Community Impact Assessment Form
For a summary of this Community Impact Assessment, click here
Title of Community Impact Assessment (CIA): Children with Disabilities – Social Work Team Re-design
Directorate: Children and Families - Specialist
Date of assessment: February 2013
Names and roles of people carrying out the community impact assessment. (Please identify Lead Officer): Julie Moss
Section A – What are you impact assessing?
(Indicate with an “x” which applies):A decision to review or change a service
A strategy
A policy or procedure
A function, service or project
x
Are you impact assessing something that is?:New
Existing
Being reviewed
Being reviewed as a result of budget constraints
x
x
1
Describe the area you are impact assessing and, where appropriate, the changes you are proposing?
The Children with Disabilities Social Work Team provides social work assessment and interventions for both Child Protection and Child
in Need cases whilst ensuring that the needs of children with disabilities and complex needs are also met. The current service comprises
of -
Position
1 Practice Manager
1 Interim Practice Manager
1 Advanced Social Worker
11 Social Workers
The proposed structure will include
Position
1 Practice Manager
1 Advanced Social Worker
7 Social Workers
1.5 Reviewing Officer
1 Direct Payment Officer
.5 Carers Assessor
2 Family Support Workers
The current service consists of qualified social workers only, with no consideration having been given to the skills and
expertise required for the delivery of services. The use of Family Support Workers has not been utilised by the team
and the analysis of current cases has not been undertaken previously. This analysis assists in understanding what
the proposed team design should comprise of and better reflects the requirements of the business.
2
Section B – Is a Community Impact Assessment required (Screening)?
Consider what you are impact assessing and mark “x” for all the statement(s) below which apply
Service or policy that people use or which apply to people (this could include staff)
x
Discretion is exercised or there is potential for people to experience different outcomes. For example,
planning applications and whether applications are approved or not
Concerns at local, regional or national level of discrimination/inequalities
Major change, such as closure, reduction, removal or transfer
Community, regeneration and planning strategies, organisational or directorate partnership
strategies/plans
Employment policy – where discretion is not exercised
Employment policy – where discretion is exercised. For example, recruitment or disciplinary process
If none of the areas above apply to your proposals, you will not be required to undertake a full CIA. Please summarise below why a full
CIA is not required and send this form to your directorate equality link officer. If you have identified one or more of the above areas, you
should conduct a full CIA and complete this form.
Equality Areas
Indicate with an “x” which equality areas are likely to be affected, positively or negatively, by the proposals
Age
x
Religion and/or belief
Disability
x
Sexual Identity
Gender (including pregnancy and maternity and
marriage and civil partnership)
People on a low income (socio-economic inequality)
x
Gender reassignment
Other (please state below) (For example carers, ex
offenders, refugees and asylum seekers, gypsies and
travellers)
Carers
x
Race
3
If any of the equality areas above have been identified as being likely to be affected by the proposals, you will be required to undertake a
CIA. You will need only to consider those areas which you have indicated are likely to be affected by the proposals
4
Section C – Monitoring information
C1 Do you currently monitor by the
following protected characteristics or
equality areas?
Age
Yes (Y) or
No (N)
Disability
Yes
If no, please explain why and / or detail in the action plan at Section E how
you will prioritise the gathering of this equality monitoring data.
Yes
Gender (including pregnancy and
maternity and marriage and civil
partnership)
Gender Reassignment
Race
Yes
Religion and/or belief
Yes
Sexual Identity
People on a low income
(socio-economic inequality)
Yes
Yes
Other (please state) (For example
carers, ex offenders, refugees and
asylum seekers, gypsies and travellers)
5
Section C (continued) – Consultation
C2 Are you intending to carry out consultation on your proposals?
Yes
If “no”, please explain your reason(s) why
If “yes”, please give details of your consultation exercise and results below
Informal consultation has taken place with staff and managers to understand the current service provision and the future requirements of
the service.
Information from Service Users has been incorporated within the proposal in relation to Family Support Workers and the skill mix within
the service.
Consultation began with the Unison at DCSC on 19th September 2012
Formal consultation with staff has been undertaken as part of the re-design process. Staff were invited to attend Staff briefings on 20th
September 2012 where the service redesign proposal was outlined.
All staff have been offered 1-1s to discuss personal issues and concerns however these were declined.
There was an additional meeting held with the unions on the 30th November 2012. Formal written response to union concerns have been
given.
. Service user consultation has taken place by means of a letter to service users that outlined the changes and the letter welcomed
service user comments. 212 letters were sent out. Six responses were received from Service Users. Concerns raised included –
o Not having access to a dedicated social worker
o Children and families having to wait to have access to a social worker
o Reduced availability of social workers
6
o It was considered extreme to make savings in this area
o The consultation period being too short and being over the Christmas period
One respondent requested additional information on current workloads against the proposed structure to allow an assessment to be
made of the likely impact. This information was forwarded and no further correspondence was received.
One respondent welcomed the redesign and felt it was long overdue.
The initial consultation period was extended until the 2nd November 2012.
The consultation period has exceeded the legal requirement of 30 days.
The draft community impact assessments will been shared and discussed with the Trade Unions and Equality Advocates.
Feedback from the consultation will be considered and acted upon if appropriate. Full details of the results from the consultation process
will be included in the subsequent report to Lead Member prior to a final decision being taken on the acceptance of the proposal.
Consultation events with parents were held on 15th April 2013, these took place at 9.30am and 6.00pm in the Council Chamber. The
Service Manager and Practice manager attended the first session. One parent attended the first session and aired concerns that his son
would not be allocated a social worker.
He was given assurances that if his son had high level needs and required a social worker then this would still be the case.
Two other parents came to the reception after the event. Colin Jones spoke to these separately. Again the same concerns were aired
and assurances given.
One parent telephoned the Service Manager, this parent was concerned that the SEN redesign would have an effect on his son. He was
informed that the Children with Disability redesign concerned the social work team rather than the SEN service.
At the event held at 6.00pm, the Service Manager and Practice Manager attended. No parent attended this session.
A letter was again sent to all service users on the 26th March outlining the proposal. Parents and carers were given 24 days in which to
respond. Four responses were received which related to the availability of social workers.
The availability of staff will remain as the percentage of work being managed by the Reviewing Officer, Direct Payments Officer and
Carers Assessor will reduce the current requirement for social workers.
7
Section C (continued) – Analysis
C3 What information has been analysed
to inform the content of this CIA? What
were the findings?
Service review has been undertaken to understand the requirements of both service users,
key stakeholders and staff.
Key findings have included –
Please include details of, for example,
service or employee monitoring
information, consultation findings, any
national or local research, customer
feedback, inspection reports, and any
other information which will inform your
CIA.
o The skill mix within the team had not been considered to ensure cost effectiveness
and efficiencies were maximised
o The resource requirements for the team had not been reviewed to ensure it reflected
the capacity matched the demand
Benchmarking with other Local Authorities has been undertaken to ensure the proposal is in
line with current research and policy demands.
Please specify whether this was existing
information or was obtained specifically
in relation to this equality analysis and
CIA process
Service Users will still receive a social work service – this will now be complemented by the
additional skills provided by the new posts within the team.
The current service consists of qualified social workers only, with no consideration having
been given to the skills and expertise required for the delivery of services. The use of Family
Support Workers has not been utilised by the team and the analysis of current cases has not
been undertaken previously. This analysis assists in understanding what the proposed team
design should comprise of and better reflects the requirements of the business.
Current Caseloads
Type of Case
Numbers of
Cases
222
Total number of
8
cases
Breakdown of Cases
Direct Payments
74
Carers Assessments
193 (2011-12)
Child In Need
137
Child Protection
3
Looked After
Children
21
A projected caseload for the CWD social work team would be approximately 135 in total. The
remainder would be closed to a social worker and appropriately managed by the Children
with Disabilities Reviewing Officer and Direct Payments Officer.
It is anticipated that there would be approximately 10 child protection cases at any given time
on the team rather than the 3 identified presently. This figure is based on the total number of
child protection cases currently managed across both the Referral and Initial Assessment
team, where the children has a disability, and the Children with Disabilities team. On current
projections this would mean each social worker would hold 20+ cases and the ASW would
hold a small number of complex cases.
The team will continue to hold the remaining child in need cases – as many of the children
have very complex needs. The team are starting to write child in need plans for each of
these children and this will be completed by September 2012.
Child Protection Cases – A social worker from the Referral and Initial Assessment Team or
Child Protection/Child In Need Service have always led and been the allocated worker when
completing Child Protection enquiries. From September 2012 the CWD team will hold these
cases. The introduction of the Advanced Social Worker, to the team, who has considerable
experience within the child protection field will compliment this move. The numbers of CP
9
cases will increase, with the CWD social worker being the key worker.
The ASW or team manager will chair strategy discussions and provide the appropriate level
of oversight, supervision and direction. Consultation and support will continue to be sought
from RIAT service and the Safeguarding Unit as necessary.
Looked After Children – Children who are looked after or with Next steps should have the
main keyworker closely linked with Next Steps or the Looked After Children’s team. Within
this proposal a social worker to manage all LAC cases would form part of the CWD team and
take those cases through to transition. Those cases which meet the remit of the Next Steps
service would be transferred to ensure they receive the appropriate level of service.
Direct Payment – In line with government policy, it is anticipated the growth of direct
payments will continue. The reviewing officer role will enable the majority of these cases to
be closed to a social worker and be reviewed yearly. The reviewing officer function needs to
be a social work qualified role. It is not anticipated the role would vary from the role of a
social worker except that the RO would not be a case holder. If an increase in direct
payments is requested, then the case would be referred back to the social work team for a
full reassessment and agreement by panel. If there are minor changes the RO can do this
without reference back to the Disability Resource Panel or social work team. The Direct
Payment Officer will support the processing of Direct Payments – this post will not require a
social work qualification however this post will be reviewed further before a final decision is
made in relation to the absolute role and function. It will remain in the structure and needs to
be established subject to further evaluation.
The Carers Assessor would be part of the team but would provide a dedicated service to
undertake carer’s assessments. This post would not require a social work qualification.
The development of the proposal is in line with team structures within neighbouring
authorities and has been benchmarked against services across the region. Proposed case
loads are again comparable with neighbouring authorities.
The Practice Manager would have supervisory responsibility for the qualified social workers
who form part of the team – the Advanced Social Worker would supervise the unqualified
staff within the service. In the absence of the Practice Manager cover would be provided
from the RIAT service.
10
Section D – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a
differential impact relating to
age equality
Will people within certain age
ranges not be getting the
outcome they need?
Will people within certain age
ranges be disadvantaged as a
result of your proposals?
If the impact is negative, how
will it be reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate,
reduce or mitigate negative
impacts, are your proposals
potentially discriminatory on the
grounds of age?
Yes (Y)
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your analysis?
N
Service users will not be negatively affected as they will continue to receive a
social work service which will be supported by a range of other professionals within
the team. Social Workers will be in a position to focus on their statutory role whilst
other tasks will be undertaken by other professionals within the team.
We will ensure that all formal policies and procedures are adhered to ensuring that
no discrimination on any ground is experienced by any service user or staff.
In order to minimise the impact on staff, they will be offered options of:
•
Consider Voluntary Early Retirement / Voluntary Severance as possible
redeployment opportunities/ Reduced hours / Careers breaks
•
Use of any vacant posts within the service/across the council that are
deemed critical as redeployment opportunities
It should be noted however that the above opportunities may not align with existing
grades and/or locations and the Employee Assistance Scheme will be utilised to
minimise the impact on any member of staff who experiences a reduction in pay as
a result of this proposal.
Y
Will the proposals mean that
people within certain age ranges
will experience positive
outcomes?
Highlight any positive impacts
Services will continue to be provided in a more targeted way – Short Breaks will be
appropriately reviewed with independence and parents/carers will be supported to
access Direct Payments which will improve choice of service provision
11
Are the proposals likely to
impact on community cohesion?
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people
who share a protected
characteristic and those who do
not?
Identify areas where there is
potential to foster good relations
Section D (continued) – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a
differential impact relating to
disability equality
Will people with a disability not
be getting the outcome they
need?
Will people with a disability be
disadvantaged as a result of
your proposals?
If the impact is negative, how
will it be reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate,
reduce or mitigate negative
impacts, are your proposals
potentially discriminatory on the
grounds of disability?
Yes (Y)
Will the proposals mean that
people with a disability will
experience positive outcomes?
Highlight any positive impacts
y
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your analysis?
n
No disadvantage will be experienced – Support will be offered and targeted
dependant on the needs of the child/young person.
Those requiring social work assessment and intervention i.e. those children who
meet the Child Protection or Child in Need threshold will continue to receive
appropriate support.
Specific support will be provide to those needing assistance with Direct Payments
and the application for Carers Assessments.
Those accessing Short Breaks will have their care reviewed independently
Caseload data for the last 3 years has remained static within the team which
support the current proposal – benchmarking against other authorities who are
classed as providing excellent services for children with disabilities
Service users will have the additional advantage of Family Support Workers who
can provide lower level interventions and support over a longer period of time.
12
Are the proposals likely to
impact on community cohesion?
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people
who share a protected
characteristic and those who do
not?
Identify areas where there is
potential to foster good relations
Section D (continued) – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a
differential impact relating to
gender equality (this includes
pregnancy and maternity and
marriage and civil
partnership)
Will men, women or boys and
girls not be getting the outcome
they need?
Will men, women or boys and
girls be disadvantaged as a
result of your proposals?
If the impact is negative, how
will it be reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate,
reduce or mitigate negative
impacts, are your proposals
potentially discriminatory on the
grounds of gender?
Will the proposals mean that
men or women, boys or girls will
experience positive outcomes?
Yes (Y)
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your analysis?
n
13
Highlight any positive impacts
Are the proposals likely to
impact on community cohesion?
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people
who share a protected
characteristic and those who do
not?
Identify areas where there is
potential to foster good relations
Section D (continued) – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a differential
impact relating to equality for people
planning, undergoing or who have
undergone gender reassignment?
Will people planning, undergoing or who
have undergone gender reassignment
not be getting the outcome they need?
Will people planning, undergoing or who
have undergone gender reassignment
be disadvantaged as a result of your
proposals?
If the impact is negative, how will it be
reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate, reduce or
mitigate negative impacts, are your
proposals potentially discriminatory on
the grounds of gender reassignment?
Yes (Y)
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your
analysis?
Will the proposals mean that people
planning, undergoing or who have
undergone gender reassignment will
14
experience positive outcomes?
Highlight any positive impacts
Are the proposals likely to impact on
community cohesion?
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people who share
a protected characteristic and those who
do not?
Identify areas where there is potential to
foster good relations
Section D (continued) – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a
differential impact relating to
race equality
Will certain racial groups not be
getting the outcome they need?
Will certain racial groups be
disadvantaged as a result of
your proposals?
If the impact is negative, how
will it be reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate,
reduce or mitigate negative
impacts, are your proposals
potentially discriminatory on the
grounds of race?
Yes (Y)
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your analysis?
n
Services are provided for all children and young people in Salford who meet the
threshold criteria for the service
Will the proposals mean that
people within certain racial
groups will experience positive
outcomes?
Highlight any positive impacts
15
Are the proposals likely to
impact on community cohesion?
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people
who share a protected
characteristic and those who do
not?
Identify areas where there is
potential to foster good relations
Section D (continued) – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a
Yes (Y)
differential impact relating to
religion or belief equality
Will people of certain religions or
who have particular beliefs not
be getting the outcome they
need?
Will people of certain religions or
who have particular beliefs be
disadvantaged as a result of
your proposals?
If the impact is negative, how
will it be reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate,
reduce or mitigate negative
impacts, are your proposals
potentially discriminatory on the
grounds of religion or belief?
Will the proposals mean that
people of certain religions or
who have particular beliefs will
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your analysis?
Services are provided for all children and young people in Salford who meet the
threshold criteria for the service.
Specific services are provided for the Jewish Community and assessment take into
consideration a child/young person’s needs dependent upon the religion or belief
16
experience positive outcomes?
Highlight any positive impacts
Are the proposals likely to
impact on community cohesion?
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people
who share a protected
characteristic and those who do
not?
Identify areas where there is
potential to foster good relations
Section D (continued) – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a
differential impact relating to
sexual identity equality
Will gay, lesbian and/or bisexual people not be getting the
outcome they need?
Will gay, lesbian and/or bisexual people be disadvantaged
as a result of your proposals?
If the impact is negative, how
will it be reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate,
reduce or mitigate negative
impacts, are your proposals
potentially discriminatory on the
grounds of sexual identity?
Will the proposals mean that
gay, lesbian and/or bi-sexual
people will experience positive
outcomes?
Highlight any positive impacts
Yes (Y)
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your analysis?
n
Services are provided for all children and young people in Salford who meet the
threshold criteria for the service.
17
Are the proposals likely to
impact on community cohesion?
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people
who share a protected
characteristic and those who do
not?
Identify areas where there is
potential to foster good relations
Section D (continued) – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a
differential impact on socio
economic equality (people on
a low income)?
Will people on a low income not
be getting the outcome they
need?
Will people on a low income be
disadvantaged as a result of
your proposals?
If the impact is negative, how
will it be reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate,
reduce or mitigate negative
impacts, are your proposals
potentially discriminatory on the
grounds of socio economic
inequality?
Yes (Y)
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your analysis?
No negative impact known
Will the proposals mean that
people on a low income will
experience positive outcomes?
18
Highlight any positive impacts
Are the proposals likely to
impact on community cohesion?
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people
who share a protected
characteristic and those who do
not?
Identify areas where there is
potential to foster good relations
Section D (continued) – Potential impacts and how these will be addressed
Could your proposals have a
Yes (Y)
differential impact relating to any
other equality groups, for
example, carers, ex offenders,
refugees and asylum seekers,
gypsies and travellers)?
Will people within any other
groups not be getting the
outcome they need?
Will people within any other
groups be disadvantaged as a
result of your proposals?
If the impact is negative, how
will it be reduced or eliminated?
If you are unable to eliminate,
reduce or mitigate negative
impacts, are your proposals
potentially discriminatory for
people within any other groups?
Will the proposals mean that
people within any other groups
will experience positive
No (N)
Explain impact(s) and what evidence or data exists to support your analysis?
No negative impact known
19
outcomes?
Highlight any positive impacts
Are the proposals likely to
impact on community cohesion
Is there potential to enhance
relationships between people
who share a protected
characteristic and those who do
not?
identify areas where there is
potential to foster good relations
Section E – Action Plan and review
Detail in the plan below, actions that you have identified in your CIA, which will eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity
and/or foster good relations.
If you are unable to eliminate or reduce negative impact on any of the equality areas, you should explain why
Impact (positive or
negative) identified
Proposed action
Person(s)
responsible
Improved outcomes for
service users
Development of an
Outcomes framework
for the service
Service
Manager
Targeted interventions
for service users
Audit of skill mix
within the service –
development of a
training plan for the
team
Practice
Manager
Where will action
Target date
be monitored? (e.g.,
Directorate
Business Plan,
Service Plan,
Equality Action
Plan)
Service Plan
April 2013
Service Plan
20
April 2013
Required outcome
Could making the changes in any of the above areas have a negative effect on other groups? Explain why and what you will do about
this.
Review
Your CIA should be reviewed at least every three years, less if it has a significant impact on people.
Please enter the date your CIA will be reviewed ……………………..You should review progress on your CIA action plan annually.
21
Section F – Summary of your CIA
As your CIA will be published on the council’s website and accessible to the general public, a summary of your CIA is required. Please
provide a summary of your CIA in the box below.
Summary of Community Impact Assessment
Brief summary of proposal or what you are impact assessing
The Children with Disabilities Social Work service is being redesigned to ensure there is an appropriate skill mix within the team – This
assessment considers the impact on service users who access social work support as there will be a reduction in social workers
How did you approach the CIA and what did you find?
The CIA has been considered and completed by the Head of Service, Service Manager and feed back from Service Users and staff.
National and local research has been used to develop the proposal. Some changes have been made to the proposal following
feedback from staff. Additional information was provided to Service Users, where requested, to assist in providing the rationale for the
changes
What are the main areas requiring further attention?
Further attention needs to be given to the development of a multi-agency service which will further enhance the offer to service users
Summary of recommendations for improvement
Section G – Next Steps
22
Quality Assurance
When you have completed your CIA, you should send it to your directorate Equality Link Officer who will arrange for it to be quality
assured. Your CIA will be returned to you if further work is required. It is important that your CIA is robust and of good quality as it may
be challenged
“Sign off” within your directorate
Your directorate Equality Link Officer will then arrange for your CIA to be “signed off” within your directorate (see below). Your directorate
Equality Lead Officer or other senior manager within your directorate should “sign off” your CIA (below).
Name
Signature
Date
Senior Manager
Julie Moss
February 2013
Lead CIA Officer
Publishing
When your CIA has been signed off within your directorate, your directorate Equality Link Officer will send it to Elaine Barber in the
Equalities and Cohesion Team for publishing on the council’s website.
Monitoring
Your directorate Equality Link Officer will also send your CIA to your directorate Performance Officer where the actions identified within
your CIA will be entered into Covalent, the council’s performance management monitoring software so that progress can be monitored
as appropriate.
23