Chris Mahony 23 January 2019

Auditors bid to explain real cause of difference in councils' spend on kids

A nine-fold variation in spending on children’s social care could largely be down to ‘differences in characteristics’ between councils, according to a National Audit Office (NAO) study.

The NAO report found that around 44% of the spending variation between councils could be explained by local characteristics such as custom and practice, local market conditions and historical patterns of demand.

It suggested that deprivation might explain another 15% and national policy changes or ‘shocks’ – such as the high profile death of a child – 10%.

Geography was not found to be an influence.

Around a quarter of the variation was unaccounted for by the factors identified by the NAO study.

The NAO found no link between a council’s spending and its Ofsted rating, with spending by services rated ‘good’ ranging from £570 per head to nearly £5,000.

With the number of child protection assessments having surged by 77% in seven years and many children’s services departments grappling with overspends, head of the NAO, Amyas Morse, questioned whether the Government would be able to meet its 2022 target of ensuring all vulnerable children received good support regardless of where they live.

Sir Amyas said: ‘The Department [for Education] has started to build its understanding of variations in services but it should know more than it does.

'Even with this understanding, the department faces a tall order to achieve its goal within three years.’

The NAO report urged the department ‘to promptly improve’ its understanding of children’s social care.

Chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, Cllr Anntoinette Bramble, said: ‘There is no right amount for councils to spend on children’s services and, as our own research has found, the majority of spend variation is due to wider economic or geographic circumstances largely outside their control.’

The Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) warned that cuts to preventive services have generated expensive spending downstream – despite the study finding no link between Sure Start closures and a rise in child protection cases.

SIGN UP
For your free daily news bulletin
Highways jobs

Senior Social Worker

London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and London Borough of Wandsworth
£46,206 - £55,992
Senior Social Worker
Recuriter: London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and London Borough of Wandsworth

Waste Operations Support Officers

Durham County Council
£29,071 - £32,046
Temporary until 1 June 2029   Refuse and Recycling are looking for 3 Waste Operations Support Officer to work in the South and East of County Durham. Peterlee
Recuriter: Durham County Council

Recovery Worker

Durham County Council
Grade 7 - £31,015 – £34,811 per annum.
Do you want to make a real difference to the lives of people experiencing hoarding and self-neglect behaviours?   As an Agile Recovery Worker within o Durham
Recuriter: Durham County Council

Finance Officer

Durham County Council
Grade 7, £30,024 - £33,699 per annum. Pay award pending.
We are seeking a Finance Officer to join DurhamLearn, where you will play a key role in supporting the financial administration, budget monitoring and Durham
Recuriter: Durham County Council

Social Work Consultant

Durham County Council
Grade 13 - £47,181 - £51,356 (Pay Award Pending)
Do you believe every child deserves to grow up feeling loved, safe, and supported, with a lasting sense of family, belonging, and stability?   Are you Durham
Recuriter: Durham County Council
Linkedin Banner