Development of the National Indicator Set and Tellus Survey

Rob Sinclair Alison Thompson (DCSF)

NIS Development: Aims and Timescale

• Aim to develop the second version of the NIS to: – Reflect emerging policy priorities for next spending period – Address gaps in the current NIS – Consider whether balance of NIs across ECM outcomes and DSOs is right – Incorporate better data that has since become available • Timing: – Uncertain, as SR timing not confirmed – but this project runs from late ’08 to late summer ’09 • Currently: – Producing initial thinking on ‘NI theory’, gaps and balance – share some of this in following slides – Gathering feedback from policy and will then circulate note to ADCS standards, performance and inspection cttee

Purpose of NIS

• NIS: Set of indicators central Govt can use to performance manage local authorities • But two alternative methods: – Use NIS to drive change, including what central Govt wants local areas to focus on; or – Use NIS to measure as comprehensively as possible the performance of the system in delivering good outcomes for children, young people and families – Unclear which currently being followed • Joined up Children’s Services – How should the NIS fit with other perf mgmt frameworks?

Processes vs Outcomes

• Guidance from HMT/CLG: outcomes focus – But only gives you part of picture • Friedman: both outcomes and process – Shows how and whether outcomes achieved • Measurement issue: – Outcomes difficult to measure and subject to inaccuracy

Balance of NIs?

• Often Claimed: – DCSF ‘owned’ NIs are unbalanced across the ECM outcomes, towards attainment • But: – If NIs owned by other Depts are included, NIS looks more balanced DCSF NIs Achieve Economic Wellbeing, 3 Make a positive contribution, 6 Healthy , 14 DCSF + OGD NIs Achieve Economic Wellbeing, 13 Healthy , 20 Make a positive contribution, 22 Saf e, 21 Safe, 15 Enjoy and Achieve, 29 Enjoy and Achieve, 30 • Cross-cutting indicators: – We currently only allow NIs to appear under one outcome – If allow multiple times, set more balanced

• •

Tellus Update (1)

Tellus is the source of data to inform 5 DCSF NIs and 3 DCSF-led PSAs – NI 50: Emotional health (PSA 12 Improves child health and well being) – – NI 69: Bullying (PSA13 Improve child safety) NI 110 : Positive activities & NI 115: Substance misuse (PSA 14 Young people on the path to success) – NI 199: Parks and play areas The survey: – annual survey – – covers years 6, 8 and 10 includes all types of mainstream schools (primary, middle, secondary, academies, PRUs and special schools) – inclusive of vulnerable and hard to reach groups such as children with SEN and disabilities – seeks CYP perceptions of, and experiences and satisfaction with universal services available to them (but not specialist services)

Tellus Update (2)

New developments      Conducted by NfER Schools can include all CYP in Years 6, 8 and 10 Autumn term rather than the summer term SEND versions Question bank schools/LAs can select their own questions from  PSHE & Citizenship curriculum pack to support delivery   Feedback reports to schools Secure web-based analytical tool for schools to analyse own results

Tellus Update (3)

Stage Confirm sample size with LAs Confirm schools taking part Timing March 2009 April 2009 LAs/Schools select from question bank May/June 2009 PSHE & Citizenship pack June 2009 Survey live National Summary of NI results and NI Calculations LA and School reports 05 October – 16 November 2009 Jan/Feb 2010 Feb/March 2009

Some issues to discuss …

• What are the limitations and benefits of national indicators as a means of performance managing local areas across the range of their work?

• Do you think indicators should be based on processes, outcomes or a mixture of both? And why?

• Can CYP interests be met by a national indicator measuring outcomes/processes for all service users? Or do we need more CYP focussed indicators?

• What’s the best way of engaging you on the detail of NI proposals for the next indicator set?