

-1

-0.33

-0.76

-0.32

-0.05

-0.34

-0.12

-0.63

-0.3

0.22

Rank

45

50

5

46

43

34

43

37

46

41

26

Key themes from the public consultation (140 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Public Transport Support

Total Budget: 1,048,000 3 Year Savings: 281,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

157

124

0

Description:

50k - Further reduction in bus services;

8K - Remove support for the Welsh Government scheme to provide discounted travel for Concessionary Travel Pass holders during winter months on the Heart of Wales line;

3k - Reduce support for the Heart of Wales forum from 7k to 4k per annum;

96k - Remove provision of fare paying school buses. Currently provision is made for children to pay to travel on subsidised buses in some areas to schools within their

"statutory walking distance" where the children are not eligible for free travel. Commercial operators could run these services without subsidy.


Average index score: -0.3

Overall Rank (of 52): 42

Sample Size: 660

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.06

-0.67

-1.41

-0.71

-0.16

-0.21

-0.26

-0.27

-0.58

-0.34

-0.33

Rank

31

49

32

45

39

43

38

43

44

43

41

Key themes from the public consultation (199 comments):

Other relevant information:

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Technical Surveys & Asset Management

Total Budget: 332,000

3 Year Savings: 61,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

25

36

0

Description:

1) Footway condition surveys - potential cessation of a programme of National standard accredited footway network surveys (FNS)

2) Reduced budget provision for Technical hardware i.e. computer equipment, mapping software and computer systems support.

3) Road condition surveys - potential cessation of annual scanner surveys to all Classes of road (3500km) - scanner survey identifies road profile, cracking and rutting levels - produces National Highway condition performance indicator for reports to WG.

Reduction in our ability to monitor road conditions and to provide sufficient evidence of condition trends, thereby reducing our capability to prioritise works.


Average index score: -0.33

Overall Rank (of 52): 43

Sample Size: 617

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.19

0.6

-1.6

-0.29

-0.23

-0.48

-0.3

-0.37

-0.56

-0.33

0

Rank

35

23

41

31

42

47

40

46

42

42

34

Key themes from the public consultation (131 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Coastal Protection

Total Budget: 67,000

3 Year Savings: 27,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

11

8

8

Description: Reduction in maintenance of coastal protection schemes. Most of the Coast Protection budget is spent on reactive work following storms and other bad weather events. A progressive reduction in budget will diminish the scope and scale of the works programme and have an impact on our ability to react to storm events.


Average index score: -0.4

Rank (of 52): 44

Sample Size: 613

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.36

0.2

-1.6

-0.58

-0.38

-0.41

-0.49

-0.34

-0.56

-0.36

-0.75

Rank

45

35

41

41

45

45

44

45

42

44

49

Key themes from the public consultation (126 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Inclusion Services – Special Educational Needs

Total Budget: 1,453,000

3 Year Savings: 400,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

200

200

0

Description: When learners with a Statement of Special Education Needs leave school the Statement comes to an end. It is planned to reduce the level of funding provided to schools by giving up some of the funding associated with statements that expire. Consequently, there will be less funding available to schools to support children and young people with additional needs.


Average index score: -0.41

Overall Rank (of 52): 45

Sample Size: 644

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.73

0

-1.14

-0.44

-0.51

-0.14

-0.57

-0.2

-0.6

-0.51

0

Rank

52

40

29

39

48

39

47

41

45

48

34

Key themes from the public consultation (171 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Home Care Services for Older People

Total Budget: 5,452,000 3 Year Savings: 1,400,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

350

1,050

0

Description: Home care is provided to eligible older people directly by the Authority, or by the independent Sector. The proposal is to explore options for transfer all remaining in house Long Term Domiciliary Care hours to Local Authority Arms Length Trading Company, Social enterprise operation or the independent sector. Local Authority would no longer be a long term domiciliary care provider with alternative arrangements being put in place. This does bring with it potential risks which have to be weighed against the potential savings which can be delivered.


Average index score: -0.43

Overall Rank (of 52): 46

Sample Size: 621

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.22

0.4

-1

-0.27

-0.42

-0.45

-0.56

-0.3

-0.71

-0.45

-0.56

Rank

37

30

21

29

47

46

46

44

48

45

44

Key themes from the public consultation (179 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Bridge Maintenance

Total Budget: 827,000

3 Year Savings: 320,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

132

100

88

Description: Reduction in basic reactive Bridge Maintenance works. This will ultimately result in planned maintenance works having to be curtailed with the majority of the budget having to be expended in addressing reactive issues – replacement of collapsed culverts, scour damage to substructures, structural repairs following vehicular collision.


Average index score: -0.46

Overall Rank (of 52): 47

Sample Size: 627

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.34

0

-1.6

-0.78

-0.39

-0.49

-0.52

-0.4

-0.67

-0.47

-0.56

Rank

44

40

41

47

46

48

45

47

47

46

44

Key themes from the public consultation (125 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Remedial Earthworks

Total Budget: 287,000

3 Year Savings: 112,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

46

35

31

Description: Reduction in basic reactive maintenance of highway support embankments and walls. The majority of the remedial earthworks budget is spent on reactive works. Further budget reduction will mean continued deterioration of highway support structures.


Average index score: -0.63

Overall Rank (of 52): 48

Sample Size: 618

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.4

-0.4

-1.6

-0.65

-0.51

-0.82

-0.64

-0.65

-0.79

-0.6

-0.56

Rank

47

43

41

43

48

52

48

49

50

49

44

Key themes from the public consultation (125 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

N/A

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Highway Maintenance

Total Budget: 8,477,000 3 Year Savings: 3,271,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

1,343

1,015

913

Description: Re-assessment of service delivery and standards which will consider reductions in structural works, cyclical maintenance including emergency response, drainage works, mechanical sweeping, surface treatment works, winter maintenance, verge mowing and weed control functions. A review of manning-levels, transport and plant will form part of this process. As a result of the interim review of manning levels the service is near to the optimum manning-level with a further review to be undertaken.

Likely impacts: increased risk of hazards, slower response time during periods of adverse weather conditions, greater disruptions to road users, reduction in number of primary presalt routes.


Average index score: -0.66

Overall Rank (of 52): 49

Sample Size: 622

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.4

-0.6

-1.67

-0.66

-0.59

-0.71

-0.65

-0.65

-0.98

-0.66

-0.56

Rank

47

46

47

44

50

51

49

49

51

50

44

Key themes from the public consultation (212 comments):

Other relevant information:

N/A

Councillor engagement:

A range of views expressed. Some questioned the impact in terms of claims against the Authority, accidents and long term maintenance costs (budget seminar)

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Flood Defence and Land Drainage

Total Budget: 322,000

3 Year Savings: 128,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

52

42

34

Description: Reduction in flood defence and land drainage maintenance / improvement works. The reduction will impact on our ability to resolve flooding / draining issues, and to provide measures that will lessen the risk of flooding.


Average index score: -0.71

Overall Rank (of 52): 50

Sample Size: 626

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.56

-0.5

-1.67

-0.91

-0.68

-0.7

-0.77

-0.68

-0.75

-0.69

-0.78

Rank

50

45

47

51

51

50

51

51

49

51

51

Key themes from the public consultation (176 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Concern expressed about climate trends. Views against the proposal. Improve collaboration with Natural Resources Wales and other agencies (budget seminar)

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Meals on Wheels

Total Budget: 155,000

3 Year Savings: 100,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

100

0

0

Description: Cessation of Hot Meals Delivery.


Average index score: -0.77

Overall Rank (of 52): 51

Sample Size: 628

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.68

-1.6

-0.57

-0.82

-0.87

-0.61

-0.85

-0.7

-1.08

-0.81

-0.33

Rank

51

51

10

48

52

49

52

52

52

52

41

Key themes from the public consultation (228 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

Transport to Secondary Schools

Total Budget: 4,430,000

3 Year Savings: 174,000

2015 - 16

2016 - 17

2017 - 18

4

0

170

Description:

4k - Introduction of an administrative charge of 50 for annual issue of "spare seat" bus passes;

170k - Remove free transport to denominational schools. At present the Authority offers free transport above the minimum requirements to denominational schools. Most of the transport is in respect of St.John Lloyd and St.Marys schools in Llanelli. The policy is more generous than for other schools and there are signs of a growth in the numbers. Other Local Authorities are removing provision.


Average index score: -1.08

Overall Rank (of 52): 52

Sample Size: 1738

 

Staff

BME

-16

16-24

25-64

65+

F

M

Dis-abled

Rel-igion

LGB

AIS

-0.28

-1.71

-1.86

-1.57

-0.11

0.62

-0.72

-0.41

-0.06

-0.5

-1.04

Rank

39

52

51

52

37

18

50

48

26

47

52

Key themes from the public consultation (1133 comments):

Other relevant information:

Councillor engagement:

Recommendation:

supported / not supported

Reasons:

In total, over 970 comments were made through the public consultation. This section reflects the most relevant themes.

The consultation demonstrates widespread public understanding of the financial constraints facing the Council. This is reflected in the many very realistic comments and suggestions made. However, where a view is expressed on the subject, the Council is encouraged to exercise restraint in respect of any rises to Council Tax.14

A number of comments were made concerning the staffing structure of the organisation. This is unsurprising given workforce cost is a major component of Council service delivery. It is typically felt that the need for management roles in general should be critically examined, and that the number, and salary, of senior management ought to be reviewed.

Furthermore, comments suggest the view that effective public service delivery depends to a great extent on staff at the ‘front line’. There is support for the view that maintaining high quality services relies on the ‘front line’ taking precedence over support and ‘back office’ functions. Councillors involved in budget consultation discussions have likewise generally supported the view that processes need to be as efficient as possible, in order services deliver the maximum value to the public.

A commonly held view related to reducing the costs associated with the democratic process, namely expenses, allowances and number of members. A number believed there was further scope for savings in this area.

A group of responses related to the approach the Council ought to take in considering the budget. There was support for the idea that there should be priority to statutory services, reductions should be fair and equitable, and that there should be no areas of protection. An alternative view with support was the idea that certain services need protecting – in particular, public transport, services for vulnerable people, and public toilets. This distinction was also in evidence in relation to each of the 52 proposals discussed earlier.

Another common view was that the Council should seek different ways of doing things. There was widespread support for further 3rd sector (charities and non-profit making organisations) involvement in service delivery, though much less support for private sector involvement, especially in areas such as social care. Of interest is evidence to suggest that reorganisation may be considered acceptable, if this enabled the quality of service delivery to be protected.

Other comments related to the need to further examine options such asset transfer, and perhaps more radically, the establishment of a trading arm of the Council

Specific ideas for saving money included:

A number of suggestions for savings were made specifically in relation to the internal arrangements of the Authority:

Furthermore, a number of ideas were put forward concerning maximising income.

Councillor engagement

The involvement of councillors is critical to effective engagement in respect of the budget consultation. The following issues were highlighted through the councillor budget seminars, or through scrutiny committee budget discussions.

Statutory provision – such services must be provided, but (as with other services) judgements need to be made concerning the quality specification of service delivery.

Collaboration - which results in cost savings - should be exhaustively pursued. For instance, it is sensible to link with Local Service Board organisations when considering requirements for office space. Furthermore, consideration should be given to the most efficient configuration of highway depots. Can we share facilities with other organisations to achieve savings?

Alternative service delivery – more information for members on alternative delivery models and implications. Theme relates to leisure provision, ‘outsourcing’ of home care etc but also to the general question of what the Council is doing to prepare the 3rd sector for a potentially greater role in service delivery. Consideration should also be given to the development of a trading arm as a source of income.

Performance – consideration of the financial, or other, impacts of reducing performance in particular areas of service delivery. This will assist in addressing financial challenges in a way that continues to meet public needs.

Further issues included:

COMMUNITY SCRUTINY 12th December 2014

ENVIRONMENT 15th December 2014

EDUCATION AND CHILDREN 18th December 2014

SOCIAL CARE & HEALTH 5th January 2015

POLICY & RESOURCES 7th January 2015

School Strategy and Budget Forum - 6th January 2015

The Head of Financial Services outlined the revenue budget strategy of the Council detailing the stark financial position that the Council faces. The final revenue settlement for 2015-16 is a cash reduction of 3.3%. When additional responsibilities placed on local authorities are taken into account, the cash reduction translates to considerably worse when the impacts of inflation and demographic factors are taken into account. As a consequence, members of the Council are faced with having to make extremely difficult decisions about how to reduce the cost of services and at the same time deliver the funding commitment given to schools and keep Council Tax rises to an acceptable level. Although WG have not provided any indication after next year, it is prudent to forecast further reductions of 3.3% for the following 2 years.

Across the Council, departments have identified potential managerial and policy reductions of approximately 12.4m in 2015-16 with a further 31.5m (which includes 14m against school delegated budgets assuming end to current protection) in the following two financial years. This equates to approximately 22% of the Council’s budget. Some of the proposed savings will also have either a direct or indirect implication for schools.

The headline rate of protection for schools amounts to a 0.6% increase over and above the current year’s budget. Local authorities are permitted to adjust for pupil number drift. The impact of this is that the level of school budgets that the Council is responsible for funding (i.e. excluding post 16) will be a slight increase in cash terms in 15/16 as the previous financial year. However schools will need to accommodate the effects of pay and inflation (as outlined in the Head of Financial Services presentation) from within this level of funding and also any other additional or increases to charges.

The Head of Financial Services introduced some of the proposed efficiency measures that service departments are putting forward for consideration by Council in order that they can deliver the significant level of reduction expected from their budgets. Unfortunately some of these proposals have a direct impact on schools particularly where schools will now be expected to pay for services not previously charged or where a reduction to the level of service is proposed.

The Head of Financial Services also outlined additional proposals regarding services which schools do not pay for from their delegated budgets but are likely to have an impact in future e.g. SEN, EVR, school crossing patrols, post 16 transport, transport in relation to faith schools, community use of sports facilities attached to schools. In addition to the reductions, WG are also reviewing a number of grants and although details are not yet available, reduced allocations have been indicated.

Finally the Chief Education Officer led the consultation of the policy proposals with specific reference to those likely to impact on schools.

The main issues identified for concern by headteachers include:

Budget Consultation meeting with Trades Unions 13th and 19th January 2015

Present: Carmarthenshire CC Chris Moore Head of Financial Services

Owen Bowen Chief Accountant

Unions Mark Evans Unison

Mark Preece Unite

Caroline Greene GMB

The Unions expressed concern at the short notice given in arranging the meeting, and voiced their concern that the decisions had effectively been made.

The Head of Financial Services stated that the first consultation exercise undertaken had actually been with the Unions back in October 2014, where an overview of the financial outlook was given and an undertaking made that a further meeting would be held later in the process. Unfortunately due to a variety of circumstances this meeting hadn’t been pencilled into the diary but he was keen to seek their views in advance of preparing the final budget proposal report which will go to Executive Board in early February. Accordingly therefore he proposed that the meeting re-convenes in the week beginning the 19th January 2015 if matters cannot be adequately covered in this meeting.

The Head of Financial Services outlined the revenue budget strategy of the Council detailing the difficult financial position that the Council faces. The final revenue settlement for 2015-16 is a cash reduction of 3.3%. The impact of the cash reduction is considerably worse when inflation, demographic and demand factors and the changes to specific grants are taken into account. WG have not provided any indication for future settlements after next year, and it is considered prudent to forecast further reductions of 3.3% in each of the following 2 years. The current budget proposal sees a Council Tax increase of 5%, and WG have continued the protection for schools at 1% above their budget settlement for 2015-16. The budget proposals provide for the recently announced pay award for NJC staff, and the inflationary assumptions will be revisited in the final report in light of the recent developments for CPI and fuel and energy prices in particular.

In response to a question, the Head of Financial Services clarified that any saving from changes to the validation factors would enable the Council to meet further pressures/withdraw savings proposals elsewhere.

Unison reiterated their stance with regard to a ‘no cuts budget’. Due to the scale of the cuts to come (if implemented), it was inevitable that services will be seriously eroded to a point where they are no longer viable, with compulsory redundancies and the Authority having no option but to become a ‘procuring’ authority as was happening in some parts of England. Unison will oppose all cuts for the above reasons. However, the Unions would still campaign on specific proposals.

Standby: Unions would support the review of the application of the standby payment. They believe that not all payments may be necessary. However, they would oppose any attempt to alter the rate of the payment.

Meeting adjourned to Monday 19th January 2015.

Reconvened meeting:

Unison reaffirmed their position as to a ‘no cuts’ budget, and the three Unions stated that they oppose the cuts, but will work with the Authority where possible to deliver efficient services.

Observations/Clarifications on specific managerial proposals:

Health & Safety – proposal detail not provided. Chief Accountant outlined that it is understood that the proposal relates to undertaking more training/H&S functions in-house as opposed to buying in.

Legal – Realignments : Several proposals refer to re-alignments. Outlined that generally these related to utilising severance opportunities.

Civic Ceremonials: Question as to the total hospitality budget

Catering: Unions not aware of any discussions with other Local Authorities in relation to management arrangements. Changes to the labour table will be opposed. Detail requested on the 200k proposal that appears to repeat elements of other catering proposals.

Inclusion Services: Question as to how the proposal is intended to deliver savings

Youth Services/Education Psychology/Family Support/Fostering/Youth Services etc. All proposals will result in greater pressures in the same area, cutting back on capacity and support. Concern as to the impact and the resultant long term costs of the cumulative proposals..

Regeneration & Leisure proposals: Concern at the lack of engagement and consultations, lack of detail on proposals and no Forum meeting for 18months+

Coedcae Sports Hall: Question schools capacity to take over function. Not aware of any consultation with the school regarding the proposal.

Accountancy & Technical/ IT : Concern at the extent of reduction, and the impact on the workloads of remaining staff.

Administrative Buildings: confirmed the amounts relate to running costs savings and the not the capital receipt.

Public Health Services Management: question as to posts involved

Social Care proposals. Head of Financial Services outlined that the new Director of Social Care, Housing and Public Protection has been revewing the proposals and the final budget report will contain proposals to re-profile the savings.

Streetscene – Unions seen stage 1 of the restructuring proposals – not been made aware of stage 2.

Transport – charging for MOT’s: Clarification requested that the proposal does not entail any member of staff utilising their vehicles for Council business having to have their MOT’s undertaken at Council’s depots. Confirmation of how the savings of 10k will be achieved.

Car Parks: Business case has previously been requested by the unions for the proposal to generate 55k income by evening charging. Unions awaiting Business Case before passing an opinion.

CCTV: Concern that the proposal will result in increased policing costs in the longer term.

Schools EVR Costs. Head of Financial Services outlined the current practice, and confirmed that the proposal would also include school support staff. Unions would be supportive of the principle.

Observations/Clarifications on specific policy l proposals:

Inclusion Services SEN: Question as to how the child’s needs will be met

Fostering Support: Question as to whether they are manageable and safe now, and impact of reducing capacity

Respite Centres: Head of Financial Services outlined the member consultation feedback and the recent press announcements regarding the desire that this proposal is withdraw.

Leisure facilities – oppose the closure of any facilities

Leisure Trust: Unison oppose the establishment of a Trust, and don’t believe that it will be sustainable in that guise longer term. Unite and GMB concerned at the lack of any engagement as to the proposals and options as to how it could work. Unions would welcome opportunity to have further discussion on this proposal including information on the different legal vehicles being consider by the department to deliver the service in the future. .

Council Tax Pensioners Grant: Head of Financial Services outlined the workings of the current arrangements and the proposal.

Social Care: Unions opposed to the closure of Glanmorlais or Tegfan and and concerned about the opportunities for staff to transfer to Family Housing Association .

Home Care Services: Unions concerned that the proposal was not mentioned by managers at a Forum meeting held on the 26th November 2014 – some two weeks after the proposals were endorsed for public consultation.

Highways Lighting: Concern at the impact of the proposal. Chief Accountant outlined that the Director of Environmental Services had reviewed the proposal and was investigating investment options to utilise LED lighting/fit timer switches so that the lights can remain on and the savings still achieved.

Other Streetscene proposals: Concern on the impact of the proposals – short term reductions that result in increased risk for the authority - may well result in increased costs through insurance claims etc.

School Crossing Patrols: Head of Financial Services outlined the approach being adopted in respect of a risk assessment approach.

Closing Summary: Essential that departments enter into early consultation with the unions, and whilst the proposals may not be supported at least the issues will be understood by all.

Meeting ended at 6.00pm